In this assessment, you are to select one marketing theory / concept from your seminar material,
prescribed/recommended readings, or any teaching materials provided to you and critically analyze Critical Analysis of Brand Personality Theory Essay Paper
the theory by:
• Providing an overview of the theory and how it has evolved over the years
• Analysing the core components / key principles of the theory from multiple scholarly sources
• Identifying a contemporary marketing issue and apply the theory to address the issue.
• Describing the strengths and limitations of the theory in addressing the contemporary marketing
issue, and what managers can learn from the critical analysis
The choosing theory is “brand personality”
Formal academic writing style required;
• Proof reading (spelling, grammar) is essential;
• In-text scholarly citations required with consistent APA / Harvard referencing;
• A minimum of 5 scholarly journal papers must be included in the report;
• An electronic copy is required to be uploaded to Turnitin by the due date;
• No hardcopy submission is required.
Critical Analysis of Brand Personality Theory
A theory in management and business is a verbal, physical, symbolic or graphical representation of an aspect, system, structure, relationship or concept in the real world. It helps with understanding complex real world phenomena. The development of a business or management theory is based on the awareness that there is no single right answer to a question. In such cases, the appropriate answer involves many ‘grey areas’ rather than a simple distinction between ‘white and black’. With the ‘grey areas’, a spectrum of different possible interpretations are presented as evolving debates that a continuously challenged, qualified and extended even as the theory is revised and new theories are presented. Conducting a critical analysis of a theory focuses on exploring the many ‘grey areas’ that are debated concerning the theory (Dalgic & Unal, 2018). This essay presents a critical analysis of Brand Personality Theory, questioning the ‘grey areas’ in the theory.
Overview of theory and evolution over time
Brand Personality Theory focuses on whether a product or service has a personality that is attractive to the consumer. It identifies the unique characteristics of the brand and interprets the feelings that consumers have towards them. The theory perceives a brand as a ‘human being’ with a personality that can be described based on a scale that progresses between different personalities. Through this approach, marketers and businesses are able to ‘turn’ brands into living things that can be modified to send customers the message that the brand is produced especially for them. In essence, assigning and matching a brand to a personality communicates personality in the forms that enable customers to interpret, link thoughts, feelings and brands image to what they perceive the brand to be. In essence, the theory identifies the product characteristics that are acknowledged by customers and provide abstract meaning that correspond with the customers’ identities (Dalgic & Unal, 2018).
In addition to comparing a brand to human beings, the theory identifies the personality that the business seeks to community in terms of what it wants people to feel and think about the brand, which includes the personality of the customers that display feelings, thoughts and behaviours. To be more precise, the theory presents the traits indicated by what the business wants to communicate, i.e. the designed brand image. Besides what the business communicates about the brand, the theory also identifies what the customers acknowledge about the brand (Fill & Turnbull, 2019). Overall, the concept presented in the theory compares a brand to human beings in terms of that unique personality traits that are related to and specified by the brand.
The initial development of the theory faced much opposition as it was noted that unlike human beings, brands are non-living thus making it inappropriate to apply the same human personality scale on brands. The fact that humans are living things has an influence on how their personalities are measured. On the reverse, brands are not living things, and this has an influence on how their personalities are measured (Vellnagel, 2020). This was a problem that was solved by Aaker (1997) who revised the theory, noting that brands can have five personalities consisting of: sincerity, excitement, competence, sophistication, and ruggedness. The five personalities were presented as being of high confidence, accuracy and generalisability. This personality scale with five dimensions has since then formed the core of the theory, gaining high popularity and reliability in measuring brand personality (Aaker, 1997).
Core components/key principles of the theory
The brand personality theory identifies five dimensions based on a study conducted by Aaker (1997). The five dimensions are sincerity, excitement, competence, sophistication and ruggedness. The dimensions are considered comprehensive because they are based on practical and theoretical perspectives, and are derived from marketing and psychology scales. Besides that, the study was based on qualitative and quantitative researches that identified 42 traits that were divided into the five dimensions with a high reliability level that exceeded 0.90 (Aaker, 1997).
