The meaning of a brand? An archetypal approach.
Xara-Brasil, Duarte ; Hamza, Kavita Miadaira ; Marquina, Percy 等
The meaning of a brand? An archetypal approach.
Introduction
Consumers identify themselves with specific brands, not for their
promises, but rather for the purpose that the brand embodies (Adi et at,
2015). Strong brands are much more than a product or service, are a
unique set of companies' promises and customers' perceptions,
interactions and experiences, which affect long-term relationships.
Large corporations must focus on brand reputation and the legitimacy of
the purpose they serve (Crisan and Bortjun, 2017). And brand managers
must track the impact of increased brand interactions and experiences
across consumers, cultures and countries on customers' brand
perceptions, especially those that relate to brand identity and
personality, since consumers may not necessarily notice brand
personality as intended (Malar et at, 2012).
A strong brand identity comprises the conceptualization and
operationalization of a very sophisticated brand strategy that meets the
challenges of the different environments where brands are present,
particularly global brands. The approaches to define identity consider
the personality traits of a brand, similar to those of a
"person," as one of its components (Aaker, 1990), or as
"Brand Identity Prism" (Kapferer, 1995).
Brand archetypes are part of brand personality. Marketing managers
may use an archetypal approach to brand personality in order to define
what a brand is, what it stands for, and the relationship with its
consumers, thus providing a real meaning associated with their
customers' desires and motivations (Mirzaee and George, 2016; Mark
and Pearson, 2001). In an archetypal approach, the focus is on the
customer's brand experience and brand meaning, and the products are
merely secondary means to achieve the expected brand meaning (Hogstrom
et al., 2015). Consumers' individual brand perceptions are
influenced not only by their exposure to a marketer's brand
stories, and to the media and pop culture, but also by personal
experiences and word of mouth (Adi et al,, 2015). These external
influences lead to different consumers' perceptions across
cultures.
We conducted a quantitative research to examine brand archetype
perceptions of three global brands--Facebook, Apple and Amazon--in four
countries--Portugal, Brazil, Colombia and Peru. We analyzed: if
consumers' perceptions of the archetypes of international brands
are homogeneous in different countries; if the characterization of
brands through words and archetypes is homogeneous and accepted by
consumers; and whether the existing brand/archetype designations in the
literature are still accurate, given the degree of innovation and growth
of these brands and consumers' perceptions across countries. To
reach these objectives we checked the words and sentences that
respondents related to each brand, as well as the coherence of the
associations with the archetype/brand and the homogeneity of the results
in different cultural contexts. This analysis has a clear managerial and
academic contribution, in the research areas of brand identity and brand
personality, leading managers and researchers to a deeper understanding
of consumer behavior patterns through brand archetypes, to a more
effective marketing strategy and to new research tools. The study of
consumers' perceptions of brand personality is a major research
topic (Lam et al., 2013; Sichtmann and Diamantopoulos, 2013).
Literature review
A brand is not just a product or a company name, but rather a
complex entity that shows the organization's commitment to the
customer. It is the promise that a company makes to the customer,
regarding what the product will provide and how it will fit into the
consumer's business (Campell, 2002). A company's products
should have a unique identity. In the eyes of consumers, brands
communicate their own identities to society, to specific groups and/or
to individuals (Strizhakova et al, 2008). Consumers may associate them
with different meanings --such as perceived quality, self-identity,
group identity, values, family traditions, national Traditions--, which
may affect their functional, experiential and symbolic benefits
(Siamagka et al, 2015). Not all brands develop a symbolic approach and
try to tell a story. Consumers unconsciously prefer to tell and to hear
stories, as they give life to others' experience or to their
experience with the brand (Woodside, 2006). Compelling stories raise
expectations about the brand, which will likely increase the positive
emotion when trying it, especially if the relationship between the brand
and the stories seems authentic (Hwang, 2017).
International firms may have a portfolio of local, international or
global brands: local brands are present in just one country or region,
international brands have global elements of their marketing strategy or
mix, and global brands use the same marketing strategy or mix in all
target markets (Schuiling and Kapferer, 2004). Although a global brand
approach has important potential advantages--such as economies of scale,
of communication costs and speed of new products' innovations--the
use of centralized marketing strategies may lead to less intimate
relationships with local markets, with the local competitive environment
and with specific customers' needs (Schuiling, 2001).
Brands can be a source of organizational differentiation and value
creation for companies and customers. Regarding competitive advantage, a
company can develop a consistent brand strategy, making sure that the
brand keeps the promise, due to the relationship established with the
customers. A successful brand provides a unique added value that meets
customers' needs, such as familiarity, reliability, risk reduction
and personality (Strizhakova et al, 2008). Added value provides
intangible benefits, such as feelings, ideas and effects to the brands
(Rodrigues, 2008). Brands are an important attribute of consumers'
culture, not only for the utility value of the commodity, but also for
its symbolic strength. It helps consumers to sustain their identity
projects and symbolic meaning (Bengtsson, 2006; Elliott and
Wattanasuwan, 1998).
The consumer-brand relationship involves processes of brand
identification and product categorization, as well as sensorial,
affective and cognitive experiences. These inputs will integrate the
brand concept through individual and cultural signaling, and develop an
attitude and a relationship (Schmitt, 2012). In addition, the
centralization of organizational efforts and marketing teams is also
important to reach a greater consensus and create synergies within the
organization (Ceballos and Juliana, 2014). Therefore, archetypes mediate
between products and customers' motivation, providing an intangible
meaningful experience.
A company develops its brand identity from different assets and
competencies, which leads to the creation of brand value through
customers' unique experiences, and the creation of a brand-specific
meaning. Ideally, brand identity is a valuable and unique experience
that competitors cannot imitate. Therefore, brand can become a
competitive advantage and the expression of an intention (Urde, 1999).
Brand identity is a central issue in marketing research, with two
major approaches: Aaker (1991) proposed a preliminary approach that
analyzes it under four different perspectives: the brand as a human, a
product, a symbol and an organization. Kapferer (1995) claimed that the
essence of brand identity is the organizational answer to central
questions regarding brand's individuality, consistence, values and
signs. This allows companies to specify their brands' meanings
(Louis and Lombart, 2010).
