The research register for this journal is available at http://www.m cbup.

com/research_registers

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at http://www.emerald-library.com/ft

Corporate branding and corporate brand performance

Corporate branding

441

Leslie de Chernatony
The Birmingham Business School, The University of Birmingham, UK
Keywords Corporate image, Brands, Brand identity, Internal marketing Abstract Corporate branding necessitates a different management approach. It requires greater emphasis on factors internal to the organisation, paying greater attention to the role of employees in the brand building process. This paper explores the implications of corporate branding for the management of internal brand resources. We describe a model for managing brands through narrowing the gap between a brands identity and its reputation and, building on this, identify three key factors that affect brand perceptions and brand performance. Finally, we review some of the mechanisms that may be used to facilitate greater congruence of brand perceptions within the brand team and communication of a brands identity to employees.

Introduction In an era when the emphasis is moving from line branding to corporate branding (Balmer, 1995; Mitchell, 1997), there is a need to better appreciate the management approach for corporate branding as this needs managing differently from line branding. One of the key differences between line and corporate branding is that the latter requires greater focus within the organisation. The size and composition of brand management teams are changing, requiring greater co-ordination of activities. One of the implications of this is that corporate marketing necessitates not only a planning perspective which addresses the matching of external opportunities with core competencies, but also considers the integration of internal activities to ensure cohesion and therefore consistency in delivery. The role of employees is also changing. No longer can they be subsumed under the category the ``firm (Freeman and Liedtka, 1997); they need to be recognised as a brands ``ambassadors (Hemsley, 1998). Employees constitute the interface between a brands internal and external environments and can have a powerful impact on consumers perceptions of both the brand and the organisation (Schneider and Bowen, 1985; Balmer and Wilkinson, 1991). Furthermore, with the ubiquity of technology decreasing the potential for sustained competitive advantage, managers are focusing more on differentiating their brands on the basis of unique emotional, rather than functional, characteristics (de Chernatony et al., 2001). A brands emotional values are communicated not just by advertising, but also through employees interactions with different stakeholders. Employees represent a source of customer information and action needs to be taken to ensure this is compatible

European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 35 No. 3/4, 2001, pp. 441-456. # MCB University Press, 0309-0566

European Journal of Marketing 35,3/4 442

with the way senior management wishes the organisation to be perceived (Kennedy, 1977). Employees are thus becoming central to the process of brand building and their behaviour can either reinforce a brands advertised values or, if inconsistent with these values, undermine the credibility of advertised messages. It is therefore crucial to look inside the organisation to consider how employees values and behaviour can be aligned with a brands desired values. A further reason for looking inside the organisation is the shift in the branding literature from brand image (Boulding, 1956) to brand identity (Kapferer, 1997). While image focuses on consumers perceptions of brand differentiation, identity is more concerned with how managers and employees make a brand unique. Managers first need to define a brands values and then ensure employees values and behaviour are consistent with them. Historically, management has provided leadership through defining a brands values. However, with the recognition of corporate branding, and therefore the critical role staff play, they need to be included in the internal debate about defining a brands values. While management will still be required to initiate the process, staff should be encouraged to contribute to discussions. Externally, managers need to examine their brands reputation among stakeholders to ensure the brands identity is communicated successfully and valued outcomes are consistently delivered. This paper explores the implications of corporate branding for the management of internal brand resources. A model for managing these resources is described, which conceptualises the process of brand building as the management of brand identity, such that the gap between a brands identity and its reputation is narrowed. Building on this, we examine the dynamics of brand management teams under corporate branding. We identify some of the factors that may affect the coherent leverage of internal resources and discuss their managerial implications. Finally, we describe some of the mechanisms that may be used to surface and harmonise brand perceptions. The identity-reputation gap model of brand management Corporate branding requires a holistic approach to brand management, in which all members of an organisation behave in accordance with the desired brand identity. Following the International Corporate Identity Groups statement on corporate identity (van Riel and Balmer, 1997), corporate identity is interpreted as an organisations ethos, aims and values that create a sense of individuality which differentiates a brand. Building on Kapferers (1997) brandbased view of identity, de Chernatony (1999) proposed a model of brand management, conceptualised as the process of narrowing the gap between a brands identity and its reputation, as illustrated in Figure 1. Brand identity consists of six components: vision and culture, which drive the brands desired positioning, personality and subsequent relationships, all of which are then presented to reflect stakeholders actual and aspirational self-images. The components of the model interact and are mutually reinforcing. The individual components are described in the following subsections.

