Branding and Corporate Reputation - Case Study Example

Branding and Corporate Reputation

Introduction

If one takes a close look at the contemporary business world one will be able to see that it is significantly different from its counterpart from the past. Today companies are no longer fixed as maximizing the return on investment at any cost but are likely to engage various scientific concepts in order to improve their performance. A good example is the amount of attention that organizations pay to values. Volkswagen Group is no exception: in order to gain a proper understanding of it as well as have a positive impact on the performance it may be essential to explore its values. This report will provide a careful examination of values that are fundamental to Volkswagen Group. In order to do so, Kapferer's Brand Prism model and Keller Brand Equity model will be used. The report will also outline the differences between product values and corporate brand values. Finally, it will recommend the company in question to use two models, namely Corporate reputation chain model as well as Aaker model to manage the brand.

Overview of Volkswagen Group product brand values

Kapferer’s Brand Prism

To begin with, it may be essential to apply Brand Prism model to understand the values of Volkswagen Group. Kapferer (2008) suggests that there are six major elements that make up a brand. They are physique, personality, relationship, culture, reflection, and self-image. Schroeder, Salzer-Mörling and Askegaard (2006) point out that each of this elements reflect different aspects of the relationship with the consumer. Anderson (2010) holds that the cultural element is the one which is responsible for values. That is why it is generally expected that values will be firmly rooted in the culture (Chevalier & Mazzalovo 2008; Cameron & Pickett 2009). Speaking of Volkswagen Group, one should point out that the key value that it hold dear is providing the consumers with high-quality cars in a wide range of markets. Indeed, Volkswagen manufactures cars that range from affordable like Skoda to exclusive like Lamborghini. Nevertheless, one remains stable: the quality and the desire to satisfy the customer. Therefore, values of Volkswagen are evident in its corporate culture

Keller’s model

Now, it may be logical to apply a different model to the case. Glynn and Woodside (2009) believe that the model which was developed by Kevin Keller may be quite effective while determining the values. Thus, this model creates a pyramid that is divided into four levels (Lee 2015; Ormeño 2007). Each of this levels asks an important question which reveals something about the brand and is reflected in its values (Dahlén, Lange & Smith 2010; Fetscherin & Heilmann 2015). So, the first level, identity, will show that Volkswagen values clear differentiation from its competitors. The second level is meaning and reflects the message that is sent by the company: in Volkswagen's case it is a modern high-performing car that is designed to excel its competitors; this shows that the next value of the Group is competitiveness. The third value focuses on the response of the consumers: they get a car that satisfies them; therefore, customer satisfaction is the third value. Finally, the last level is about the relationship with the consumer; here Volkswagen group values reliability.

Product brand values versus corporate brand values

It may be rather easy to confuse the two notions in question. However, the scholars were able to come up with clear distinctions. Thus, Balmer and Gray (2003) point out that product brands tend to be focused on the product itself. It other words they emphasize different aspects of it and each value is inseparably connected to it. On the other hand, as noticed by Melewar and Alwi (2015) corporate brands, as one can easily guess from the very name are more focused on the company as such. Cornelissen (2008) that product brand values are designed and taken care of by middle managers. Contrary to that, Schultz, Antorini and Csaba (2005) insist that it the CEO who is ultimately responsible for managing corporate brand value.

There are other aspects that should be highlighted as well. For example, Meierer (2011) believes that values of a product brand are designed to attract the attention of the consumer. In other words, they try to reach the people who will buy the product. On the other hand, Heding, Knudtzen, and Bjerre (2009) insist that corporate brands design their values in such a way that would hold the attention of numerous stakeholders, not only the customers. Riel and Fombrun (2007) found that values of a product brand are primarily delivered by the marketing department. In other words, it is the major responsibility of the latter to make sure that the attention of the consumers attracted. Contrary to that, Kitchen and Schultz (2001) believe that the entire company is responsible for delivering corporate brand values. In other words, while a failure of a product can be explained by the actions of the responsible department, the failure of corporate strategy should be attributed to the entire company. As a result, the level of responsibility is quite different.

Finally, there are several other aspects that should be emphasized. Schultz (2009) holds that product brand values are such that exist relatively a short period of time. This is quite understandable since the latter are closely connected the life of the product. Contrary to that, corporate brand values exist as long as the company exists. Therefore, the time horizon is completely different, as a stage by Mooij (2010). Balmer and Greyser (2003) also suggest that product brand values have a functional significance for the company: just like the product generates revenue, the values are associated with it are expected to attract the people. On the other hand, Davis (2010) assumes that corporate brand values have strategic significance for the company. This can be explained by the fact that the latter share a strong bond with the fundamental elements of the company and have a direct impact on its development. As a result, this kind of brands is extremely important when it comes to introducing changes.

Models to build and manage corporate brand

Corporate reputation chain

There are two models that can be used by Volkswagen in order to build and manage its corporate brand. Davies (2003) argues that corporate reputation change may be particularly useful since it is able to combine the internal and the external views on the company. Burke, Martin, and Cooper (2011) assume that when it comes to managing the brand, the employee should be presented with a clear identity. For Volkswagen Group, this means that the staff should have firm understanding that they work in a company that is dedicated to producing the best cars and treats its employees well. This will lead to employee satisfaction and retention. On the other hand, Berg (2014) supposes that the customer view should also be addressed. In this case, it is important to create the correct image (Martin & Hetrick 2006). As a result, the customers will be satisfied with the product and will become loyal which will bring many benefits for the company.

Aaker model

There is another model that can be effectively applied by Volkswagen Group. According to Aaker (2009), every brand should put emphasis on the following aspects in order to become successful: awareness, quality, association and loyalty. Woodside, Megehee and Ogle (2009) believe that brand awareness plays a considerably important role in the contemporary world. Of course, people are familiar with such famous brands and Audi or Lamborghini, but that does not mean that this awareness should not be reinforced. Flynn (2005) holds that the quality of the product is one of the fastest ways to win hearts of the people. One would make no mistake that the cars that are produced by Volkswagen Group are of superb quality and that should not be changed. Jenster, Hayes & Smith (2005) point out that association can also play an important role brand development. If one considers the recent scandal with Volkswagen regarding cheating on environmental testing, one should point out that this may become the major obstacle on the way of reinforcing success. That is why it is important that the Group deal with it. Finally, loyalty can be maintained in a number of ways; keeping in mind the number of brands that are included in Volkswagen Group, it is obvious that the organization enjoys a considerable amount of loyalty and it is imperative that it must not be lost.

Conclusion

Having examined all the points which were mentioned in the paragraphs above one is able to come to the following conclusion: there are numerous models that can be used to outline values that Volkswagen Group holds. Thus, Brand prism identity would put emphasis on the corporate culture while Keller's model will categorize the values into four levels. It is important to hold in mind the difference between product brand and corporate brand values: they often reflect the opposing aspects of the business operations. Finally, there are two models that are proposed to be implemented in the company, Corporate reputation chain model, and Aaker model.