From the Retail Brand to the Retail­er as a Brand: themes and issues in retail

branding research

Steve Burt and Keri Davies

Institute for Retail Studies, Stirling Management School, University of Stirling

Introduction

When we discuss research into retail branding, the natural starting point is the
retail product brand – invariably referred to as the “private brand”, the “store
brand” or the “retail brand”. Private brands have generated a vast body of research
on both sides of the Atlantic over the past forty years. In a recent review article,
Hyman et al (2010) generated 73 articles published since 1990, simply through a
key word search in the Business Source Premier database. Whilst such an approach
is likely to underestimate the total volume of material, this figure is nonetheless
impressive. The authors also comment on the variety within this body of work in
terms of the origin of the article (ie USA or not), the product categories investigated,
the research methods used (eg sample frames, sample sizes and types of panel
data), and the analytical tools employed.

One obvious criticism of key word searches of electronic databases is that they are
dependent on the choice of terminology (and journal inclusion). Indeed, in the above
study the authors used the composite term “private label brand”, presumably to
extend the scope of their search. Without wishing to rehearse the terminology
debate covered in most retail marketing textbooks it is evident from the focus of
several early studies that the definition of the “subject” has caused some concern (eg
Schutte, 1969; Morris, 1979; Simmons and Meredith, 1984; Martell, 1986; de
Chernatony & McMillan, 1988). This extended discussion around terminology,
which was often based on product features such as quality composition, price
position, packaging and naming, implies that a certain degree of variety and/or
evolution is hidden by the umbrella term “retail brand”. This is an important issue
in retail (product) brand research as the national setting, the timing of the study and
even the choice of retail company may mean that cross study comparisons may not
be considering like with like. The “retail brand” in one study and in one context may
not be directly comparable with the “retail brand” in another.

Initially definitions and categorisations of retail brands were framed around

descriptive typologies, with some debate over whether generics were a sub‐
category of private brands or a distinct category of brand in their own right (Bellizzi
et al 1981; McGoldrick, 1984; de Chernatony 1988). Since the mid 1990s however it
has been recognised that a more discrete segmentation, incorporating the fit or link
to broader assortment and positioning strategies is more appropriate (Laaksonen
and Reynolds, 1994; Wileman and Jary, 1997; Burt, 2000; Juhl et al, 2006).

In the remainder of this paper we will first consider the broad themes found within
existing research focused upon the retail (product) brand, before exploring an
extension of the research focus to incorporate a more holistic view of branding in
retailing, which involves the retailer as a store and as an organisation. We conclude
with a few comments on the future direction of research.

Research into Retail Brands

In the introduction to the Review of Industrial Organization special issue on retail

brands, Scott Morton (2004) comments that store brands are of interest to both
marketers and industrial organisational economists because they entail issues of
competition among retailers, and between retailers and manufacturers. These
horizontal and vertical dimensions have underpinned much of the existing work on
retail brands, and allow a straightforward stakeholder (consumer, retailer, supplier)
framework to be used to consider past research.

It is perhaps not surprising that the initial focus for research was the identification
of private brand consumers. Various attempts have been made to determine the
characteristics of those prone to purchase these products (eg Frank and Boyd, 1965;
Myers, 1967; Rao, 1969; and Burger and Schott, 1972). However, these studies –
whether exploring private brand consumers in general or having a specific focus on
generic brand consumers (eg Granzin 1981; McEnally and Hawes, 1984; Rosen,
1984; Wilkes and Valencia, 1985; Szymanski and Busch, 1987) – have generally
failed to determine consistent consumer profiles. This theme has persisted within
the literature since private brands first appeared and has been explored in many
national contexts (eg Richardson et al, 1996; Ailawadi et al, 2001; Baltas, 2003;
Bonfrer and Chintagunta, 2004; Zielke and Dobbelstein, 2007; Baltas and
Argouslidis, 2007; Mártinez and Montaner, 2008), and via a variety of approaches
including the use of human personality research (Whelan and Davies, 2006). It is
now accepted that that a wide range of customers with different demographic,
socio‐economic, lifestyle and value profiles purchase private brand products.

Closely aligned to this theme is a second stream of research which took the retail
brand product as the object, and sought to identify the product attributes which
were of greatest interest to consumers (eg Baltas, 1997; Baltas et al, 1997; Gonzales
Mieres et al, 2006; Grunert et al, 2006; Glynn and Chen, 2009). As the retail brand
has evolved over time, the actual and perceived quality gap with national brands
declined (Hoch and Banerji 1993; Quelch and Harding 1996), as has the price
differential between the two, and other largely marketing related factors have come
into play. Consequently, the focus in the research into product attributes has
become more multi‐dimensional, moving away from considerations of the price‐
quality relationship to encompass perceived risk, presentational issues (shelf space,
packaging cues and positioning) and product category and retail format
considerations.