Brand personality and brand archetypes
Brand personality is one of the main components of brand identity
frameworks, and it is mandatory for brand managers to develop a
systematic process to manage this central brand identity dimension.
Although Aaker's brand personality scale has been successfully used
in many studies, it has some relevant limitations in an international
context and in some industries (Escobar-Farfan et al., 2016). In Chile,
Rojas-Mendez et al. (2004) could not validate this scale in the
automobile industry, and Ahmad and Thyagaraj (2014) called attention to
validation problems of certain dimensions, in some countries. This led
to the development of brand personality scales in local markets, such as
in France (Ferrandi et al., 2000), USA (Austin et al., 2003), Germany
(Hieronimus, 2003), and Russia (Supphellen and Gronhaug, 2003), among
others.
As an alternative to Aaker's (1997) brand personality scale,
some brand and marketing executives adopted the platform of archetypes
to represent brands. In a marketing perspective, we use archetypes to
interact with consumers' deepest motivations and give meaning to
the products and brands associated with their conscious and unconscious
desires (Mark and Pearson, 2001). The unconscious is divided in personal
unconscious--images and impulses from an individual's life
experiences -, and a collective unconscious that includes a big variety
of shared cultural images and impulses, known as archetypes (Zehnder and
Calvert, 2004). Marketing will further advance by understanding the
collective unconscious, and how it affects consumers' perceptions
and actions (Dominici et al., 2016).
Archetypes are universal topics of human existence, which are
evident in the common traits of characters and storylines in myths,
fairy tales, novels and films (Faber and Mayer, 2009; McPeek, 2008).
Societies do not exist without communication and representation and, to
a certain extent, they share their cultural archetypal articulations
(Zehnder and Calvert, 2004).
Many brands are representations of "modern myths,"
containing cognitive elements, emotional elements, and unconscious
processes. Brand archetypes and myths are considered allegories that
support the construction of brand-consumer relationships (Muniz and
Woodside, 2015). In this context, specific brands may play a pivotal
role in . enabling consumers to achieve the proper pleasures that
facilitate an implicit brand recognition and consumer-brand
relationships and experiences (Woodside et al,, 2008). The growing
interest in archetypes indicates a major transformation in the attitudes
of marketing professionals with respect to the unknown regions of the
unconscious, and the search for increasingly sophisticated ways to
attract, retain and remain relevant to the brand community.
To access these patterns, we examined the verbal vehicles that
consumers use to communicate this archetypal theme: their own stories.
Brands can capture the essential meaning of the category to which they
belong and communicate their messages in subtle and refined manners
(Mark and Pearson, 2001). Thus, consumers' memories associated to
brands often materialize into stories through which patterns of
archetypes can be identified.
The use of archetypes allows creating a spiritual and mystical
identity for brands, helping to establish a deeper and more significant
connection with consumers regarding their unconscious aspirations (Siraj
and Kumari, 2011). Archetypes mediate between products and customer
motivations, providing an intangible experience of meaning.
Mark and Pearson (2001) used Carl Jung's archetypal model and
proposed a business application (Figure 1) that is frequently used. In
their model, 12 archetypes are classified into four human main drivers:
"belonging and enjoyment," "independence and
fulfillment," "stability and control" and "risk and
mystery." According to Bosley (2017), Mark and Pearson's
research is the groundbreaking work that links archetypes to brands
(Table I).
Although each archetype is autonomous in terms of personality
traits, Mark and Pearson (2001) proposed a two-axis framework to group
archetypes into clusters. The framework considers their common
attributes, according to the four major human drivers (see Figure 1):
the x-axis links the need to belong and enjoy with independence and
fulfillment; the y-axis links the need for stability and control with
risk/mystery. These motivations are deep, and pull customers in
different directions, so they should be included in marketing and brand
strategies.
The creator, caregiver and ruler archetypes are associated to those
who intend to organize the world, helping individuals to feel more
secure. These people's main concerns regard financial aspects,
health and loss of control.
The lover, jester and regular guy archetypes refer to the need to
connect to others and to be accepted, to belong, but not to change the
world. These archetypes focus on people who relate to others and on
love/community. Their concerns are exile, orphaning, abandonment, and
engulfment (submission/destruction).
The hero, outlaw and magician archetypes represent those who want
to change and improve the world, make dreams come true. These are brave
protagonists, capable of facing challenges, taking risks, breaking the
rules, and changing their realities. They fear impotence, powerlessness
and ineffectiveness (the disinterest of others).
The innocent, explorer and sage archetypes relate to the pursuit of
happiness. They focus on independence and autonomy, rather than
belonging. These archetypes help people to pursuit happiness, mainly
dealing with the fear of entrapment, conformity, and inner emptiness.
A systematic and strong management of all the components and
related items for different stakeholders is mandatory, in order to build
a strong brand identity. Companies must monitor stakeholders'
insights on how the brand is sensed in their perspective, whether or not
they are customers (Urde, 2016).
The perceived brand archetype, and how it relates to the desired
brand identity, is a relevant topic to study across market segments and
countries: individual perceptions and purchasing patterns are partly
determined by the collective values of the local community, including
Hofstede's indicators of cultural proximity (Hofstede Centre,
2017). Furthermore, usage patterns and motivations may vary across
countries and affect customer's perceptions (Pentina et al., 2016).
According to Chau et al (2002), we may expect that people with different
cultural backgrounds will respond differently to a global generic
website.
Methodology and field research
The empirical research focused on the analysis of customers'
perceptions regarding three leading global brands--Facebook, Apple and
Amazon -, which are among the largest brands, with high growth rates
(Interbrand, 2015) in the four countries. We measured the intensity of
the brand-archetype associations by identifying the sentence and number
of words that the respondents mentioned, among the three that describe
each archetype, and to which they associated the brand. We used the
software SPSS 21 to analyze data.