Corporate branding

443

Figure 1. The identity-reputation gap model of brand management

Brand vision and culture At the centre of brand identity are brand vision and culture. Vision encompasses the brands core purpose its reason for being and its core values, which provide a system of guiding principles (Collins and Porras, 1996). Managers need to communicate their brands purpose to employees clearly in order to inspire them and help them understand how their roles relate to it. It is also important to convey internally the brands core values, because these guide employees behaviour. Each brand will have a unique set of values that are relevant to its target market, but we argue that it is the consistency of the perception of those values, as well as the nature of those values, that is an important characteristic of successful brands. The organisations culture encompasses employees values and assumptions, which also guide their behaviour, particularly in novel situations (Wilkins and Ouchi, 1983). Managers need to be attentive to their organisations culture and its alignment with the brands values, since this could result in inconsistent behaviour and detrimentally affect stakeholders perceptions of

European Journal of Marketing 35,3/4 444

the brand. Corporate culture can represent a source of competitive advantage (Bettencourt and Brown, 1997), but the culture needs to be appropriate, adaptive and attentive to the needs of all stakeholders (Kotter and Heskett, 1992). Managers thus need to agree on the few core corporate values that will remain unchanged, and the less central values that need to adapt to changing circumstances. Positioning The coherence between the brands vision and core values and the brands positioning next needs to be examined. A brands positioning sets out what the brand is, who it is for and what it offers (Rositer and Percy, 1996). Following means-end theory (Gutman, 1982), a set of functionally distinct capabilities that differentiate a brand should be derived from the brands core values. The brands positioning will be affected by artefacts, akin to Kapferers (1997) ``physique, which provide cues about the brands performance characteristics. Personality The brands emotional characteristics are represented by the metaphor of personality, which, amongst other sources, evolves from the brands core values. Personality traits are further developed through associations with the ``typical user imagery, endorsers and consumers contacts with the companys employees (Aaker, 1997). Managers therefore need to ensure that a brands personality is conveyed consistently by both its employees and external communications. Another influential source for a brands personality is its positioning and an integrated approach to branding can help reinforce the synergy between these. Relationships Having nurtured a brands personality, a relationship between the brand and its consumers evolves, which is characterised by the values inherent in the brands personality. Consistent with Fournier (1998), consumer-brand relationships are portrayed as being reciprocal in Figure 1. Through their interactions, employees significantly affect a brands relationship with its consumers. The consistency of these interactions is therefore crucial, since relationships continually evolve and can be destabilised by changes from either partner (Fournier and Yao, 1997). Managers need to help employees understand the types of relationships that are appropriate with other employees, consumers and other stakeholders, based on the brands core values. Presentation The final component of brand identity involves the identification of presentation styles to present the brands identity so as to reflect consumers aspirations (cf. Kapferers (1997) ``reflections) and self-images (Belk, 1988; Hogg and Mitchell, 1996). People respond more favourably to brands and companies they perceive as being consistent with their self-concepts (Dowling,

1994). Brands symbolic meanings also help consumers understand and express aspects of their selves to others (McCracken, 1993). Both advertising and employees interactions with consumers contribute to the symbolic meaning of a brand. Thus managers need to be attentive to potential incongruity between a brands desired symbolic meanings and those conveyed through advertising and employees behaviour. Reputation Successful management of internal brand resources should result in a favourable brand reputation. Adapting Fombrun and Rindovas (1996) definition of reputation, a brands reputation is defined as ``a collective representation of a brands past actions and results that describes the brands ability to deliver valued outcomes to multiple stakeholders. In contrast to a brands image, which reflects current, changing perceptions, a brands reputation is more stable and represents the distillation of multiple images over time (Fombrun and van Riel, 1997). By encompassing the evaluations of all stakeholders, reputation provides a much more representative indication of brand performance. van Riel and Balmer (1997) also noted that the objective of corporate identity management was the establishment of a favourable reputation among an organisations stakeholders. Familiarity with key stakeholders perceptions is central to corporate brand management (Balmer, 1995). de Chernatonys (1999) model conceptualises the brand building process as revolving around the identification and narrowing of gaps between a brands identity and its reputation. Managers therefore need to work with staff to reduce these gaps and eliminate sources of incongruity. Strategies may then be fine-tuned to achieve a better match between identity and reputation. By including both internal and external components in the process, the model provides a balanced approach to brand building. Perceptual congruity and brand performance de Chernatonys (1999) model emphasises the multidimensional nature of the corporate branding concept, which involves the co-ordination of internal resources (for example, functional capabilities, communication capabilities, coordinating consistency through staff, planning, pricing, customer service) to create a coherent brand identity and a favourable brand reputation. Although brand reputation encompasses the perceptions of all stakeholder groups, to begin to appreciate the importance of internal brand resources, we focus on two stakeholder groups: an organisations employees and its consumers. Brands are multidimensional entities, whose success requires matching a firms functional and emotional values with consumers performance and psychosocial needs (de Chernatony and DallOlmo Riley, 1998). Corporate branding thus relies heavily on an organisations members holding congruent perceptions about the nature of their brand. However, with corporate branding, the teams responsible for managing brands are becoming larger and the composition of their members more diverse. We define a brand management