As the sales of retail brands have grown and as they began to dominate certain
product categories and move into others, academic research also sought to explain
their growth (eg Davies et al, 1986; Fitzell, 1993; 2003; Hoch, 1996; Dhar and Hoch,
1997; Dunne and Narasimham, 1999; Burt, 2000; Kumar and Steenkamp, 2007
Lamey et al, 2007), and why retailers sold these products (Mills, 1995; Steenkamp
and Dekimpe, 1997; Steiner, 2004). Several motives were identified including the
potential of private brands to: generate higher margins (Hoch & Banerji, 1993) and
improve category profitability (Bontemps et al, 2008; Raju et al, 1995; Putsis and
Cottrill, 1999); lower the financial risk of new product launch; provide a source of
differentiation from competitors either through positioning or availability
(Richardson et al 1994; Davies 1990; Sudhir and Talukdar, 2004; Scott Morton and
Zettelmeyer, 2004; Liu and Wang 2008;); engender greater store and retailer loyalty
(Steenkamp & Dekimpe, 1997; Cortjens and Lal, 2000; Binninger, 2008); improve
retailer image; and allow a wide range of product options to be offered to meet the
differing needs and values of customer groups (Sayman et al, 2002; Anselmsson and
Johansson, 2007)

There has been less of a focus, certainly in terms of the volume of published output,
on the role of suppliers in retail brand growth and particularly the implications of
retail brands for relationships between retailers and suppliers. Research exploring
the channel perspective has focused on changing power relationships in the channel
and the specifics of procuring private brands (Shaw et al 1992; Bhasin et al, 1995;
Collins and Burt, 1999; Cotterill and Putis, 2001; Scott‐Morton and Zettelmeyer,
2004; Oubiña et al, 2006; Johansson and Burt, 2004; Tarzijan, 2004)

This dyadic, stakeholder framed, structure has also been complimented by

investigatios into aspects of intra‐brand competition at the product level. Two
themes have been of particular interest. First, the impact of private brands upon the
wider category assortment, for example on assortment profitability (Sayman et al,
2002; Sajman and Raju, 2004; Ailawadi and Harlam, 2004) on category price levels
(Putsis and Cotterill 1999; Bonfrer and Chintagunta, 2004; Pauwels and Srinivasan,
2004; Anselmsson et al, 2008); on price and variety levels (Olbrich and Grewe,
2009), and on the allocation of shelf space (Fernandez Nogales and Gomez Suarez,
2004; Gomez Saurez, 2005; Amrouche and Zaccour, 2007). A second theme, is the
issue of copy‐cat brands, based upon the accusation that private brands take up
free‐rider positions alongside leading manufacturer brands (Uncles, 1995). This
issue has been explored in a number of national and product contexts often
stimulated by specific high profile incidents (Miaoulis and D’Amato, 1978; Loken et
al, 1987; Foxman et al, 1992; Kapferer, 1995a; 1995b; Rafiq and Collins, 1996;,
Balabanis and Craven, 1997; Burt and Davies, 1999; Collins‐Dodd and Zaichkowsky,
1999)
Whilst various approaches and methodologies have been employed in constructing
this body of work, most academic research over the past four decades, perhaps
driven (or at least reinforced) by the methodologies employed, has overwhelmingly
taken a managerial perspective on randing, based upon the transmission models of
brand communication, where it is assumed that the brand is a wholly managerially
(or sender) produced concept. The retail brand is taken as an assumed given. It is
only relatively recently that the idea of socially co‐constructed brands, more familiar
to the consumer culture approach, has begun to gain attention (eg Kozinets et al
2002; Esbjerg and Bech‐Larsen, 2009, El‐Amir and Burt, 2010) although usually this
has been in relation to a wider concept of the retail brand than simply a product
item.

The Retailer as the Brand

The emerging view of the retail brand as a wider concept than simply a product
brand was discussed in the Journal of Retailing special issue of 2004. In the position
paper introducing the issue, Ailawadi and Keller (2004) recognise a broader concept
of branding in retailing. They acknowledge that retailer brands are more multi‐
sensory than product brands and discuss the linkages with retail image in
particular. The private brand is relegated to an (albeit) important part of the brand
portfolio offered by retailers, and they argue that it is the image of the retailer held
by customers that is the basis of retail brand equity.

There is an intuitively simple logic to this viewpoint. If consumers increasingly treat

segmented private brand ranges as an alternative brand (rather than as an
alternative product) to the manufacturer brand on offer, then this suggests that
these product ranges are trusted by consumers. One characteristic of branding is
that it allows consumers to identify preferences, and reduce consumer search costs.
Therefore, the retail brand name and the retail context within which it is sold,
presumably enables such identification and recognition, and reflects a level of trust
which encourages repeat purchase.