There is theoretical support for associating the three brands to
specific archetypes and clusters. Apple is included in the creator
archetype and the "stability and control" cluster (Haddad et
al., 2015; Muniz and Woodside, 2015); Facebook can be included in the
"Regular Guy" archetype and in the "belonging and
enjoyment" cluster (Roberts, 2010); and Amazon can be included in
the explorer archetype and the "independence and fulfillment"
cluster (Mark and Pearson, 2001; Hwang, 2017). For each archetype, it is
possible to associate specific sentences and words. We did not assign
words to the "risk and mastery" cluster because we did not use
any brand previously included in that cluster. Nevertheless, we kept the
corresponding sentences, as detailed in Table II.
In relation to each archetype specifications, Mark and Pearson
(2001) proposed a major sentence, as detailed in Table II. They also
highlighted a list of major attributes, closely related to each
archetype. In this study, we chose to use multiple items (three words
for each archetype) to represent these theoretical concepts, as a means
to reduce measurement errors and get a better concept estimation (Hair
et al., 2009). Based on an extensive bibliographical research, including
a detailed analysis of Mark and Pearson's (2001) framework, three
academic researchers with multi-cultural backgrounds carried out
autonomous analyses of the different archetypes, and proposed a list of
words/personality traits to characterize each archetype. These lists
were shared and debated, in order to achieve a final 27- item scale to
apply in a multi-cultural survey, where participants were asked to make
a link between the brand and each word. For each personality trait,
respondents had to say if it was related (Yes or No) to each brand: we
used three brands, each one included in a different cluster of three
archetypes: 3 brands x 3 clusters x 3 archetypes = 27 words.
We measured consumers' perceptions in the different cultural
contexts through a survey conducted in two Spanish-speaking countries,
namely, Colombia (CO) and Peru (PE), and two Portuguese-speaking
countries, Brazil (BR) and Portugal (PT). According to the Hofstede
Centre (2017), these countries have very similar indicators of cultural
proximity in terms of power distance and uncertainty avoidance, but
indicators such as individualism and indulgence show very different
results (see Figure 2). It seemed relevant to study how three brands
with a global approach behave in this diverse cultural contexts.
We conducted an online survey between March and May 2016, with a
young population, mostly undergraduates. There were 537 valid
questionnaires, from participants between 17 and 40 years old, with an
average value of 27.2 years, and 41 percent were women. The distribution
among countries was 116 valid questionnaires in Portugal, 130 in Brazil,
190 in Peru and 101 in Colombia.
Results from apple
Apple was founded in 1976 and its predominant archetype nowadays is
the "Creator." According to their corporative statement
"Apple designs the best personal computers in the world [...] leads
the digital music revolution [...] reinvented the mobile phone and is
' defining the future of mobile media and computing devices"
(Apple, 2013). For this brand, we observed a significant coherence
regarding the archetype mentioned in the literature (creator) and
consumers' perceptions, through words and sentences. As shown in
Table III, the most commonly words used in all countries were associated
with the creator archetype.
The word Innovation is the most cited (between 85 and 95 percent
along the countries), followed by creativity and vision. By analyzing
the words that respondents associated with the Apple brand, the dominant
archetype was creator (22 percent of all words mentioned), followed by
Sage (15 percent) and Ruler (13 percent). On average, respondents
associated 2.58 (out of 3) of these words with the Apple brand; among
the countries, we confirmed that Brazil is the one where the association
of the brand with the Creator archetype was more evident: 80 percent of
the respondents mentioned the three words.
Answers regarding the sentences associated with the Apple brand
were also very consistent: 61 percent of the respondents associated it
to the sentence "If it can be imagined, it can be created."
The second most mentioned sentence was associated with the Ruler
archetype, which belongs to the same cluster and received only 8 percent
of the answers.
We conducted a X2 test to analyze the independence of the
observation of archetypes (sentences and words), with respect to the
countries of origin. We concluded that in the case of the most present
archetypes for this brand - Creator (p-value = 0.000) and Sage (p-value
= 0.000) -, consumers' perceptions were not independent of the
country of data collection, with a significance level of 0.05. However,
considering only South American countries, the most present archetype
for this brand (Creator) reached a p-value = 0.025. That is, in these
three countries, individuals' perceptions toward Apple are
independent of their place of origin, as observed in Table IV.
The analysis of the chosen words showed that the most relevant
clusters of archetypes are Stability and Control (44 percent),
Independence and Fulfillment (30 percent) and Belonging and Enjoyment
(26 percent), as shown in Table V.
By analyzing the results from the literature review and
respondents' associations, expressed through words and sentences,
we concluded that all associations are very clearly related to the
reference cluster (Stability and Control), which is consistent with the
literature. As shown in Figure 3, most of the sentences are associated
with the Stability and Control cluster (72 percent). The same happens
with the words (46 percent), although, in this case, the dispersion is
larger, especially in the cluster of Independence and Fulfillment (33
percent).
Results from Facebook
Facebook was associated to the words Enjoyment, Friend and Humor,
which belong to the Jester and Caregiver archetypes (see Table VI).
The analysis of the words that respondents associated with the
Facebook brand shows that the Jester archetype is the most relevant: 64
percent of the respondents associated at least two of the words, and 34
percent associated all three words with this archetype. Then, the
Regular Guy (41 percent) and Ruler (38 percent) archetypes were
associated with two and three words, respectively; on average, the
respondents associated 1.83 of the words of the Jester archetype with
Facebook brand, 1.22 words of the Regular Guy archetype and 1.21 of the
Ruler archetype.
A [chi square] test analyzed the independence of the most relevant
archetypes from the countries of origin, as shown in Table VII. We
concluded that the observations were independent of the country of
origin for the Regular Guy archetype (p-value = 0.059), for all
countries. For the Jester archetype, this independence did not occur in
any of the analyses (p- value = 0.000). Moreover, in the Ruler case, it
happened only among the respondents of Portugal and Brazil (p-value =
0.522). The analysis of the independence of the archetypes in relation
to gender generated high p-values (greater than 0.1), thus confirming
this independence.
The analysis of the Facebook brand affiliation to clusters of
archetypes, made through word associations, showed a clear predominance
of the Belonging and Enjoyment cluster, as stated in the literature, in
all countries, especially in Peru. The most relevant archetype cluster
is Independence and Fulfillment, and there are important differences in
consumers' perceptions among the countries, especially in the
Belonging and Enjoyment cluster, where Portugal and Brazil present a
level of perception very different from Peru and Colombia (see Table
VIII).