Corporate branding

445

European Journal of Marketing 35,3/4 446

team as comprising those people responsible for designing and developing the brand strategy. This could include both internal staff (marketing, customer service, corporate affairs, etc.) and those in external agencies working on the brand. The potential for misperceptions of a brand internally, as well as externally, is therefore substantial. Perception depends on a persons expectations and previous knowledge as well as the information presented by the stimulus, in this case the brand (Eysenck and Keane, 1990). People at different seniority levels and from different departments tend to have differing information and decision criteria (Tjosvold, 1987). Thus managers and employees are likely to differ in their perceptions of their brands identity. Indeed, research has shown that managers perceptions may differ from each other (de Chernatony et al., 1993; Reger, 1990). Furthermore, differences in managers functional backgrounds can result in selective perception and imperception (Beyer et al., 1997). Managers perceptions have also been found to differ from those of sales staff (DelVecchio, 1998). Congruent perceptions will therefore be crucial in the successful management of corporate brands. Specifically, we propose: P1: There is a positive correlation between brand performance and the congruence of the brand team members perceptions about the nature of their brand. P2: There is a positive correlation between brand performance and the congruence between the brand teams and consumers perceptions about the nature of their brand. P3: There is a positive correlation between brand performance and the congruence between the brand teams and employees perceptions about the nature of their brand. Corporate branding involves multiple stakeholders interacting with numerous staff across many departments in an organisation (Mitchell, 1997). Effective corporate branding requires consistent messages about a brands identity and uniform delivery across all stakeholder groups to create a favourable brand reputation. Internal consistency and congruency are vital to the successful external communication of corporate identity (Abratt, 1989). It is therefore important that managers identify mechanisms for surfacing diverse perceptions to resolve inconsistencies. Members of the brand team first need to surface their own perceptions and clarify their brands intended identity. They should then work with employees to ensure their perceptions align with the intended brand identity. As a further coherency check, employees should be encouraged to provide feedback about how they believe consumers perceive the brand. To build a coherent brand identity, managers need to understand the factors that can affect the congruency of perceptions. This will help them identify potential problems and put in place appropriate mechanisms to minimise incongruity. We consider next the factors we believe affect the congruency of

perceptions within an organisation and how these influence brand performance. Building the corporate brand through internal mechanisms A review of the literature (e.g. Tajfel and Fraser, 1978; Wagner et al., 1984; Murray, 1989; Smith et al., 1994) suggested three key factors affect perceptual congruity: the similarity of brand team members, shared values and communication. Figure 2 shows how we believe these factors affect the congruency of perceptions and brand performance. The strength of this model is that it examines the effects of various intervening variables on performance. For example, Carroll and Harrison (1998) could find only three studies that had examined intervening variables between organisational demography and performance. In the following subsections we explore the impact of these internal factors and examine the managerial implications of each. Similarity of brand team members As previously noted, brand teams are larger with corporate branding and more diverse in their membership. The resulting heterogeneity poses a challenge to the formation of congruent perceptions, which are crucial for effective leverage of brand resources and, consequently, brand performance. The literature on team composition typically defines similarity in terms of age, experience, education, team and organisations tenure, and functional background (e.g. Bantel and Jackson, 1989; Hambrick and Mason, 1984; Smith et al., 1994). Teams composed of members with dissimilar characteristics are likely to differ with respect to values (Bantel and Jackson, 1989) and exhibit greater conflict (Murray, 1989). Heterogeneous teams also tend to be associated with poorer communication, team integration and consensus building (Lichtenstein et al., 1997). By contrast, team members with similar characteristics are more likely to have similar experiences and perspectives (Robbins, 1991), shared values (Bantel and Jackson, 1989) and communicate easily (Wagner et al., 1984). For

Corporate branding

447

Figure 2. The relationships between internal brand resources and brand performance

