About the Project
Branding strategy, often used synonymously with the term “brand architecture” (Kapferer, 2012), refers to an explicit relationship between the corporate brand, the organisation, and its various products and services (Balmer and Gray, 2003). Branding strategies can be distinguished when an organisation either employs ‘a single umbrella image that casts one glow over a panopoly of products’ (Hatch and Schultz, 2001: 129) sometimes referred to as branded house; or a collection of individual brands are presented with different names and referred to as house of brands (Ollins, 1978). Keller (2015) claims that subbranding is a strategy that sits between branded house and house of brands which facilitates access to attitudes and associations with both the corporate brand and the product brand.
Empirical studies have shown that brand architecture has a strong impact on profitability, and marketing efficiency (Morgan and Rego, 2009). However, despite the fact that ‘higher education and branding go back a long way’ (Temple, 2006: 15) few studies have explored the concept, or application of, branding strategies in universities and as a result universities tend to be more focused on such approaches as advertising and promotional material (Bunzel, 2007). What research has shown is that there are distinct pockets of specialisms which may provide the very source of competitive advantage required for a post-92 university seeking to hold a corporate brand with a distinct competitive edge (Abratt and Kleyn, 2012; Spry, 2014).
These “sub-brands” in a university can make stronger connections to their students through the development of values which signal differences in specific products (Keller, 2015). Hsu et al (2015) praise sub-brands for their ability to control risks particularly in terms of negative feedback concerning the corporate brand (Muzellec and Lambkin, 2009). However if branding practices change in universities, and ‘corporatization’ (Hemsley-Brown and Gonnawardana, 2007: 945) is introduced, departments may have to align their identity with that of the university. This could result in departments losing their ‘house-of-brands approach’ (Hemsley-Brown and Gonnawardana, 2007: 946) and hence their individual branding to different target markets particularly those departments operating in niche markets. This strengthens the calls for more research devoted to understanding how corporate branding strategies might work in universities as according to Uggla (2006) a coherent and effective brand architecture can effectively be created by sub brands.
Continue with Facebook