By comparing the results of the literature with the answers, the
words clearly relate to the Belonging and Enjoyment cluster.
Furthermore, the chosen sentences were more dispersed, with a slight
predominance of references to the Jester archetype and the cluster
Independence and Fulfillment (see Figure 4).
In the case of Facebook, there is a relevant homogeneity with
respect to the words and clusters of the archetype present in the
literature, even though some relevant disparities are apparent regarding
the mentioned sentences and the depth of the associated words. The
word/archetype associations are more dispersed regarding the Facebook
brand, and there is less independence in the countries.
Results from Amazon
Although Amazon does not have a specific webpage, nor stores and
offices in Portugal, Peru or Colombia, native consumers use the
international webpage with local delivery for several categories of
products.
The words associated to Amazon brand were Credibility, Expert and
Learning, that is, all of the Sage archetypes belonging to the
Independence and Fulfillment cluster. The Sage archetype was the most
mentioned in all countries, although its relative importance ranged from
38 percent in Portugal to 55 percent in Colombia.
Amazon's associations with the words for Caregiver, Creator
and Ruler archetypes belonging to the Stability and Control cluster are
also very important. Hence, in global terms, these two clusters are very
significant (see Table IX). On the other hand, the literature associates
Amazon with the Explorer archetype, while in our study it was not often
mentioned.
The collected data supported the conclusion that Sage archetype is
the most relevant for Amazon brand: of the four words more often
mentioned, the three defined words were among them. In total, 61 percent
of the respondents associated the Amazon brand with at least two words
of the Sage archetype. The second most relevant archetype (Creator) had
a much lower association rate (36 percent), and the Ruler and Caregiver
archetypes achieved a level of association (two or more words) of 33 and
32 percent, respectively. In terms of clustering, Independence and
Fulfillment was also prominent, but Stability and Control had a very
close result (see Table X).
The most selected sentences relate Amazon brand to the Caregiver
archetype "We live to serve" (29 percent) and the Hero
archetype "Where there's a will, there's a way" (21
percent). There was no consistence between the words and sentences, in
terms of the archetypes and clusters, of the chosen archetypes. As shown
in Figure 5, there is a predominance of word associations regarding the
Independence and Fulfillment cluster (as indicated in the literature
review), followed by the Stability and Control cluster, whereas in the
case of sentences, there is some emphasis on the Risk and Mastery
cluster.
A [chi square] test led to the conclusion of interdependence
between the Sage archetype (p-value = 0.001) and the Creator archetype
(p-value = 0.001) in the countries. When we analyzed the three South
American countries, we got p-values from 0.04 for Sage and 0.343 for
Creator (see Table XI). For both archetypes, we noticed independence
from gender observations (all p-values registered values above 0.005).
We concluded that Amazon closely relates to the Sage archetype,
especially in South American countries. However, no alignment exists
regarding consumers' perceptions in the four countries, probably
due to different insights about the brand value or communication
strategy.
Discussion and conclusions
The extensive literature review highlighted the importance of
customers' perceptions, interactions and experiences, and their
consequences regarding sensorial, affective and cognitive relations with
a specific brand. In this context, brand managers must focus on
developing and monitoring an appropriate brand identity framework,
managing customers' brand perceptions, especially the ones related
to their identity and personality, across countries and cultures. Brand
personality can be achieved through a platform of archetypes, which was
developed by Swiss psychologist Carl Jung in the 1940s, and applied to
brand management by Mark and Pearson (2001).
The overall analysis of consumers' associations relating to
Apple, Facebook and Amazon brands supports the conclusion that there is
a proximity between the associations observed in the literature and
those of consumers of different countries about these three brands. This
proximity is much more relevant in the case of clusters, as shown in
Table XII.
We also showed that the consistency of results in the analyzed
brands is significantly higher for word associations--that is,
archetypes are more similar--, than in the sentences which Mark and
Pearson (2001) used to characterize the different archetypes. We found
the biggest differences in Facebook and Amazon brands, while for Apple
the consistence of perceptions is significant (see Table XII).
These three brands are very recent and have a global approach or at
least important global elements in their marketing strategy. Moreover,
most of these brands do not have a direct presence (offices) in some of
the chosen markets (except in Brazil, for some of them). The centralized
and global approach may lead to a less accurate monitoring of local
customers' brand perceptions, due to different cultural and value
traits, consumer behavior patterns, brand experiences and social
influences (social groups, social networks, word of mouth).
Although global brands have a global strategy and positioning, they
can foster consumers' experiences and expectations locally. For
example, in South American countries, technological products (Apple) are
very exclusive and expensive, due to local taxes and lower average
salaries. Companies' portfolios may vary across countries, and so
do the perceptions of consumers: in some markets, Amazon mostly sells
books and technology, but in others, they also sell new products and
services, as FMCG, Convenience Stores (AmazonGo), and even new
categories, as Amazon Alexa. In addition, social networks, such as
Facebook, may offer different uses, according to specific cultural
items, such as indulgence.
In our research--and aligned with Interbrand Report--we concluded
that the three brands are very relevant in these countries: they all
have a high level of brand awareness and brand associations. We also
found that consumers' perceptions differ substantially, at least
for the two most recent brands: Facebook and Amazon. The reason for
these differences relates to the specific local usage patterns and
motivations, cultural and social issues, and possibly a lack of
marketing research on specific programs for each country. The
consolidation of perceptions can be a slow process, unless there is a
focus of brand owners on subjects related to the perceptions of brand
personality in these countries.
By comparing our results with the literature, we noticed a clear
coherence of the Apple brand in all countries (Creator Archetype); as
for Facebook, literature places it into the Regular Guy archetype, but
our results showed a prior allocation in the Jester, followed by the
Regular Guy (both archetypes belongs to Independence and Fulfillment
cluster). In the case of Amazon, literature allocates the brand in the
Explorer archetype, and empirical results placed it in Sage (both
archetypes belong to the Independence and Fulfillment cluster). For all
brands, the [chi square] test did not show significant differences in
the results of the four countries. We also noticed that the
classification of brands by words and sentences is homogeneous, given
the [chi square] test results and the "word scores" in Tables
III, VI and IX. Respondents' acceptance of the words is a fact,
observed by the high number of fully answered questionnaires, in all
countries.
