Brand Management

Brand Management

Identity and the Social Psychology of Brands

• Discovery: true self already exists; it is only a matter of discovery • Constructivist: Dynamic and assembled over time

(Vignoles 2011)

• Ascribed: traits we’re born with so identity can’t change (Gabriel and Lang 2006)

• Achieved or Acquired: identity is fluid and constructed over time (Larsen and Patterson 2018)

“Even to the extent that the private self-concept is drawn on a blank slate, every individual starts with a particular set of chalks to draw with, and these are very far from random”. (Vignoles (2011, p.405)

Identity Perspectives

Identity

• “Self-referential description that provides contextually appropriate answers to the question who am I?” Ashforth et al (2008):

• “A person’s unique sense of self” (Postmes and Jetten 2006, p. 260)

• “People’s explicit or implicit response to the question ‘who are you?’” (Vignoles, Schwartz and Luyckx (2011, p.2) • Made up of individual and social identity (Tajfel 1974; Mael

and Ashforth 1992)

• Brewer and Gardner (1996) – independent and interdependent self

• Individual/Personal – we are individual agents; including attributes, values, and beliefs

• Relational/Roles - roles individuals occupy and the necessity for exogenous recognition (Reicher, 2000; Vignoles, Schwartz and Luyckx, 2011)

• Collective/Social - how we see ourselves within the context of social classifications and the meaning we associate with them (Tajfel, 1974; Tajfel and Turner, 1986; Mael and Ashforth, 1992; Vignoles, Schwartz and Luyckx, 2011)

• Material Based – physical objects and meaningful places (Vignoles, Schwartz and Luyckx, 2011); Belk (1988): ‘That we are what we have is perhaps the most basic and powerful fact of consumer behaviour’.

(Vignoles, Schwartz and Luyckx, 2011; Stets and Burke, 2000)

Identity

• Identity has “a direct, causal role in motivating behavior” (Vignoles, 2011, p.406)

• (Sirgy 1982) • Self-esteem - seek out situations that improve our self-concept; self-

worth, self-efficacy, and authenticity • Self-consistency - drives us to act in a way that is consistent with our

existing notions of self across various facets

• Distinctiveness one of the strongest motivators in formulating identity and associated behaviours (Vignoles 2006); obtained through comparing oneself to others but needs a balance as being too distinct can have adverse outcomes e.g. a sense of isolation (van Doeselaar et al., 2018).

Identity Motives

Continuity motive - desire for a sense of continuousness with one’s identity over time (Vignoles et al., 2006)

• “People pay more attention to information that is consistent with their existing self conceptions, recall it better, and interpret it as more reliable (Shrauger, 1975), and they often seek to occupy and to create social contexts that provide self-confirming feedback (Swann, 1987)” (Vignoles (2011, p.414))

Identity Motives

A sense of meaning:

• universal trait of humans to seek meaning in their existence • contributes to psychological health (Steger, Oishi and

Kashdan, 2009; Vignoles, 2011)

• Provides a sense of purpose and substance in one’s life, assists in preventing feelings of hopelessness, and is a coping mechanism for dealing with distressing situations (Golsworthy and Coyle, 1999; Vignoles, 2011).

• Another key motivator in shaping identity (Vignoles, 2011).

Identity Motives

Two identity motives that relate more to identity enactment rather than construction

• Efficacy: the need for individuals to view themselves as being able to take action • gives individuals the sense that they are in control and have agency to be able

to influence who they are and their surroundings (Apter, 1983). Individuals who view themselves in this way can also function at higher levels due to pursuing further achievements and possessing a greater perseverance toward those achievements (Bandura, 1997).

• Belonging: the need for individuals to view themselves as belonging; • Critically important for identity. • Primary reason individuals construct identity is to experience this sense of

belonging. (Ryan and Deci 2003)

(Vignoles, 2011)

Identity Motives

Social Identity

• Social identity – how we see ourselves in the context of social classifications

• Tajfel (1974) and Turner (1975) – SIT: social groups are part of forming how we define ourselves

• Oyserman (2009) – identity is contextualised and includes traits, characteristics, and goals linked to a social role or group a person is, was, or may become a part of

• Pratt (1998) – membership achieved through similar existing attributes or through changing self to join group

• Ashforth and Mael (1989) – no interaction required • Brewer and Gardner (1996) – need not even know each other

• Individuals seek memberships to preserve a positive social identity for four distinct reasons: • “create self-gratifying social opportunities”, • “heighten social prestige” • “facilitate social interaction” • “create social credits” (Dutton, Dukerich and Harquail, 1994,

p.250).