If trust comes from a retail name, where do customers get their impressions of the
retail brand from? Steiner (2004) provides an interesting historical context to
national and private brand competition, and quotes from the work of Braithwaite,
published in the late 1920’s. She observed that advertising and reputation
contributed more than quality to the price differential between leading advertised
national brands and unadvertised national brands and private labels. Although
private labels were cheaper they “do not however dispense with reputation
altogether as a factor in marketing, For the reputation of these large shops
themselves, is one of the means by which they are able to secure volume and rapidity of
turnover” (Braithwaite, 1928 in Steiner, 2004). In short, trust (or reputation)
emerges from consumer interactions with stores and the retail company itself.
When we talk about brands in retailing as customers we generally refer to a specific
(named) company or a store – we rarely say “I am going to the superstore”, “to the
convenience store” or “to the clothes shop”. As consumers we have often decided
which retailers or groups of retailers to visit before we start a shopping trip, on the
basis of pre‐existing conceptions and past experiences of those stores, and
interactions with the retailer through the store. It has long been recognised that
retailers create an image or reputation in the minds of the consumers and it would
be remiss in an article of this nature not to mention Martineau (1958) and the idea
of the personality of the store (!). The store is a crucial – and unique – element in
retailer branding. It is the place where the customer experiences the retailer and to
many the store is the retail product (Floor, 2006). The store as the “brand” is
probably easier to relate to in several non‐ food sectors where the product on offer
is 100% store brand (eg IKEA, Zara, Next, the Gap etc).

As the conceptualisation of retail brands has widened from the product to

encompass the store, several researchers have examined the relationship between
the two, although as Jacoby and Mazursky (1984) note the linkages between brands
and store image are multi‐faceted and multi‐dimensional. For some the store image
influences the product brand, whilst for others the product brand influences store
image. In the mid 1990s several of the papers published from the Dick, Jain and
Richardson study noted that store image was an important indicator of store brand
quality and that perceptions of the physical environment, merchandise and service
quality were important cues in evaluating store brands (Dick et al, 1995), and that
store aesthetics aided the formation of store brand quality perceptions (Richardson
et al, 1996b).

More recently, other studies have explored the link between store image and the
store brand. In Canada, Collins‐Dodd and Lindley (2003) concluded, perhaps not
surprisingly, that store image is more complex and dynamic than product
associations, and suggested that the store name on a store brand was in effect a
form of brand extension, and that positive store attributes could be leveraged to
increase awareness of and build positive perceptions of store brands. “A strong
relationship between store and store brand image is the fundamental requirement for
a successful differentiation strategy.” In a similar vein, Semeiijn et al (2004) claimed
a direct and linear relationship between store image and attitudes towards store
brands for three Dutch grocery chains and a selection of products chosen to
represent different levels and types of consumer risk. The authors claimed that
their research suggested that “developing, nourishing and sustaining a store image
can create differentiation and positioning relative to other chains and see profitable
store brands”. Finally in a different setting, the department store, Vahie and Paswan
(2006) found that store atmosphere and store quality positively influenced
consumer perceptions of store brand quality, although it was also noted that
congruence between national brands and store image could have a negative
influence on store brand quality perceptions. The authors emphasised that the
subject of their study, clothes, are a higher involvement and higher price type of
purchase compared to routinely purchased groceries, and carry a greater degree of
social risk.

The growing attention paid to the retail store as the embodiment (or the source) of
the brand in retailing brings us back to further issues around terminology and
conceptualisations. Ailawaldi & Keller (2004) quite correctly make the case for a
greater integration of mainstream branding concepts into retail brand research “Our
contention is that branding and brand management principles can and should be
applied to retail brands. Even though there has not been much academic research on
retail branding per se, a lot of work has been done on retailer actions and consumer
perceptions of retailer image that has direct relevance to branding” But as they,
themselves suggest, this generally entails taking store image as a proxy for retailer
brand image.

Greater consideration of “mainstream” branding concepts in retailing requires us to

be clear about these concepts and how they are interpreted in retailing. For
example, although the terms are often used interchangeably there is an important
distinction between brand image and brand identity. The brand image (aka store
image) is the current view or perceptions of the consumer, and others, of the brand.
It is comprised of associations and beliefs about the brand and is regarded as a
passive construct, reflecting the current situation or past associations. Brand
identity originates from the organisation and includes elements such as vision,
culture, personality and relationships. Brand identity should be aspirational and
forward looking. Kaprerer (1986) pursued this distinction in some of his early work
which looked at how retailers might seek to differentiate themselves. He argued
that most retail advertising was mechanical – with a focus on functional aspects
(price, service, range and availability) that were intended to influence consumer
behaviour ie persuade them to buy from one store rather than another. Instead, he
argued, the focus should be on “engagement” with customers, by focusing on their
perceptions and attitudes, with a focus on the entire store as the retailer’s product
and the company personality which in turn gives rise to an identity. This focus on
attitudes required a move from what is “said” to how to say it.