The study has a significant theoretical contribution, mainly about
the importance of using multiple variables for each dimension in order
to perform a more accurate analysis --instead of a single sentence -,
for measuring consumers' perceptions of brand archetypes. This
conclusion matches the concepts of Hair et al. (2009) toward a more
accurate analysis and the possibility to use exploratory and
confirmatory factor analysis. To develop and test a list of words that
characterize each archetype is another significant theoretical
contribution to the study of brand archetypes. The majority of related
studies focus on intended brand archetype (from the perspective of the
brand manager), while ours deals with customers' perceptions
regarding major global brands in distinct countries. The differences
found in consumers' results prove the importance of this
methodology.
This study has also a significant practical contribution. Marketing
managers must carefully analyze the existence of such different
costumers' perceptions regarding brand archetype. We provide a tool
for monitoring brand performance, in domestic and international markets,
through the application of surveys and other research tools.
Implications for academics, brand managers and future research
The theory of brand archetypes describes the value of implementing
a specific brand personality approach to brands. The model suggests a
monitoring system of consumers' perceptions of brand archetypes in
various countries. In fact, from literature review, we conclude that
this area was not appropriately studied, especially regarding global
brands and international comparisons.
We tested the methodology developed by Mark and Pearson (2001), and
we extended its scope in order to include the observed variables along
with the proposed sentences; hence, we carried out a deeper measurement
of consumers' perceptions to include local attributes.
Most of the research on brand archetypes is based on semiotic and
content analysis of the brand communication (the sender's
perspective.). In this study, we measured consumers' perceptions of
brand archetypes in different countries, affected by all brand
communication, experimentation and contact with other consumers, and
through cultural, competitive and personal aspects, which are most
relevant under the impact of social networks and brand storytelling
(word of mouth). This research is the first step of a larger process
that focuses on the development of better branding tools, that may
include brands from different size industries, in different locations,
with different cultural approaches.
For future research, we suggest applying other methodological
alternatives for cultural and industrial diversification. This might
bring more knowledge about the brand personality component and better
methodologies and tools for academics and marketers.
From a methodology standpoint, future research studies should use
sophisticated quantitative methods with a numerical scale (Likert-type
scales). This would allow a stronger data analysis with exploratory and
confirmatory tests and scale validation. Similarly, researchers may link
this issue to a deeper perspective of global branding systems, thus
providing better understanding and monitoring systems.
By knowing consumers' perceptions of individual brands in
different countries, managers may create more sophisticated or effective
marketing strategies for their brands. They could make decisions
regarding their brand personality traits, according to the similarities
between countries and their specifications. Monitoring consumers'
associations related to brand personality traits might help in the
evaluation of marketing and brand strategies and their local and global
performance.
Frequently, companies do not use a brand personality systematic
methodology to allocate their brands to these archetypal brand identity
components, which is critical for establishing emotional associations of
consumers with a brand. An archetype can be an appropriate choice in
many situations. In fact, this research shows how consumers'
perceptions vary across countries, even for top brands, and how
important it is to monitor them.
DOI 10.1108/REGE-02-2018-0029
Received 6 February 2018
Revised 20 February 2018
Accepted 21 February 2018
References
Aaker, D. (1990), Building Strong Brands, Free Press, New York, NY.
Aaker, D. (1991), Managing Brand Equity, Free Press, New York, NY.
Aaker, J.L. (1997), "Dimensions of brand personality",
Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 34 No. 3, pp. 347-356.
Adi, A., Crisan, C. and Dinca, R. (2015), "Stories, heroes and
commercials: spreading the message across with a new type of
responsibility", Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy, Vol.
3 No. 4, pp. 749-764.
Ahmad, A. and Thyagaraj, K. (2014), "Applicability of brand
personality dimensions across cultures and product categories: a
review", Global Journal of Finance and Management, Vol. 6 No. 1,
pp. 9-18.
Apple (2013), "Apple introduces next generation iWork and
iLife apps for OS X and iOS", available at:
www.apple.com/newsroom/2013/10/23Apple-Introduces-Next-Generation-iWork-and- iLifeApps-for-OS-X-and-iOS/ (accessed October 27, 2017).
Austin, J., Siguaw, J. and Matila, A. (2003), "A
re-examination of the generalizability of the Aaker brand personality
measurement framework", Journal of Strategic Marketing, Vol. 11 No.
2, pp. 77-92.
Bengtsson, A. (2006), "A brand literacy: consumers' sense
making of brand management", American Advances in Consumer
Research, Vol. 33, pp. 375-380.
Bosley, L. (2017), "A tale of twin cities: using brand
personality to differentiate Minneapolis and St Paul", thesis,
University of Minnesota Digital Conservancy, Minneapolis, FL.
Campell, M. (2002), "Building brand equity",
International Journal of Medical Marketing, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 208-218.
Ceballos, L. and Juliana, G. (2014), "El uso de los arquetipos
en la industria de la moda en Colombia (Use of archetypes in the
Colombian fashion industry)", Estudios Gerenciales, Vol. 30 No.
130, pp. 48-54.
Chau, P.Y., Cole, M., Massey, A.P., Montoya-Weiss, M. and
O'Keefe, R.M. (2002), "Cultural differences in the online
behavior of consumers", Proceedings of the ACM, Vol. 45 No. 10, pp.
138-143.
Crisan, C. and Bortjun, D. (2017), "Digital storytelling and
employer Branding. An exploratory connection", Management Dynamics
in the Knowledge Economy, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 273-287.
Dominici, G., Tullio, V., Siino, G. and Tani, M. (2016),
"Marketing archetypes: applying Jungian psychology to marketing
research", Journal of Organisational Transformation & Social
Change, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 109-122.
Elliott, R. and Wattanasuwan, K. (1998), "Brands as symbolic
resources for the construction of identity", International Journal
of Advertising, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 131-144.
Escobar-Farfan, M., Mateluna, C. and Araya, L. (2016),
"Evolution y description de los modelos de personalidad de marca en
Latinoamerica (Evolution and description of brand personality models in
Latin America)", Dimension Empresarial, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 91-113.