European Journal of Marketing 35,3/4 448

example, people who join an organisation at the same time are more likely to share common experiences and have similar job values and orientations (Lichtenstein et al., 1997). The sharing of common values results in better consensus (Erez, 1992). Thus we postulate: P4: The greater the similarity of brand team members, the more congruent will be their perceptions about the nature of their brand. However, the growing team heterogeneity with corporate branding does have some benefits. Heterogeneous teams offer a wider range of skills and knowledge and are less susceptible to the limitations of ``groupthink (Janis, 1972). Bantel and Jackson (1989) concluded that heterogeneity was beneficial for tasks that involved complex problem solving and that heterogeneous teams were more innovative. In addition, Murray (1989) suggested that heterogeneous groups would be responsive to change. Although heterogeneous teams are prone to conflict, Priem et al. (1995) argued that cognitive conflict that was expressed and resolved would produce stronger consensus than the premature consensus of teams that attempted to smooth over latent disagreement. The key issue is thus whether heterogeneous brand teams can arrive at congruent brand perceptions. Over time, teams tend towards increasingly similar perceptions. As team members work together the effects of surface-level (demographic) diversity decrease (Harrison et al., 1998). In addition, conflict is reduced and group cohesiveness grows as people interact and come to know each other better (Robbins, 1991). Difficulties in communication should also recede over time, as communication becomes easier between people used to working with each other (Zenger and Lawrence, 1989). Turnover is also higher among more dissimilar team members (Wagner et al., 1984). Hence we postulate: P5: The longer the team tenure of heterogeneous brand teams, the more congruent will be their perceptions about the nature of their brand. However, rather than leaving these tendencies to take effect over time, constructive action should be taken to harness the strengths of heterogeneous teams while minimising the potential barriers to coherent management of a brands identity. This is particularly important given that marketers tend to change jobs frequently (Beyaztas, 1998). We recommend that mechanisms be put in place to facilitate the surfacing and resolving of incongruent brand perceptions among brand team members. Such mechanisms are discussed in the section Mechanisms for surfacing and harmonising perceptions. Shared values People who share similar values tend to perceive things in similar ways (Meglino and Ravlin, 1998). Deal and Kennedy (1982) argued that successful organisations placed great emphasis on making their values explicit and ensuring they were known and shared by employees. Top managements

values shape the perceptions and interpretations of an organisation (Hambrick and Mason, 1984; Guillen, 1994). Shared organisational values also provide employees with guidance about desired behaviour (McDonald and Gantz, 1991). It is thus important with corporate branding that the brands and the organisations values are consistent. Shared values will play an important part in facilitating congruent brand perceptions and coherent actions both within the brand team and across the organisation. They are also instrumental in communicating the organisation to the outside world (Deal and Kennedy, 1982). We therefore posit: P6: There is better brand performance as the congruence increases between the values of the organisation and the values of the brand. Organisational performance is a function of its members degree of involvement and participation (Brown, 1995). With corporate branding, organisational and brand performance are closely entwined. Erez (1992) reported that the sharing of common values resulted in greater consensus and commitment to those values. Thus we posit: P7: There is better brand performance as the congruence increases between the personal values of members of the brand team and the values of the organisation. P8: There is better brand performance as the congruence increases between the personal values of employees and the values of the organisation. In addition to organisational values, personal values also guide individuals behaviour (Rokeach, 1973; Melgino and Ravlin, 1998). Thus we expect the greater the congruence between team members and employees personal values and those of the brand, the more likely that managers and employees will act in accordance with the corporate brands values, and the more coherent will be the brands identity. We therefore propose: P9: There is better brand performance as the congruence increases between the values of the brand and the personal values of the brand team. P10: There is better brand performance as the congruence increases between the values of the brand and the personal values of employees. However, it is possible that an organisations shared values may be inappropriate for its continuing success (Deal and Kennedy, 1982). Visionary companies nurture their core values and adapt to changing circumstances without compromising them (Collins and Porras, 1996). Kotter and Heskett (1992) proposed that values which helped organisations adapt were associated with sustained excellent performance. Managers thus need to agree which are their core values that need to be sustained and which values should adapt as circumstances change (de Chernatony, 1999). Thus we postulate: P11: Strong shared organisational values that are appropriate and adaptive will be positively associated with superior brand performance.