Aaker (1997) approach in developing the theory drew parallels between brand personality measures and human personality measures. While brand personality and human personality are not explicitly linked, the brand personality construct is presented in terms of human characteristics associated with the brand, and which may not necessarily be personality traits. For instance, a brand can be associated with gender as a human characteristic, and yet gender is not a personality trait. This makes it clear that the measures designed for human personality can be adapted or used to measure brand personality (Aaker, 1997). Fill and Turnbull (2019) offers a contrary opinion, explaining that there is a fundamental difference between human and brand structures as human are living beings while brands are non-living. Vellnagel (2021) concedes that this fundamental difference between a brand and a human being exists, but argues that the dimensions of a brand personality scale can be made compatible with those of a human personality. Critical Analysis of Brand Personality Theory Essay Paper
There is a general consensus that even if a human personality cannot be perfectly matched to a brand personality, measures can be changed to make the dimensions more compatible. In this case, there is an awareness that using particular personality traits makes it more difficult to match the dimensions. Rather, it would be more appropriate to use generalised personalities that cover many traits within a single measure. Towards this end, attention is drawn to the five-factor human personality model. This model identifies five dimensions of human personality: openness (wide interests, original, insightful, imaginative and curious), neuroticism (worrying, unstable, touchy, tense, self-pitying and anxious), conscientiousness (thorough, responsible, reliable, organised, and efficient), agreeableness (trusting, sympathetic, kind, generous, forgiving and appreciative), and extraversion (talkative, outgoing, enthusiastic, energetic, assertive and active). These human personality measures are derived as self-reports, but when applied in brand personality they are measured as definition reports. For instance, human personality can measure propensity of the individual to be kind, whereas the brand inventory for the same trait measures whether the brand is kind. It shows that the individual is predisposed to be kind (a negative) while a kind brand is an adjective for the brand. This shows that while human personality and brand personality can be matched, they are quite different and not directly comparable (Akkucuk, 2018).
BUY A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE
Still, there is an awareness that human personality and brand personality can be matched since they both measure reputation. It would be surprising if they had nothing in common as the two measures share the bases of a subjective perception. Based on this awareness, Aaker (1997) presents five dimensions of brand personality: sincerity (cheerful, wholesome, honest and down-to-earth), excitement (up-to-date, imaginative, spirited and daring), competence (successful, intelligent and reliable), sophistication (charming and upper-class), and ruggedness (tough and outdoorsy). Overall, the theory makes it clear that consumers imagine each brand as a human being, and gives the brands personality traits in terms of the personality dimensions defined by extending human personality dimensions to the brand domain (Pogorzelski, 2018).
Contemporary marketing issue and theory application
The theory works by presenting a framework that helps the company to shape that way people feel about a brand. In fact, it is targeted at eliciting a specific emotional response in a specific consumer segment with the intention of inciting a positive action that is beneficial to the company. A contemporary marketing issue that the theory can address is luxury consumption among Generation Z (born between 1997 and 2012, and aged between 10 and 25 years). Generation Z is expected to account for an increasing share of luxury consumption thus marking them as a critical growth lever for companies that produce luxury products. But wining over this cohort requires a marketing understanding of their needs and expectations for luxury products, and shift towards the brand personalities that drive their spending. In essence, to better serve Generation Z shoppers, luxury producers must provide them with considered and unique luxury brands. Towards this end, personality measurement models can be applied to clarify the personality traits of luxury brands as perceived by Generation Z and what they expect from their desired brands. These personality traits must be unique in comparison to other population cohorts. To be more precise, the personality of luxury brands as perceived by Generation Z must include the values, motivations and perceptions of the targeted customers (French & Gordon, 2020).