• Optimal distinctiveness theory: memberships simultaneously fulfil two key identity motives • the desire to be unique and the desire to belong (Brewer, 1991;

Vignoles et al., 2006)

Social Identity Motives

Social Identity Theory

SIT

Cognitive

EmotiveEvaluative

Knowledge of group membership (Bhattacharya and Sen, 2003)

Membership good or bad? Draw our esteem here (Lam et al., 2010; Ellemers et al., 1999)

Emotional attachment Personal relevance = potential for emotioal reactions (Ellemers et al 1999; Homburg, Wieseke and Hoyer, 2009; Einwiller et al (2006)

EffectiveCommitment to the group (Bergami and Bagozzi, 2000)

Modernity and Postmodernity

“The individual has never been so free in his or her private and public choices as today, and never so alone and cut off from the spirit of community”

Neo-tribalism

“Each postmodern individual belongs to several tribes in each of which he or she might play a different role and wear a specific mask; this means that the modern tools of sociological analysis cannot classify him or her”

Perpetual search for identity is the price of freedom

We now seek to recreate social ties through consumption experiences

Cova (1997)

• Gardner and Levy (1955) and Levy (1959) the products we consume and brands themselves hold symbolic meaning and impact on how we see ourselves in relation to our self-worth and social standing.

• Purchases are a mechanism for developing identity and assembling self-concept (Ball and Tasaki, 1992; Kliene, Kliene and Jerome, 1993).

• Possessions provide symbolic experiences for consumers (Hirschman and Holbrook, 1982) and are extensions of the self (Belk, 1988).

• Overreach by brands in using the free labour of consumers to influence other consumers? (Arvidsson, 2005; Carah and Brodmerkel, 2020),

• Consumer using brands in the way they choose rather than allowing brands to define them (Holt, 2002)

• Use of brands to “fulfill these goal driven identity projects” (Allen, Fournier and Miller, 2014, p.798) is a dynamic appropriation of brand meaning to create and manage a sense of self across one’s lifespan (Belk, 1988; Allen, Fournier and Miller, 2014).

• Consumers are curators of identity through using brands at different times to communicate a politic-socio-cultural identity (Bastos and Levy, 2012).

• Not only used to demonstrate how they are unique (Fournier, 1998) but also to demonstrate belongingness to groups (Bagozzi and Dholakia, 2006).

• The desire to simultaneously be unique and like others as well as a desire to live a life of significance and have a good reputation are what Bastos and Levy (2012) suggest are at the heart of branding.

Consumption and Meaning Making

Replacing traditional notions of community and social interaction (Hughes, 2009) • Subcultures of Consumption: formed around “a particular

product class, brand, or consumption activity” (Schouten and McAlexander, 1995, p.43) • Robust long-term social bonds that take precedents over other

social relationships • Developed through indoctrination and rituals • Internal hierarchies and individuals in positions of power • Reject conventional lifestyle norms

(Canniford, 2011)

Consumer Collectives

• Provide a sense of social connection through utilisation of the same products and services (Cova, 1997, p.199).

• Temporary and dynamic (Cova and Cova, 2002; Hughes, 2009) • Not centred around only one brand or product but instead engage in

“‘active play’ with marketplace resources“ (Canniford, 2011, p.63).

• This enables utilising a larger number of groups for shorter periods of time • These social connections are the driver for consumer tribes and as Cova

and Cova (2002, p.3) put it, “the link is more important than the thing”.

• This use of multiple groups and brands for social connection means they rarely demonstrate the fanaticism and proselytization that is often found in brand communities (Cova, Kozinets and Shankar, 2007; Canniford, 2011)

Consumer Collectives - Tribes

• High level of enthusiasm for one particular brand (Canniford, 2011). • Significance of brand is paramount; consumers drawn together due to a proclivity

toward the brand itself and products and services it offers (Muniz and O’guinn, 2001; Canniford, 2011).

• Substantial/enduring relationships; often hierarchies based on brand values • Social connection is driven by “shared rituals, traditions, and a sense of

responsibility toward other members” (Canniford, 2011, p.61).

• Do not typically reject social norms • No need to be within close physical proximity but rather can be anywhere

geographically (Muniz and O’guinn, 2001).

• One specific challenge is that not all brand communities form or gather around one particular brand but rather consumers value the connection with others over the brand itself and therefore have looser connections with multiple consumer collectives and brands (Canniford, 2011).