This developing of the brand concept in retailing brings us into the area of corporate
branding. Mårteson (2006) in yet another attempt to understand the determinants
of satisfaction and loyalty in retailing defines corporate image as store image.
Although she concludes that the key factor for customers is the store as a brand, so
“retailers must be good at retailing”, she also makes another important observation
about the holistic nature of branding in retailing. “A coherent look and feel that
reflects the values of the corporate brand is assumed to have a positive impact on the
store brands carrying the corporate name”

The corporate brand as a concept aligns internal organisational systems and

external stakeholder networks with the organisation’s core vision, values and
culture (eg Balmer, 2001; Balmer and Grey, 2003; Kunde, 2002; Hatch and Schultz,
2003; Brown et al 2006). Ind (1997) defines the corporate brand as the “sum of
values that represent the organization”, and claims that it is distinct from product
branding in three ways. First, the corporate brand is intangible, but has elements of
tangibility through communications and relationships with stakeholders; second, it
is highly complex because of the variety of relationships involved, and third, there
are specific issues of responsibility arising from the role of people in delivery, and
through the organisation’s sense of ethics and social responsibility. It is generally
recognised that the corporate brand is essentially a relational construct based upon
customer relationships built, maintained and delivered by employees; networks of
suppliers and partners who deliver enhanced consumer value; and relationships
with external stakeholders such as the media, investors, public authorities and local
communities who all contribute to reputation and perception of the brand
(Einwiller and Will, 2002).

In some of the generic work on corporate brands, retailers are often cited as
examples of strong corporate brands, so it is not surprising that the role of
corporate branding – or at least elements of corporate branding – in retailing is
starting to attract attention. The relational nature of corporate branding makes
retailing an obvious candidate for consideration. For example, Mitchell (1999) in a
discussion on Brand Reality identifies a series of relationships between retailers and
consumers which he classifies as communication linkages, experience links and
emotional links – images and associations – with consumers, all of which are
claimed to deliver extra added value, communicate something about the brand, and
learn from the customer in real time.

Burt and Sparks (2002) note that the basic features of corporate branding are all
inherently applicable in retailing – although they caution that the nature of retailing
and the scope and intensity of relationships with stakeholders may pose potential
challenges of consistency to retail corporate branding. Further challenges may arise
from the often raised tension between costs and service as productivity gains are
sought in retailing, and added dimension of retail internationalisation. Despite this,
Tarnovskaya et al (2008), explore the role of corporate branding in market driving,
specifically in an international retailing context with IKEA in Russia, and argue that
a strong corporate brand may both provide competitive advantage and determine
approaches and activities in new international markets.

The significance of corporate branding has certainly been recognised by the retail
industry itself. Burghausen and Fan (2002) explored how executives at seven UK
retailers considered and thought about corporate branding in their own
organisations. There was a growing awareness of the corporate brand as a holistic
process and the role of the corporate brand as a strategic reference point for all
activities and behaviours, although the respondents stressed that the corporate
brand was not static and that it would evolve and change over time. However, the
respondents also tended to place a specific emphasis in their views upon the
centrality of the customer – which is perhaps not surprising given the management
mantra of the past few decades. The importance of core corporate values was
recognised as a reference point for the organisation, but these were often expressed
in terms of customer relevant values, similarly the importance of relational
networks within corporate branding was acknowledged, but again these were
primarily articulated in respect of customer outcomes.

The Future ?

In this brief review of research into branding in retailing we have attempted to

argue that academic research has evolved from the level of the product to the level
of the company, via the store. Whilst in many ways this appears to be a simplistic
hierarchy it represents a growing recognition that branding should be explored
from a holistic perspective. The inter‐relationships between these “levels” of retail
branding should provide a future focus for research in retailing, and the corporate
branding perspective would appear to be a crucial component.

In the Journal of Retailing special issue Ailawaldi & Keller (2004) suggested a
research agenda encompassing three themes (1) the development and application of
traditional branding theory to retailer branding, specifically the concepts of brand
personality, experiential marketing, and brand architecture; (2) the role of private
labels in building retailer equity through issues such as category considerations,
private brand tiers and positioning, branding (naming) options and brand
extension, and the response of manufacturers; and (3) the measurement of brand
equity, which presents several serious challenges. We would suggest that further
work into corporate branding in retailing and the relationship to the store brand
and product brand would clearly fit into theme (1) and contribute to themes (2) and
(3).

One consequence of such a focus would be a re‐think of prevailing research designs,

approaches and methodologies. The concepts embodied within corporate brand
research – as currently formulated – are less suited to the survey based approach
and analytical tools which tend to dominate published material on retail branding at
present. A range of other approaches may be more appropriate.