Corporate branding

449

European Journal of Marketing 35,3/4 450

Communication Dubrin (1994, p. 336) defined communication as:

Communication plays an important role in the formation of congruent perceptions (Gilly and Woolfinbarger, 1998; Bowman and Ambrosini, 1996). Furthermore, Balmer (1995) suggested that an unfavourable image could result from the mismanagement of communication. We argue that communication will fulfil a vital role in surfacing perceptions, and that effective communication will enable incongruent perceptions to be identified and resolved. To understand how communication will affect the congruence of perceptions among members of the brand team and between the brand team and employees, we examine communication at both the team and organisational levels. In the following subsections communication encompasses all communication among managers and staff in the course of their work activities. This includes both general communication and communication specifically relating to the corporate brand. Our justification for focusing on communication as a whole is that the literature suggests that this affects perceptual congruency (e.g. Wagner et al., 1984; DelVecchio, 1998). However, as part of our current empirical research, we are, in addition, exploring the nature and effectiveness of specific communications about the corporate brand. Communication at the team level. Communication is easier in teams whose members are similar to each other (Wagner et al., 1984; Harrison et al., 1998) or are used to working together (Zenger and Lawrence, 1989). More importantly, the interpretation of communication is better between more similar individuals (Robbins, 1991). Thus homogeneous brand teams are also expected to have more congruent perceptions because they are less likely to misunderstand each other. Although communication within heterogeneous teams is typically more difficult (Lichtenstein et al., 1997; Zenger and Lawrence, 1989), improving their communication will enable these teams to take advantage of the rich resources represented by their diversity. For example, greater frequency of communication is likely to increase the similarity of their perceptions (Wagner et al., 1984). The more frequently team members communicate with each other, the more opportunities they will have to surface their perceptions regarding their brands identity and appreciate other members perceptions. Furthermore, when conflicts are resolved co-operatively, through individuals working out the differences between themselves, more information is considered and integrative solutions are likely to result rather than compromises (Maier, 1967). Team members are also more likely to have favourable attitudes toward the outcome (Ruekert and Walker (1987). We therefore propose: P12: The greater the similarities between members of the brand team, the more informal and frequent the communication between them.

P13: The more frequent the communication between members of the brand team, the greater the congruence between their perceptions about the nature of their brand. P14: The more stable the membership of the brand management team, the more informal and frequent the communication between team members. Communication at the organisational level. When all members of an organisation understand their brands identity they are better able to act in a more coherent manner, enhancing the likelihood of their activities supporting the desired identity. Maier (1967) maintained that many organisational problems could be attributed to inadequate communication between superiors and their subordinates, whose task it was to implement their decisions. Communication between the brand team and employees will be crucial to their perceptual congruity. DelVecchio (1998) reported that greater interaction between managers and sales staff reduced their perceptual differences. We therefore propose: P15: The more frequent the communication between the brand team and employees, the more congruent will be their perceptions about the nature of their brand. The nature, as well as the frequency, of communication is also expected to affect the congruence between the brand teams and employees perceptions. Fisher et al. (1997) reported that the bidirectionality of communication was as important as communication frequency in producing positive interfunctional outcomes. Gilly and Woolfinbarger (1998) suggested that the congruence of perceptions about an organisations advertisements was enhanced by two-way communication between management and employees. Two-way communication provides the opportunity to assess how accurately the communication has been understood (Robbins, 1991). Therefore we propose: P16: The greater the two-way communication between the brand team and employees, the more congruent will be their perceptions of their brand. The brand team needs to ensure that all forms of brand communications present a coherent brand identity. Employees perceptions of their brand will be based not only on what the brand team tells them, but also on their own experience with the brand and brand advertisements. Gilly and Woolfinbarger (1998) noted that consumer advertising was an important means of communicating with employees and that consumer advertisements affected the way they perceived their service roles. Employees were more accepting of advertisements when decision makers communicated with them about the advertisements. Hence, the brand team should explain to employees not only the brands identity, but also how other forms of brand communication are intended to reflect that identity. Leaving such brand communications open to