Faber, M. and Mayer, J. (2009), "Resonance to archetypes in
media: there's some accounting for taste", Journal of Research
in Personality, Vol. 43 No. 3, pp. 307-322.
Ferrandi, J.M., Valette-Florence, P. and Fine-Falcy, S. (2000),
"Aaker's brand personality scale in a French context: a
replication and a preliminary test of its validity", Developments
in Marketing Science, Proceedings of the Academy of Marketing Science,
Vol. 23, pp. 7-13.
Haddad, L., Hamza, K.M. and Xara-Brasil, D. (2015),
"Archetypes and brand image: an international comparison",
Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, Vol. 9 No. 34, pp.
22-31.
Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B. and Anderson, R. (2009),
Multivariate Data Analysis, Prentice Hall, London.
Hieronimus, F. (2003), An Empirical Study on The Measurement,
Perception and Impact of Brand Personality, Peter Lang, Frankfurt.
Hofstede Centre (2017), "Portugal in comparison with
Brazil", available at: http://geert-hofstede.com/ portugal.html
(accessed October 10, 2017).
Hogstrom, C., Gustafsson, A. and Tronvoll, B. (2015),
"Strategic brand management: archetypes for managing brands through
paradoxes", Journal of Business Research, Vol. 68 No. 2, pp.
391-404.
Hwang, S. (2017), "Storytelling in branding: the difference in
brand archetypes between Western and Asian Tech brands-based on Carl
Jung's 12 Archetypes Model", master's thesis, Aalto
University, Electronic Theses and Dissertations database, Espoo.
Interbrand (2015), "Interbrand's 15th annual best global
brands report, 2014", New York, NY, available at:
http://interbrand.com/en/newsroom/15/interbrands-th-annual-best-global-
brands-report (accessed October 27, 2017).
Kapferer, J.N. (1995), Strategic Brand Management, Kogan Page,
London.
Lam, S.K., Ahearne, M., Mullins, R., Hayati, B. and Schillewaert,
N. (2013), "Exploring the dynamics of antecedents to consumer-brand
identification with a new brand", Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, Vol. 41 No. 2, pp. 234-252.
Louis, D. and Lombart, C. (2010), "Impact of brand personality
on three major relational consequences (trust, attachment, and
commitment to the brand)", Journal of Product & Brand
Management, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 114-130.
Mcpeek, R. (2008), "The Pearson-Marr archetype indicator and
psychological type", Journal of Psychological Type, Vol. 68 No. 7,
pp. 52-66.
Malar, L., Nyffenegger, B., Krohmer, H. and Hoyer, W. (2012),
"Implementing an intended brand personality: a dyadic
perspective", Journal of the Academy of Marketing. Science, Vol. 40
No. 5, pp. 728-744.
Mark, M. and Pearson, C. (2001), Building Extraordinary Brands
Through the Power of Archetypes, McGraw Hill, New York, NY.
Mirzaee, S. and George, B. (2016), "Brand archetypes: an
experiment with the 'demeter' ", Journal of Applied
Economics and Business Research, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 93-105.
Muniz, C. and Woodside, A. (2015), "Consumer storytelling of
brand archetypes encatchment", International Journal of Tourism
Anthropology, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 67-88.
Pentina, I., Basmanova, O. and Zhang, L. (2016), "A
cross-national study of twitter users' motivations and continuance
intentions", Journal of Marketing Communications, Vol. 22 No. 1,
pp. 36-55.
Roberts, C. (2010), "Exploring brand personality through
archetypes", master's thesis/doctoral dissertation, East
Tennessee State University, Electronic Theses and Dissertations
database, Johnson City.
Rodrigues, P. (2008), Capital de Marca Baseado no Consumidor:
Mensuragao e Modelos de Equagoes Estruturais para Marcas de Vestuario,
University of Porto, Porto.
Rojas-Mendez, J., Erunchen, I. and Silva, E. (2004), "The ford
brand personality in Chile", Corporate Reputation Review, Vol. 7
No. 3, pp. 232-251.
Schmitt, B. (2012), "The consumer psychology of brands",
Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 7-17.
Schuiling, I. (2001), "Think local-act local: is it time to
slow down the accelerated move to global marketing?", Symphonya
Emerging Issues in Management, Vol. 1, pp. 83-87.
Schuiling, I. and Kapferer, J. (2004), "Executive insights:
real differences between local and international brands: strategic
implications for international marketers", Journal of International
Marketing, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 97-112.
Siamagka, N.-T., Christodoulides, G. and Michaelidou, N. (2015),
"The impact of comparative affective states on online brand
perceptions: a five-country study", International Marketing Review,
Vol. 32 No. 32, pp. 438-454.
Sichtmann, C. and Diamantopoulos, A. (2013), "The impact of
perceived brand globalness, brand origin image, and brand
origin-extension fit on brand extension success", Journal of the
Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 41 No. 5, pp. 567-585.
Siraj, S. and Kumari, S. (2011), "Archetyping the brand:
strategy to connect", The 1UP Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 8
No. 3, pp. 47-59.
Strizhakova, Y., Coulter, R. and Price, L. (2008), "Branded
products as a passport to global citizenship: perspectives from
developed and developing countries", Journal of International
Marketing, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 57-85.
Supphellen, M. and Gronhaug, K. (2003), "Building foreign
brand personalities in Russia: the moderating effect of consumer
ethnocentrism", International Journal of Advertising, Vol. 22 No.
2, pp. 203-226.
Urde, M. (1999), "Brand orientation: a mindset for building
brands into strategic resources", Journal of Marketing Management,
Vol. 15 Nos 1-3, pp. 117-133.
Urde, M. (2016), "The brand core and its management over
time", Journal of Product & Brand Management, Vol. 25 No. 1,
pp. 26-42.
Woodside, A. (2006), "CABS: Consumer archetype brand
storytelling", Annual Meeting of The Society For Marketing
Advances, Vol. 11, pp. 66-72.
Woodside, A., Sood, S. and Miller, K. (2008), "When consumers
and brands talk: Storytelling theory and research in psychology and
marketing", Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 97-145.