Finally, we would justify the suggested focus on a holistic approach to retail

branding because we feel it fits with the characteristics and competitive pressures
facing the industry today. The very nature of retailing, presenting consumers with a
combination of products, services and experiences, arising from business processes,
interactions and relationships with a myriad of channel and associated
stakeholders, would seem to make it an appropriate “case” for branding research
embedded in the concept of the corporate brand. As retailing is conceptually
viewed more and more as a process rather than a function, then relationships,
behaviours, and the capturing of value becomes crucial to any business model. The
retail product – at the item level, and to some degree at the level of the store – can
be relatively easily copied, as one moves to more behaviourally based
representations of the business model – encapsulated within the company vision,
organisational cultures and behaviours – found at the corporate level, more resilient
sources of differentiation can be found. The industry view of branding in retailing
has moved on, our research focus should do so as well.
References

Ailawadi KL and Harlam B (2004), An Empirical Analysis of the Determinants of

Retail Margins: the role of store brand share, Journal of Marketing, 68(1), 147‐166

Ailawadi KL and Keller KL (2004), Understanding Retail Branding: conceptual

insights and research propositions, Journal of Retailing, 80(4), 331‐342

Ailawadi KL, Gedenk K and Neslin SA (2001), Pursuing the Value‐Conscious

Consumer: Store Brands versus National Brand Promotions, Journal of Marketing,
65(1), 71‐89

Amrouche N and Zaccour G (2007), Shelf Space Allocation of National and Private
Brands, European Journal of Operational Research, 180(2) 648‐663

Anselmsson J and Johansson U (2007), Corporate Social Responsibility and the

positioning of grocery brands, International Journal of Retail and Distribution
Management, 35(10), 835‐856

Anselmsson J, Johansson U, Maranon A, and Persson N (2008), The Penetration of

Retailer Brands and the Impact on Consumer Prices – a study based on household
expenditures for 35 grocery categories, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services,
15(1), 42‐51

Balabanis G & Craven S (1997), Consumer Confusion from Own Brand Lookalikes:
An Exploratory Investigation, Journal of Marketing Management, 13(4), 299‐313.

Balmer, J.M.T. (2001), Corporate Identity, Corporate Branding and Corporate

Marketing: seeing through the fog, European Journal of Marketing, 25(3/4), 248‐291.

Balmer, J.M.T. and Gray, E. (2003), Corporate Brands: What are they? What of them?,
European Journal of Marketing, 37(7/8), 972‐997.

Baltas G (1997), Determinants of Store Brand Choice: a behavioural analysis, Journal

of Product and Brand Management, 6(5), 315‐324

Baltas G (2003), A Combined Segmentation and Demand Model for Store Brands,
European Journal of Marketing, 37(10), 1499‐1513

Baltas G and Argouslidis PC (2007), Consumer Characteristics and Demand for Store
Brands, International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, 35(5), 328‐341

Baltas G, Doyle P and Dyson P (1997), A Model of Consumer Choice for National v
Private Label Brands, Journal of the Operational Research Society, 48(10), 988‐995
Bellizzi JA, Krueckeberg HF, Hamilton JR and Martin WS (1981), Consumer
Perceptions of National, Private, and Generic Brands, Journal of Retailing, 57(4), 56‐
70

Bhasin A, Dickinson R, & Nandan S (1995), Retailer Brands: A Channel Perspective ‐

the United States” Journal of Marketing Channels, 4(4), 17‐37.

Binninger A‐S (2008), Exploring the Relationships between Retail Brands and
Consumer Store Loyalty, International Journal of Retail and Distribution
Management, 36(2), 94‐110

Bonfrer A and Chintagunta PK (2004), Store Brands: Who Buys Them and What
Happens to Retail Prices When They are Introduced? Review of Industrial
Organization, 24(2), 195‐218

Bontemps C, Orozco V, and Requillart V (2008), Private Labels, National Brands and
Food Prices, Review of Industrial Organization, 33(1), 1‐22

Braithwaite D (1928), The Economic Effects of Advertising, Economic Journal, 38,

16‐37

Brown, T., Dacin, P., Pratt, M., & Whetten, D. (2006), Identity, Intended Image,
Construed Image, and Reputation: An Interdisciplinary Framework and Suggested
Terminology, The Academy of Marketing Science, 34(2), 99‐107.

Burger PC and Schott B (1972), Can Private Brand Buyers Be Identified?, Journal of
Marketing Research, IX (May), pp219‐222.

Burghausen M and Fan Y (2002), Corporate Branding in the Retail Sector : a pilot
study, Corporate Communications, 7(2), 92‐99

Burt S (2000), The Strategic Role of Retail Brands in British Grocery Retailing, European
Journal of Marketing, 34(8), 875‐890

Burt S and Davis S (1999), Follow My Leader? : Lookalike Retailer Brands in Non‐
Manufacturer‐Dominated Product Markets in the UK, International Review of Retail,
Distribution and Consumer Research, 9(2), 163‐185.