Corporate branding

451

European Journal of Marketing 35,3/4 452

interpretation is likely to increase incongruous brand perceptions among employees. Hence we propose: P17: Explaining to employees how consumer advertisements are designed to communicate the corporate brand identity will increase the congruence between the brand teams and employees perceptions about the nature of the brand. Mechanisms for surfacing and harmonising perceptions We now discuss mechanisms that can be used to help brand teams and employees surface and harmonise their perceptions and develop congruent brand perceptions. One approach is to use an independent facilitator (de Chernatony and Daniels, 1994). The facilitator collates team members anonymous, individual brand perceptions and then leads a workshop in which the range of perceptions are discussed and a consensus reached regarding each of the brand identity components. This approach allows diverse views to be debated openly, with the facilitator ensuring they are each given due consideration. The facilitator, as an impartial co-ordinator, reduces the potential for conflict and prevents domination of any team members. Heterogeneous teams should find this approach particularly beneficial. Two techniques used in strategic decision making to assist the expression and resolution of perceptions are dialectical inquiry (DI) and devils advocacy (DA) (Schweiger et al., 1986). DI involves inducing maximal conflict by requiring a team to debate two opposing views. DA induces conflict through the consideration and critique of one view. These techniques may be used by heterogeneous brand teams to legitimise and manage conflicting views about the nature of the brand. They should thus maximise the benefits of team diversity and result in greater consensus by allowing conflicting perceptions to be expressed and resolved (cf. Priem et al., 1995). By forcing wider debate, these techniques may also be used by homogeneous brand teams to counteract the possibility of groupthink (Janis, 1972). A powerful device for creating a coherent focus among large numbers of individuals engaged in the development of a common concept was described by Dumas (1994) in relation to design. Dumas (1994) advocated the use of objectbased metaphors called ``totems to build shared mental models. Totems may consist of visual photographs or images and a set of words, and provide a gestalt that makes explicit the collective tacit knowledge of a team of individuals from a range of functional backgrounds. Examples include ``tall boy as a metaphor for the Honda ``City (Clark and Fujimoto, 1990) and ``rugby player in a business suit for the Honda ``Accord (Nonaka, 1991). Although Dumas (1994) described the use of totems by design teams developing new products, the process may be used by brand teams as a simplifying and unifying device to reflect de Chernatonys (1999) six brand identity components. The brand team could then use a totem to help communicate a brands identity to employees and guide their behaviour accordingly.

To gain employees commitment to a brands identity it is important to establish staff communication programmes. Internal organisational communication is crucial for providing and obtaining information, achieving understanding and gaining employees commitment (Gilly and Woolfinbarger, 1998). Employees need to know what is expected of them and how they can contribute to the brands identity through their behaviour. For example, BUPA, Railtrack and Great North Eastern Railway have all introduced internal programmes to inform employees about their brand values and involve them in acting as ``ambassadors for their brands (Mistry, 1998; Hemsley, 1998; Wilson, 1998). Involvement facilitates understanding and consensus (Maier, 1967; Wooldridge and Floyd, 1990). It is therefore important that employees are actively involved in the process of building a brands identity. Concluding remarks Corporate branding requires increased emphasis on internal brand resources to present a coherent brand identity to stakeholders. de Chernatonys (1999) identity-reputation gap model of brand management conceptualises brand building as the process of narrowing the gap between brand identity and brand reputation. Building on this, we have identified key internal factors that we propose affect the leverage of brand resources to enhance brand performance. Employees play a crucial role in the brand building process and managers can further lever their brand potential by striving to achieve greater congruence among members of the brand team and between the team and other employees. It is therefore crucial that corporate marketers adopt a planning perspective which incorporates both internal, pan-company marketing as well as the traditional, external perspective to ensure that there is synergy between employees actions, resulting in optimising consumers satisfaction. Organisations also need to pay attention to the composition of their brand teams and be aware of their strengths and weaknesses. The increasing heterogeneity of brand teams under corporate branding should enhance the resources of the brand team, but will require greater emphasis on integration to arrive at congruent brand perceptions. Organisations will need to consider carefully the appointment of new members to the brand team, taking into account the teams composition and whether new and existing members will be able to work together. We have reviewed some of the mechanisms that may be used to assist the brand team in surfacing their perceptions and resolving any inconsistencies. Such mechanisms can help in the creation of a coherent brand identity. Organisations should then consider initiating internal programmes to communicate the brands identity to employees. We have recently embarked on empirical research to test our model of brand identity and the internal factors we believe influence brand perceptions and performance. Our findings will be reported in future publications.
References Aaker, J.L. (1997), ``Dimensions of brand personality, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 34, August, pp. 347-56.