Zehnder, S. and Calvert, S. (2004), "Between the hero and the
shadow: developmental differences in adolescents' perceptions and
understanding of mythic themes in film", Journal of Communication
Inquiry, Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 122-137.
Further reading
Keller, K.L. (1993), "Conceptualizing, measuring, managing
customer-based brand equity", The Journal of Marketing, Vol. 57 No.
1, pp. 1-22.
Corresponding author
Duarte Xara-Brasil
Department of Marketing and Logistics, Instituto Potitecnico de
Setubal, Kavita Miadaira Hamza can be contacted at: kavita@usp.br
Setubal, Portugal
Kavita Miadaira Hamza
Department of Business Administration, Universidade de Sao Paulo,
Sao Paulo, Brazil, and
Percy Marquina
Centrum, Pontificia Universidad Catolica del Peru, Lima, Peru
Caption: Figure 1. Major human drives and brand archetypes
Caption: Figure 2. Cultural proximity indexes
Caption: Figure 3. Scatter diagram: Apple
Caption: Figure 4. Scatter diagram: Facebook
Caption: Figure 5. Scatter diagram Amazon
Table I.
Mark and Pearson's
(2001) archetypes
Archetype Description Characteristic Examples
of brands
Caregiver They want to Caring, compassion Nivea
protect and generosity.
others from Protective,
harm, to devoted,
help, to sacrificing and
take care maternal/parental.
Benevolent,
friendly, helping
and trusting
Regular guy They have the Working class or GAP, Visa
basic desire common person,
of connection the neighbor,
with others; ordered,
want to sometimes
belong, to fatalistic and
fit in self-depreciative,
realistic, and
disappointed
humanist. Having
the basic desire
of connection with
others, want to
belong, to fit in
Innocent Desire for Pure, faithful, Coke, Disney
simple naive,
purity, child-like
goodness, character;
happiness, humble,
faith and tranquil,
optimism looking for
happiness and
simplicity
Explorer Desire to Independent, Amazon,
be free, adventurer. Seeks Starbucks
to find discovery and
out who fulfillment.
they are by Often solitary
exploring and indomitable.
the world. They want to
Long to discover who they
experience are, seeking to
a better, explore the world
more and have an
authentic authentic and
and fulfilling life
rewarding
life
Sage They want to Value enlightening McKinsey,
find the and knowledge, Harvard
truth. Use truth and
their understanding;
intelligence a bit
and analysis pretentious.
to understand They use their
the world intelligence to
understand the
world, to
discover the
truth
Hero They want to Courageous, Nike
prove their impetuous,
own worth rescuer,
through crusader.
courageous Wants to
and prove his/her
difficult own value
action. through
Aim to courageous and
exercise tough action.
mastery to Triumphs over
improve the adversities.
world Their skills
are persistence,
strength,
determination,
discipline,
challenge and
ability
Outlaw Their basic Represented by the Harley
desire is rebellious Davidson,
revenge or iconoclast, the Apple
revolution: survivor and a
They want rule-breaker.
to destroy Can be wild,
what does destructive and
not work a struggler.
for them Revolutionary
or to
society
Magician They want to The visionary, the Vanish,
know the alchemist. Pantene
fundamental Focused on
laws and natural forces,
functioning transformations
of the and metamorphoses.
world or the They want to know
universe how the world
and realize works and
dreams influence its
transformation
Lover They want to Intimate, romantic, Victoria's
achieve sensual and Secret,
intimacy and especially Godiva
experience passionate.
sensual Seductive,
pleasure. delighted,
Aim to tempestuous and
maintain a whimsical. Warm,
relationship playful, erotic
with people and enthusiastic
partner
Creator They want to Represented as LEGO
create innovative,
something artistic,
valuable self-driven,
and lasting, inventive, a
participate dreamer. Often
in forming non-social.
a vision Focused on
quality
Jester They want to Living for fun. Pepsi,
live in the Usually ironic Burger
present and mirthful. King
with full Sometimes
joy and irresponsible.
entertain Live in the
the world moment
Ruler They want to Represented by a American
control, strong sense of Express,
raise a power and Microsoft
family, control. The
and/or leader, the
build a boss, and the
successful judge.
company or Influential and
community stubborn. High
level of
dominance
Sources: Adapted from Mark and Pearson (2001),
Faber and Mayer (2009)
Table II.
Archetypes-related
sentences and words
Archetype Sentence Word Cluster
Sage "The truth will Learning, Independence
set you free" Expert, and Fulfillment
Credibility
Innocent "Free to be you Optimism,
and me" Simplicity,
Goodness
Explorer "Don't fence Freedom,
me in" Adventure,
Independence
Ruler "Power isn't Power, Stability and
everything. Control, Control
It's the Authority
only thing"
Creator "If it can be Creativity,
imagined, it Innovation,
can be Vision
created"
Caregiver "We live Friend, Care,
to serve" Protection
Regular "Love they Democracy, Belonging and
neighbor as Regular, enjoyment
yourself" Empathy
Guy Lover "I only have Sensuality,
eyes for Pleasure,
you" Intimacy
Jester "A life without Enjoyment,
fun is a life Humour,
half-lived" Relaxation
Hero "Where there's Not considered Risk and Mastery
a will,
there's a way"
Magician "It can be done!"
Outlaw "Rules
are meant to
be broken"
Source: Adapted from Mark and Pearson (2001)
Table III.
Apple--the ten most
mentioned words
No. Word Portugal (%) Brazil (%) Peru (%)
1 Innovation 95 95 85
2 Creativity 85 90 82
3 Vision 64 85 75
4 Expert 72 70 63
5 Power 76 72 58
6 Credibility 49 76 57
7 Enjoyment 53 44 44
8 Optimism 50 53 47
9 Pleasure 40 55 40
10 Independence 37 43 43
No. Colombia (%) Total (%) Archetype
1 93 91 Creator
2 92 87 Creator
3 73 75 Creator
4 71 68 Sage
5 56 65 Ruler
6 68 62 Sage
7 49 47 Jester
8 34 47 Innocent
9 51 46 Lover
10 36 40 Explorer
No. Cluster
1 Stability and control
2 Stability and control
3 Stability and control
4 Independence and Fulfillment
5 Stability and control
6 Independence and Fulfillment
7 Belonging and enjoyment
8 Independence and Fulfillment
9 Belonging and enjoyment
10 Independence and Fulfillment
Table IV.