Burt S and Sparks L (2002), Corporate Branding, Internationalisation and the Retailer as a
Brand, Corporate Reputation Review, 5(2/3), 194‐212

Collins A and Burt S (2006), Private Brand Governance and Relational Exchange within
Retailer‐Manufacturer Relationships : evidence from Irish food manufacturers supplying
the Irish and British grocery markets, Agribusiness, 22(1), 1‐20
Collins‐Dodd C and Lindley T (2003), Store Brands and Retail Differentiation: The
Influence of Store Image and Store Brand Attitude on Store Own Brand Perceptions,
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 10(6), 345‐352

Collins‐Dodd C and Zaichkowsky J (1999), National Brand Responses to Brand

Imitation: retailers versus other manufacturers, Journal of Product and Brand
Management, 8(2), 96‐105

Corstjens M and Lal R (2000), Building Store Loyalty through Private Labels, Journal
of Marketing Research, 37(August), 281‐291

Cotterill RW, and Putsis jnr WP (2001), Do Models of Vertical Strategic Integration
for National and Store Brands Meet the Market Test?, Journal of Retailing, 77(1), 83‐
109

Davies G (1990), Marketing to Retailers: a battle for distribution?, Long Range

Planning, 23(6), 101‐108

Davies K, Gilligan C T and Sutton C J (1986), The Development of Own Label

Product Strategies in Grocery and DIY Retailing in the United Kingdom.
International Journal of Retailing, 1(1), 6‐19.

De Chernatony L (1988), The Fallacy of Generics in the UK, Market Intelligence

and Planning, 6(2), 36‐38.

De Chernatony L and McWilliam G (1988), Clarifying the Difference Between

Manufacturers' Brands and Distributors' Brands, Quarterly Review of Marketing,
Summer, 1‐5.

Dick A, Jain A, and Richardson P (1995), Correlates of Store Brand Proneness: Some
Empirical Observations, Journal of Product & Brand Management, 4(4), 15‐22.

Dhar SK and Hoch SJ (1997), Why Store Brand Penetration varies by Retailer,
Marketing Science, 16, 208‐227

Dunne D and Narasimham C (1999), The New Appeal of Private Labels, Harvard
Business Review, 77(3), 41‐48

Einwiller S and Will M (2002), Towards an Integrated Approach to Corporate

Branding: an empirical study, Corporate Communications, 7(2), 100‐109

El‐Amir A and Burt S (2010), Towards Modelling the Retailer Brand from a
Sociological Perspective: a social construction of the grocery store from a customer
standpoint, Journal of Brand Management, 17(6), 429‐445
Esbjerg, L., and Bech‐Larsen, T., (2009). The Brand Architecture of Grocery
Retailers: setting material and symbolic boundaries for consumer choice, Journal of
Retailing and Consumer Services, 16( 5), 414‐423

Fernandez Nogales A and Gomez Suarez M (2005), Shelf Space Management of Private
Labels: a case study in Spanish Retailing, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 12(3),
205‐216

Fitzell P (1993), Private Label Marketing in the 1990s : the evolution of private labels into
global brands, Global Book Productions.

Fitzell P (2003), Private Label Marketing in 21st century: store brands\exclusive brands on
the cutting edge, Global Books

Floor K (2006) Branding a Store, Kogan Page

Foxman ER, Berger PW & Cote JA (1992), Consumer Brand Confusion: A Conceptual
Framework, Psychology and Marketing, 19, 101‐105.

Frank RE and Boyd HW (1965), Are Private Brand Prone Grocery Consumers Really
Different?, Journal of Advertising Research, 5 (December), 27‐35

Glynn MS and Chen S (2009), Consumer‐factors Moderating Private Label Brand

Success: further empirical results, International Journal of Retail and Distribution
Management, 37(11), 896‐914

Gonzáles Mieres C, Díaz Martín AM, and Trespalacios Gutiérrez JA (2006), Influence
of Perceived Risk on Store Brand Proneness, International Journal of Retail and
Distribution Management, 34(10), 761‐772

Granzin KL (1981), An Investigation of the Market for Generic Products, Journal of

Retailing, 57(4), pp39‐55

Grunert KG, Esbjerg L, Bech‐Larsen T, Bruns K and Juhl HJ (2006), Consumer

Preferences for Retail Brand Architectures: results from a conjoint study,
International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, 34(8), 597‐608

Hatch M.J. and Schultz M. (2003), Bringing the Corporation into Corporate Branding,
European Journal of Marketing, 37(XX), 1041‐1064.