Consumer Collectives – Brand Communities

Brand Identification

• Constructing our identity through considering ourselves a ‘member’ of the brand

• Positive brand appraisal = positive self appraisal (Homburg, Wieseke and Hoyer, 2009)

• Threats to identity (White and Argo 2009) • High contribution to the group = remain • Low contribution to the group = leave

• Nostalgia purchases (Sierra and McQuitty 2007) • Country of origin (Verlegh 1999; Zeugner-Roth

2015; Balabanis and Diamantopoulos 2016)

Salience

• SI not enough to trigger a positive response to a brand; SI must be salient through priming (Forehand et al 2002) • Spokespersons: in group = positive response to

ad; outgroup = negative response

• SI Salience and motivation (Oyserman 2009) • In-group and out-group (ethnicity) impact on performance

(Oyserman et al 2003) • Behave in ways congruent with stereotypes to protect their

identity

Antecedents to BI Brand Self Similarity

Brand Distinctiveness

Brand Prestige

Social Benefits

Brand Warmth

Memorable Brand Experiences

Reputation

Personality Congruence

Brand Identification

Kuenzel and Halliday 2010

Stokburger-Sauer et al 2012

References

• Ashforth, B. and Mael, F. (1989). Social Identity Theory and the Organization. The Academy of Management Review, 14(1), p.20.

• Ashforth, B., Harrison, S. and Corley, K. (2008). Identification in Organizations: An Examination of Four Fundamental Questions. Journal of Management, 34(3), pp.325-374.

• Balabanis, G. and Diamantopoulos, A. (2016). Consumer Xenocentrism as Determinant of Foreign Product Preference: A System Justification Perspective. Journal of International Marketing, 24(3), pp.58-77.

• Bergami, M. and Bagozzi, R. (2000). Self-categorization, affective commitment and group self-esteem as distinct aspects of social identity in the organization. British Journal of Social Psychology, 39(4), pp.555-577.

• Bhattacharya, C. and Sen, S. (2003). Consumer-Company Identification: A Framework for Understanding Consumers’ Relationships with Companies. Journal of Marketing, 67(2), pp.76-88.

• Brewer, M. and Gardner, W. (1996). Who is this "We"? Levels of collective identity and self representations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(1), pp.83-93.

• Einwiller, S. (2006). Enough Is Enough! When Identification No Longer Prevents Negative Corporate Associations. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34(2), pp.185-194.

• Ellemers, N., Kortekaas, P. and Ouwerkerk, J. (1999). Self- categorisation, commitment to the group and group self-esteem as related but distinct aspects of social identity. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29(2-3), pp.371-389.

• Fiske, S. and Taylor, S. (1984). Social cognition. Sage Publications. • Homburg, C., Wieseke, J. and Hoyer, W. (2009). Social Identity and

the Service–Profit Chain. Journal of Marketing, 73(2), pp.38-54.

• Ladik, D., Carrillat, F. and Tadajewski, M. (2015). Belk’s (1988) “Possessions and the extended self” revisited. Journal of Historical Research in Marketing, 7(2), pp.184-207.

• Lam, S., Ahearne, M., Hu, Y. and Schillewaert, N. (2010). Resistance to Brand Switching When a Radically New Brand Is Introduced: A Social Identity Theory Perspective. Journal of Marketing, 74(6), pp.128-146. • Mael, F. and Ashforth, B. (1992). Alumni and their alma mater:

A partial test of the reformulated model of organizational identification. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13(2), pp.103-123.

• Oyserman, D. (2009). Identity-based motivation: Implications for action-readiness, procedural-readiness, and consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 19(3), pp.250-260.

• Postmes, T. and Jettern, J. (2011). Individuality and the group. London [etc.]: Sage Publ.

• Pratt, M. (n.d.). To Be or Not to Be?: Central Questions in Organizational Identification. Identity in Organizations: Building Theory Through Conversations, pp.171-208.

• Rempel, J., Holmes, J. and Zanna, M. (1985). Trust in close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49(1), pp.95-112.

• Rosenbaum-Elliott, R. (2015). Strategic brand management. Oxford University Press.

• Sierra, J. and McQuitty, S. (2007). Attitudes and Emotions as Determinants of Nostalgia Purchases: An Application of Social Identity Theory. The Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 15(2), pp.99-112.

• Tajfel, H. (1974). Social identity and intergroup behaviour. Social Science Information, 13(2), pp.65-93.

• Turner, J. (1975). Social comparison and social identity: Some prospects for intergroup behaviour. European Journal of Social Psychology, 5(1), pp.1-34.

• Verlegh, P. and Steenkamp, J. (1999). A review and meta-analysis of country-of-origin research. Journal of Economic Psychology, 20(5), pp.521- 546.

• Vignoles, V., Regalia, C., Manzi, C., Golledge, J. and Scabini, E. (2006). Beyond self-esteem: Influence of multiple motives on identity construction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(2), pp.308-333.

• White, K. and Argo, J. (2009). Social identity threat and consumer preferences. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 19(3), pp.313-325.

• Zeugner-Roth, K., Žabkar, V. and Diamantopoulos, A. (2015). Consumer Ethnocentrism, National Identity, and Consumer Cosmopolitanism as Drivers of Consumer Behavior: A Social Identity Theory Perspective. Journal of International Marketing, 23(2), pp.25- 54.