Apple [chi square] test in
the countries--three words
Archetype PT BR CO PE BR CO PE PT BR Words global
4 countries 3 countries 2 countries archetype
share
Creator 0.000 0.025 0.000 22
Sage 0.001 0.001 0.651 15
Ruler 0.013 0.013 0.725 13
Caregiver 0.000 0.001 0.960 9
Lover 0.004 0.079 0.107 9
Innocent 0.013 0.324 0.001 9
Explorer 0.342 0.173 0.878 8
Jester 0.046 0.026 0.905 8
Regular guy 0.013 0187 0.107 5
Note: The significance level used for italic values was 0.05
Table V.
Apple--association
of words to the cluster
of archetypes
Portugal (%) Brazil (%) Peru (%)
Stability and control 45 47 45
Independence and fulfillment 35 32 33
Belonging and enjoyment 20 21 22
Colombia (%) Total (%)
Stability and control 46 46
Independence and fulfillment 31 33
Belonging and enjoyment 24 22
Table VI.
Facebook--the ten
most mentioned words
No. Word (%) Portugal (%) Brazil (%) Peru (%)
1 Enjoyment 62 79 82
2 Friend 79 53 76
3 Humour 76 60 68
4 Power 53 58 48
5 Pleasure 51 55 57
6 Control 49 67 41
7 Regular 48 40 49
8 Relaxation 53 16 71
9 Freedom 47 52 50
10 Empathy 28 40 51
No. Colombia (%) Total (%) Archetype
1 67 74 Jester
2 61 68 Caregiver
3 50 65 Jester
4 52 53 Ruler
5 42 52 Lover
6 46 50 Ruler
7 54 48 Regular guy
8 35 47 Jester
9 32 46 Explorer
10 36 40 Regular guy
No. Cluster
1 Stability and control
2 Stability and control
3 Stability and control
4 Independence and Fulfillment
5 Stability and control
6 Independence and Fulfillment
7 Belonging and enjoyment
8 Independence and Fulfillment
9 Belonging and enjoyment
10 Independence and Fulfillment
Table VII.
Facebook--X test
along countries and
clusters of countries -
three words
Archetype PT BR CO PE BR CO PE PT BR Words global
4 countries 3 countries 2 countries archetype
share (%)
Jester 0.000 0.000 0.000 18
Regular guy 0.059 0.031 0.333 13
Ruler 0.002 0.001 0.522 12
Explorer 0.000 0.001 0.056 11
Creator 0.228 0.675 0.038 11
Lover 0.002 0.000 0.333 10
Caregiver 0.000 0.015 0.000 10
Innocent 0.008 0.139 0.030 8
Sage 0.002 0.004 0.602 7
Note: The significance level used for italic values was 0.05
Table VIII.
Facebook - association of
words to clusters
of archetypes
Portugal (%) Brazil (%) Peru (%)
Stability and control 33 34 30
Independence and fulfillment 29 27 27
Belonging and enjoyment 38 39 44
Colombia (%) Total (%)
Stability and control 35 32
Independence and fulfillment 24 27
Belonging and enjoyment 41 41
Table IX.
Amazon--the ten
most mentioned words
No. Word Portugal (%) Brazil (%) Peru (%)
1 Credibility 47 77 55
2 Expert 34 48 49
3 Vision 22 51 36
4 Learning 32 46 42
5 Care 39 36 38
6 Independence 33 39 32
7 Innovation 20 43 32
8 Simplicity 40 32 33
9 Control 34 30 46
10 Pleasure 29 39 20
No. Colombia (%) Total (%) Archetype Cluster
1 63 67 Sage
2 55 45 Sage
3 46 42 Creator
4 47 42 Sage
5 27 37 Caregiver
6 35 36 Explorer
7 38 36 Creator
8 24 34 Innocent
9 41 34 Ruler
10 34 33 Lover
No.
1 Independence and Fulfillment
2 Independence and Fulfillment
3 Stability and control
4 Independence and Fulfillment
5 Stability and control
6 Independence and Fulfillment
7 Stability and control
8 Independence and Fulfillment
9 Stability and control
10 Stability and control
Table X.
Amazon--associated
words
Portugal (%) Brazil (%) Peru (%)
Stability and control 32 36 41
Independence and fulfillment 42 41 41
Belonging and enjoyment 26 24 18
Colombia (%) Total (%)
Stability and control 40 38
Independence and fulfillment 40 41
Belonging and enjoyment 19 21
Table XI.
Amazon--[chi square] test in the countries and
clusters of countries - three words
PT BR CO PE BR CO PE PT BR Words global
4 countries 3 countries 2 countries archetype
share (%)
Regular guy 0.352 0.294 0.845 19
Creator 0.001 0.340 0.000 27
Sage 0.001 0.040 0.000 41
Jester 0.000 0.000 0.181 13
Ruler 0.352 0.074 0.824 25
Caregiver 0.171 0.204 0.926 28
Explorer 0.134 0.057 0.031 24
Lover 0.033 0.024 0.524 13
Innocent 0.007 0.324 0.195 22
Note: The significance level used for italic values was 0.05
Table XII.
Brands and archetypes--literature review
and empirical study
Literature review Words (2 or more words)
Archetypes Cluster Archetypes Cluster
Apple Creator Stability and Creator (89%) Stability and
Control Sage (63%) Control
Facebook Regular Belonging and Jester (64%) Belonging and
guy Enjoyment Regular Enjoyment
guy (41%) (Both)
Amazon Explorer Independence Sage (61%) Independence
and Creator (36%) and
Fulfillment Fulfillment
Sentences
Archetypes Cluster
Apple Creator(61%) Stability and
Ruler (8%) Control
Facebook Innocent (27%) Independence and
Jester (23%) Fulfillment and
Belonging and
Enjoyment
Amazon Caregiver (32%) Stability and
Hero (26%) Control and Risk
and Mastery
COPYRIGHT 2018 Faculdade de Economia, Administracao e Contabilidade - FEA-USP
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2018 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
