Brands (part C)
by
Charles Lamson
Brands, Meaning and Identity
The discussion about brand congruity and brand personality raised the question of how brands attain their meaning and how this in turn transferred to consumers? Allen and Olson (1995) suggest that consumers attribute meaning as well as action and purpose to brands. But what are the mechanics of how this works? In marketing the focus on meaning can be traced to Levy (1959), who argued that people do not buy products for what they do but for what they mean. While these are inseparable in practice, it makes sense analytically to divide the discussion about brand meaning identity into two sections, one dealing with the role played by brands in our lives, the other which focuses on how brand meaning is mediated through advertising (Elliot and Wattanasuwan, 2001).
 |
In this respect brands are symbols whose meaning is used to create and define a consumer's self-concept. In earlier posts, the Freudian view was discussed showing that possessions can come to be regarded as being part of the extended self (Csikszentmihalyi and Rochberg-Halton, 1991; Belk, 1988). Elliot and Watanasuan, (2001) follow this line of thinking, arguing that consumers invest psychic energy into people and objects. In this view, the self concept is complex as energy may be invested in a number of people and things. Consequently a person possesses a multiplicity of identities. This account highlights the role played by narratives or stories in the formation of identity. Much of the knowledge that is gained about ourselves and our culture comes to us from the commercial process of story-telling called branding. In building up these stories meaning is constructed from two sources; our lived experience and the mass media.
Lived Experience of Brands
Freudian theory suggests that at a certain point in our life the issue of identity becomes important to us. In this respect Erikson (1968) argues that identity confusion is experienced by most adolescents. This is because by that stage of development the individual feels independent of the family and ventures beyond the safe confines of the family to sample other social contexts. New social contexts can be frightening and challenging to the adolescent's sense of self, particularly if they have not previously mastered the ability to take different roles. Consequently a person may react to this sense of confusion by clinging to the security provided by the peer group and may overidentify with the heroes of that group to the extent that they seem to lose their individuality. Where the adolescent fails in positively responding to the identity crisis they may attempt to create a negative identity by seeking to become everything that they have learned ought to be avoided. From the above, it is important to consider the context in which interaction takes place with products in order to gain meaning from them. As children we consume many food and beverage brands in the family and often secure context of the family home. This is why such brands attain such a nostalgic appeal later in life. Life in the school context brings us into contact with others, and here brands may become implicated in the struggle for esteem and status, signifying who is 'in' and who is 'out' of the group. Most children who must negotiate the changed balance between home, school and a widening circle of social contexts feel confused and some will be disaffected. This latter group are the targets for a host of branded identities, many of which are to be found on MTV or something similar, from Marilyn Manson to the 'stars' of death metal, or more extremely Insane Clown Posse. Given Erikson's comments then as children grow into adolescence a range of brands targeted at the 'anti-hero' image should become salient. Identity is lucrative for marketers. 
The idea of a reference group (Newcomb, 1948) plays a key role in the construction of identity as one moves from the family context to the school and the ever widening social context. This divides the 'in-group' that we feel comfortable with, from 'out-groups', those we tend to avoid and in turn the aspirational group to which we seek to belong. In consumer societies brands can play a key role in differentiating 'in' groups from 'out' groups. For example, in the UK, the luxury Burberry brand has been identified with 'chav' culture:
Chav is a slang term which has been in wide use throughout the United Kingdom since 2004. It refers to a subcultural stereotype of a person with fashions such as flashy 'bling' jewelry and counterfeit designer clothes or sportswear, an uneducated, uncultured, impoverished background, a tendency to congregate around places such as fast-food outlets, bus stops or other shopping areas, and a culture of antisocial behavior. (Wikipedia online) 
When chavs begin to wear Burberry other groups stop wearing the brand. On the other hand, those who are proud to be chavs may react strongly against brands such as Polo, which may be perceived as being associated with 'upper-class twits'.
*SOURCE: FUNDAMENTALS OF MARKETING, 2007, MARILYN A. STONE, PGS. 211-212*
END
|
No comments:
Post a Comment