Corporate branding

453

European Journal of Marketing 35,3/4 454

Abratt, R. (1989), ``A new approach to the corporate image management process, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 63-76. Balmer, J.M.T. (1995), ``Corporate branding and connoisseurship, Journal of General Management, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 24-46. Balmer, J.M.T. and Wilkinson, A. (1991), ``Building societies: change, strategy and corporate identity, Journal of General Management, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 20-33. Bantel, K.A. and Jackson, S.E. (1989), ``Top management and innovations in banking: does the composition of the top team make a difference?, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 10, pp. 107-24. Belk, R.W. (1988), ``Possessions and the extended self, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 15, September, pp. 139-68. Bettencourt, L.A. and Brown, S.W. (1997), ``Contact employees: relationships among workplace fairness, job satisfaction and prosocial behaviours, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 73 No. 1, pp. 39-61. Beyaztas, B. (1998), ``Why marketers keep on moving, Marketing, 24 September, p. 95. Beyer, J.M., Chadttopadhyay, P., George, E., Glick, W.H. and Pugliese, D. (1997), ``The selective perception of managers revisited, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 40 No. 3, pp. 716-37. Boulding, K.E. (1956), The Image, University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, MI. Bowman, C. and Ambrosini, V. (1996), ``Tracking patterns of realised strategy, Journal of General Management, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 59-73. Brown, A. (1995), Organisational Culture, Pitman Publishing, London. Carroll, G.R. and Harrison, J.R. (1998), ``Organizational demography and culture: insights from a formal model and simulation, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 43, pp. 637-67. Clark, K.B. and Fujimoto, T. (1990), ``The power of product integrity, Harvard Business Review, November-December,pp. 107-18. Collins, J.C. and Porras, J.I. (1996), Built to Last. Successful Habits of Visionary Companies, HarperCollins, London. Deal, T.E. and Kennedy, A.A. (1982), Corporate Cultures. The Rites and Rituals of Corporate Life, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA. de Chernatony, L. (1999), ``Brand management through narrowing the gap between brand identity and brand reputation, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 15, pp. 157-79. de Chernatony, L. and DallOlmo Riley, F. (1998), ``Defining a `brand: beyond the literature with experts interpretations, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 14, pp. 417-43. de Chernatony, L. and Daniels, K. (1994), ``Developing a more effective brand positioning, The Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 1 No. 6, pp. 373-9. de Chernatony, L., Daniels, K. and Johnson, G. (1993), ``Competitive positioning strategies mirroring sellers and buyers perceptions, Journal of Strategic Marketing, Vol. 1, pp. 229-48. de Chernatony, L. Harris, F. and DallOlmo Riley, F. (2001), ``Added value: its nature, roles and sustainability, European Journal of Marketing (in press). DelVecchio, S.K. (1998), ``The salespersons operating freedom. A matter of perception, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 27, pp. 31-40. Dowling, G.R. (1994), Corporate Reputations, Kogan Page, London. Dubrin, A.J. (1994), Applying Psychology: Individual and Organizational Effectiveness, 4th ed., Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Dumas, A. (1994), ``Building totems: metaphor-making in product development, Design Management Journal, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 71-82. Erez, M. (1992), ``Interpersonal communication systems in organisations, and their relationships to cultural values, productivity and innovation: the case of Japanese corporations, Applied Psychology: An International Review, Vol. 41 No. 1, pp. 43-64.

Eysenck, M.W. and Keane, M.T. (1990), Cognitive Psychology, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hove, East Sussex. Fisher, R.J., Maltz, E. and Jaworski, B.J. (1997), ``Enhancing communication between marketing and engineering: the moderating role of relative functional identification, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 61, July, pp. 54-70. Fombrun, C. and Rindova, V. (1996), ``Whos tops and who decides? The social construction of corporate reputations, working paper, Stern Business School, New York University, NY. Fombrun, C. and van Riel, C. (1997), ``The reputational landscape, Corporate Reputation Review, Vol. 1 No. 1/2, pp. 5-13. Fournier, S. (1998), ``Consumers and their brands: developing relationship theory in consumer research, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 24, March, pp. 343-73. Fournier, S. and Yao, J.L. (1997), ``Reviving brand loyalty: a reconceptualization within the framework of consumer-brand relationships, International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 14, pp. 451-72. Freeman, E. and Liedtka, J. (1997), ``Stakeholder capitalism and the value chain, European Management Journal, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 286-96. Gilly, M.C. and Wolfinbarger, M. (1998), ``Advertisings internal audience, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 62, January, pp. 69-88. Guille M.F. (1994), ``The age of eclecticism: current organizational trends and the evolution of n, managerial models, Sloan Management Review, Fall, pp. 75-86. Gutman, J. (1982), ``A means-end chain model based on consumer categorization processes, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 46, Spring, pp. 60-72. Hambrick, D.C. and Mason, P.A. (1984), ``Upper echelons: the organization as a reflection of its top managers, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 9, pp. 193-206. Harrison, D.A., Price, K.H. and Bell, M.P. (1998), ``Beyond relational demography: time and the effects of surface- and deep-level diversity on work group cohesion, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 41 No. 1, pp. 96-107. Hemsley, S. (1998), ``Internal affairs, Marketing Week, April 2, pp. 49-50, 53. Hogg, M.K. and Mitchell, P.C.N. (1996), ``Identity, self and consumption: a conceptual framework, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 12 No. 7, pp. 629-44. Janis, I. (1972), Victims of Groupthink: A Psychological Study of Foreign-Policy Decisions and Fiascos, Houghton-Mifflin, Boston, MA. Kapferer, J.-N. (1997), Strategic Brand Management. Creating and Sustaining Brand Equity Long Term, 2nd ed., Kogan Page, London. Kennedy, S.H. (1977), ``Nurturing corporate images: total communication or ego trip?, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 120-64. Kotter, J.P. and Heskett, J.L. (1992), Corporate Culture and Performance, The Free Press, New York, NY. Lichtenstein, R., Alexander, J.A., Jinnet, K. and Ullman, E. (1997), ``Embedded intergroup relations in interdisciplinary teams. Effects on perceptions of team integration, The Journal of Applied Behavioural Science, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 413-34. McCracken, G. (1993), ``The value of the brand: an anthropological perspective, in Aaker, D.A. and Biel, A.L. (Eds), Brand Equity and Advertising, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ. McDonald, P. and Gandz, J. (1991), ``Identification of values relevant to business research, Human Resource Management, Summer, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 217-36. Maier, N.R.F. (1967), ``Assets and liabilities in group problem solving, Psychological Review, Vol. 74 No. 4, pp. 239-49.