Hoch SJ (1996), How Should National Brands Think about Private labels?, Sloan
Management Review, 37(2), 89‐102

Hoch SJ and Banerji S (1993), When Do Private Labels Succeed ? Sloan Management
Review, 34(1), 57‐67
Hyman MR, Kopf DA and Lee D (2010), Review of Literature – Future research
Suggestions: Private Label Brands: benefits, success factors and future research,
Journal of Brand Management, 17(5), 368‐389

Ind, N. (1997), The Corporate Brand, London: Macmillan Business.

Jacoby J and Mazursky D (1984), Linking the Brand and Retailer Image: do the
potential risks outweigh the potential benefits?, Journal of Retailing, 60(2), 105‐122

Johansson U and Burt S (2004), The Buying of Private Brands and Manufacturer Brands in
Grocery Retailing: a comparative study of the buying process in the UK, Italy, and Sweden,
Journal of Marketing Management, 20(7/8), 99‐824

Juhl HJ, Esbjerg L, Grunert KG, Bech‐Larsen T and Brunso K (2006), The Fight Between
Store Brands and National Brands – What’s the Score ?, Journal of Retailing and Consumer
Services, 13(5), 331‐338

Kapferer JN (1986), Beyond Positioning: retailers identity, ESOMAR seminar on Strategies

for Retail Growth – Retailing Mix, ESOMAR, 167‐175

Kapferer JN (1995a), Stealing Brand Equity: Measuring Perceptual Confusion

Between National Brands and ‘Copycat’ Own Label Products”, Marketing and
Research Today, May, 96‐103.

Kapferer JN (1995b), “Brand Confusion : Empirical Study of a Legal Concept”,

Psychology & Marketing, 12(6), September, 551‐568.

Kozinets, R.V., Sherry, J.F., DeBerry‐Spence, B., Duhachek, A, Nuttavuthisit, K., and
Storm, D. (2002). Themed Flagship Brand Stores in the NEW Millenium: theory,
practice, prospects.’ Journal of Retailing, 78(1), 17‐29.

Kumar N and Steenkamp J‐B (2007), Private Label Strategy: how to meet the store
brand challenge, Harvard Business Press

Kunde, J. (2002), Unique Now or Never. The Brand is the Company Driver in the New
Value Economy, Pearson Education Limited, UK.

Laaksonen H and Reynolds J (1994), Own Brands in Food Retailing across Europe,
Journal of Brand Management, 2(1), 37‐46

Lamey L, Deleersnyder B, Dekimpe MG and Steenkamp JEM (2007), How Business

Cycles Contribute to Private Label Success: Evidence from the United States and
Europe, Journal of Marketing, 71(1), 1‐15
Liu T and Wang C (2008), Factors Affecting Attitudes Towards Private Labels and
Promoted Brands, Journal of Marketing Management, 34(3/4), 283‐298

Loken B, Ross I & Hinkle RL (1987), Consumer Confusion of Origin and Brand
Similarity Perceptions, Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 5, 195‐211.

Mandhachitara R, Shannon RM and Hadjicharalambous C (2007), Why Private Label

Grocery Brands Have Not Succeeded in Asia, The Journal of Global Marketing,
20(2/3) 71‐87

Martell D (1986), Own Labels: Problem Child or Infant Prodigy?, Quarterly

Review of Marketing, Summer, 7‐12.

Martineau, P. (1958), The Personality of the Retail Store’ Harvard Business Review,
36(1), 47‐55.

Martinez E and Montaner T (2008), Characterisation of Spanish Store Brand

Consumers, International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, 36(6), 447‐
493

Mårtenson, R. (2007). Corporate Brand Image, Satisfaction and Store Loyalty: a

study of the store as a brand, store brands and manufacturer brands, International
Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 35(7), 544‐555.

McEnally MR and Hawes JM (1984), The Market for Generic Brand Grocery
Products: A Review and Extension, Journal of Marketing, 48(Winter),75‐83.

McGoldrick P (1984), Grocery Generics ‐ An Extension of the Private Label

Concept, European Journal of Marketing, 18(1), 5‐24.

Miaoulis G & D’Amato D (1978), Consumer Confusion and Trademark Infringement”,

Journal of Marketing, 42(3), 48‐55.

Mills DE (1995), Why Retailers Sell Private Labels, Journal of Economics and
Management Strategy, 4(3), 509‐528

Mitchell A (199), Out of the Shadows, Journal of Marketing Management, 15(??), 25‐
42

Morris D (1979), The Strategy of Own Brands, European Journal of Marketing, 13(2),
59‐78.