The focus is on Generation Z as the targeted customers and not the whole market. There is an expectation that those who can pay the high prices for luxury products would view the brands personalities as educated, dignified and sophisticated. On the other hand, those who are unable to afford their prices may view them as condescending, snobbish, classy and sophisticated. The theory application makes it clear that there are variables in self-views of luxury brands based on differences in financial capabilities. With these results, variations of tactics and strategies can be applied to market luxury brands within the cohort. The identified personality traits create a bidirectional causality suggesting that differences in financial capabilities are predictive of variations in the way Generation Z perceive luxury brands. With this understanding, the marketing strategy for luxury brands can be customised so that marketing activities are targeted at persons with high financial capabilities who can afford luxury products (French & Gordon, 2020).
Strengths and weaknesses of the theory
The Brand Personality Theory has two strengths. Firstly, it is a universally mentioned marketing feature with several models of the theory presented to define brand personality. All the models attempt to define traits that are related to the personality of brands. If one model does not work, then another model can be applied to ensure that the brand personality is matched to human personality. Secondly, it helps in developing a brand identity that reveals the brand richness. This contributes to brand differentiation that can then be leveraged as a competitive advantage. Still, the theory has a weakness. It describes the personality traits as perceived by the consumers so that the results are likely to be inconsistent personality dimensions across different brands. While Aaker (1997) tries to address this weakness by introducing the five personality dimensions, there is concern that the dimensions do not capture all brand traits (Dalgic & Unal, 2018).
This critical analysis acts as a learning point for managers. It offers an understanding of the theory, how it can be used as well as its shortcomings. Through reviewing this discussion, managers can understand what the theory involves, how it can be applied, the two strengths that can be leveraged to improve marketing efforts, and the weakness that must be minimised for the best outcomes. Concerning the strengths, managers learn that different personality models can be used for the theory with the appropriate model helping to differentiate a brand from others. Concerning the weakness, managers learn that using the theory produces subjective results individuals are likely to have inconsistent personality dimensions across different brands. Overall, the critical analysis helps managers in identifying the situations in which applying the theory would be appropriate.
References
Aaker, J. L. (1997). Dimensions of brand personality. Journal of Marketing Research, 34, 347-356.
Akkucuk, U. (Ed.) (2018). Handbook of Research on Supply Chain Management for Sustainable Development. IGI Global.
Dalgic, T., & Unal, S. (Ed.) (2018). Utilizing Consumer Psychology in Business Strategy. IGI Global.
Fill, C., & Turnbull, S. (2019). Marketing Communications: Touchpoints, Sharing and Disruption. Pearson.
French, J., & Gordon, R. (2020). Strategic Social Marketing: For Behaviour and Social Change (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications Inc.
Pogorzelski, J. (2018). Managing Brands in 4D: Understanding Perceptual, Emotional, Social and Cultural Branding. Emerald Publishing.
Vellnagel, C. C. (2020). Cross-Cultural Brand Personality and Brand Desirability. Springer.
In this assessment, you are to select one marketing theory / concept from your seminar material, prescribed/recommended readings, or any teaching materials provided to you and critically analyse the theory by:
- Providing an overview of the theory and how it has evolved over the years
- Analysing the core components / key principles of the theory from multiple scholarly sources
- Identifying a contemporary marketing issue and apply the theory to address the issue.
- Describing the strengths and limitations of the theory in addressing the contemporary marketing
issue, and what managers can learn from the critical analysis
The choosing theory is “brand personality”
Reading: Brand Personality (Week 10; Aaker, 1997 or Mulyanegara, Tsarenko, & Anderson, 2009)
Formal academic writing style required;
- Proof reading (spelling, grammar) is essential;
- In-text scholarly citations required with consistent APA / Harvard referencing;
- A minimum of 5 scholarly journal papers must be included in the report;
- An electronic copy is required to be uploaded to Turnitin by the due date;
Recommended Structure
OFFICE I FACULTY I DEPARTMENT 6
- Introduction
An overview of the theory and how it has evolved over the years
- Analysis
Analyse the core components / key principles of the theory from multiple scholarly sources
- Interpretation and application
Identify a contemporary marketing issue and apply the theory to address the issue.
- Critique and Limitation
Describe the strengths and limitations of the theory in addressing the contemporary marketing
issue. What can managers learn from the critical analysis?