Corporate branding

455

European Journal of Marketing 35,3/4 456

Meglino, B.M. and Ravlin, E.C. (1998), ``Individual values in organizations: concepts, controversies, and research, Journal of Management, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 351-89. Mistry, B. (1998), ``Life and soul of the brand, Marketing, March 26, pp. 47-9. Mitchell, A. (1997), Brand Strategies in the Information Age, Financial Times Report, London. Murray, A.I. (1989), ``Top management group heterogeneity and firm performance, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 10, pp. 125-41. Nonaka, I. (1991), ``The knowledge-creating company, Harvard Business Review, NovemberDecember, pp. 96-104. Priem, R.L., Harrison, D.A. and Muir, N.K. (1995), ``Structured conflict and consensus outcomes in group decision making, Journal of Management, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 691-710. Reger, R.K. (1990), ``Managerial through structures and competitive positioning, in Huff, A.S. (Ed.), Mapping Strategic Thought, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester. Robbins, S.P. (1991), Organizational Behaviour. Concepts, Controversies, and Applications, 5th ed., Prentice-Hall International, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Rokeach, M. (1973), The Nature of Human Values, The Free Press, New York, NY. Rositer, J. and Percy, L. (1996), Advertising Communications and Promotion Management, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY. Ruekert, R.W. and Walker, O.C. Jr (1987), ``Marketings interaction with other functional units: a conceptual framework and empirical evidence, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 51, January, pp. 1-19. Schneider, B. and Bowen, D. (1985), ``Employee and customer perceptions of service in banks: replication and extension, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 70, pp. 423-33. Schweiger, D.M., Sandberg, W.R. and Ragan, J.W. (1986), ``Group approaches for improving strategic decision making: a comparative analysis of dialectical inquiry, devils advocacy, and consensus, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 51-71. Smith, K.G., Smith, K.A., Olian, J.D., Sims, H.P. Jr, OBannon, D.P. and Scully, J.A. (1994), ``Top management team demography: the role of social integration and communication, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 39 No. 3, pp. 412-38. Tajfel, H. and Fraser, C. (1978), Introducing Social Psychology. An Analysis of Individual Reaction and Response, Penguin Books, Harmondsworth. Tjosvold, D. (1987), ``Participation: a close look at its dynamics, Journal of Management, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 739-50. van Riel, C.B.M. and Balmer, J.M.T. (1997), ``Corporate identity: the concept, its measurement and management, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 31 No. 5/6, pp. 340-55. Wagner, W.G., Pfeffer, J. and OReilly, C.A. (1984), ``Organisational demography and turnover in top-management groups, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 29, pp. 74-92. Wilkins, A.L. and Ouchi, W.G. (1983), ``Efficient cultures: exploring the relationship between culture and organizational performance, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 28, pp. 468-81. Wilson, R. (1998), ``Action stations, Marketing Week, February 16, pp. 78-9. Wooldridge, B. and Floyd, S.W. (1990), ``The strategy process, middle management involvement and organizational performance, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 11, pp. 231-41. Zenger, T.R. and Lawrence, B.S. (1989), ``Organizational demography: the differential effects of age and tenure distributions on technical communication, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 32, pp. 353-76.