Myers JG (1967), Determinants of Private Brand Attitude, Journal of Marketing

Research, 4(1), pp73‐81.
Olbrich R and Grewe G (2009), Consequences of Competition Between National
Brands and Private Labels, International Journal of Retail and Distribution
Management, 37(11), 933‐951

Oubiña J, Rubio N and Yagüe MJ (2006), Strategic Management of Store Brands: an

analysis from the manufacturer’s perspective, International Journal of Retail and
Distribution Management, 34(10), 742‐760

Pauwels K and Srinivasan S (2004), Who Benefits from Store Brand Entry?,
Marketing Science, 23(30, 364‐390

Putsis jr WP and Cotterill RW (1999), Share, Price and Category Expenditure –

geographic market effects and private labels, Managerial and Decision Economics,
20(4), 175‐187

Quelch JA & Harding D (1996), Brands Versus Private Labels, Harvard Business
Review, 74(1), 99‐109.

Rafiq M and Collins R (1996), Lookalikes and Customer Confusion in the Grocery
Sector: An Exploratory Survey, International Journal of Retail Distribution and
Consumer Research, 6(4), 329‐350.

Raju JS, Sethuraman R and Dhar SK (1995), The Interaction and Performance of
Store Brands, Management Science, 41(6), 957‐978

Rao T (1969), Are Some Consumers More Prone to Purchase Private Brands?,
Journal of Marketing Research, 57 (November), 56‐70.

Richardson PS, Dick AS, Jain AK (1994), Extrinsic and Intrinsic Cue Effects on
Perceptions of Store Brand Quality, Journal of Marketing, 58(4), 28‐36

Richardson P, Jain AK, and Dick A (1996a), Household Store Brand proneness: A
Framework, Journal of Retailing, 72(2), 159‐185

Richardson P, Jain AK, and Dick A (1996b), The Influence of Store Aesthetics on
Evaluation of Private Label Brands, Journal of Product and Brand Management, 5(1),
19‐27

Rosen DL (1984), Consumer Perceptions of Quality for Generic Grocery Products: A

Comparison Across Product Categories, Journal of Retailing, 60(Winter), 64‐80.

Sayman S, Hoch SJ, and Raju J (2002) Positioning of Store Brands, Marketing Science,
21(4), 129‐141

Sayman S, and Raju JS (2004), Investigating the Cross‐Category Effects of Store

Brands, Review of Industrial Organization, 24(2), 129‐141
Schutte J F (1969), The Semantics of Branding, Journal of Marketing, 33(2), 5‐11.

Scott Morton F and Zettelmeyer F (2004), The Strategic Positioning of Store Brands
in Retailer‐Manufacturer Negotiations, Review of Industrial Organization, 24(2),
161‐194

Semeijn J, Van Riel ACR, and Ambrosini AB (2004), Consumer Evaluations of Store
Brands: Effects of Store Image and product Attributes, Journal of Retailing and
Consumer Services, 11(4), 247‐258

Shaw SA, Dawson JA and Blair LMA (1992), The Sourcing of Retailer Brand Food
Products, Journal of Marketing Management, 8(2), 127‐146.

Simmons M and Meredith B (1984), Own Label Profile and Purpose, Journal of the
Marketing Research Society, 26(1), 3‐27.

Steenkamp J‐B and Dekimpe M (1997), The Increasing Power of Private Labels:
Building Loyalty and Market Share, Long Range Planning, 30(6) 917‐930

Steiner RL (2004), The Nature and Benefits of National Brands/Private Label

Competition, Review of Industrial Organisation, 24(2), 105‐127

Suarez MG (2005), Shelf Space Assigned to Store and National Brands: A Neural
Network Analysis, International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management,
33(11), 858‐878

Sudhir K and Talukdar D (2004), Does Store Brand Patronage Improve Store
Patronage?, Review of Industrial Organization, 24(2), 143‐160

Szymanski DM and Busch PS (1987), Identifying the Generics‐Prone Consumer: A

Meta‐Analysis, Journal of Marketing Research, XXXIV(November) 425‐431.

Tarnovskaya V, Elg U, and Burt S (2008), The Role of Corporate Branding in a

Market Driving Strategy, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management,
36(11), 941‐965

Tarzijan J (2004), Strategic Effects of Private Label and Horizontal Integration,

International Review of Retail Distribution and ConsumerRresearch, 14(3), 392‐402

Uncles M (1995), Just How Different are Retail Look-alikes from Traditional Me-Toos ?
Journal of Brand Management, 2(4), 204-207.

Vahie A and Paswan A (2006), Private Label Brand Image: its relationship with store
image and national brand, International Journal of Retail and Distribution
Management, 34(1), 67‐84
Whelan S and Davies G (2006), Profiling Consumers of Own Brands and National Brands
Using Human Personality, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 13(5), 393‐402

Wileman A & Jary M (1997), Retail Power Plays: From Trading to Brand Leadership,
MacMillan: Basingstoke

Wilkes RE and Valencia H (1985), A Note on Generic Purchase Generalizations and

Subcultural Variations, Journal of Marketing, 49(summer), 114‐120.

Zielke S and Dobbelstein T (2007), Customer’s Willingness to Purchase New Store

Brands, Journal of Product and Brand Management, 16(2), 112‐121