Strategies for Leveraging Master Brands: How to Bypass the Risks of Direct Extensions

Abstract

In building a brand, marketers should try to link the brand to an association that has enough flexibility to provide a platform for both current positioning and subsequent leveraging. Brand leveraging involves several steps, including: 1. Determine the core associations evoked by the brand. 2. Understand the brand's boundaries. 3. Examine the ease with which customers learn new associations. A master brand's core associations make direct extensions difficult to all but closely related product categories. Strategies for indirect extensions bypass possible interference by leveraging alternate associations for the master brand that come from brand hierarchies. Vertical branding strategies for master brands include both sub-branding and super-branding, introducing elements to an existing brand hierarchy either below or above the master brand. Horizontal branding strategies include brand bundling and brand bridging.

Brand leveraging is a common practice today in product and services marketing. Many new brands are being especially developed as strategic platforms for later extensions. No longer do marketing managers ask whether or not to extend a brand--the primary question is how far can we reasonably stretch the brand.

Category extensions carry both opportunities and risks. On the one hand, they offer customers immediate brand recognition as well as the promise of benefits associated with a known brand. By stretching the brand to other products or services, a company can reinforce the brand's core associations, strengthen and expand the customer franchise, and build the overall business.

On the other hand, brands stretched too far (even if successful) risk diluting the core associations and eroding the customer base.

ASSESSING A BRAND'S STRETCH

In deciding how far to stretch a brand, specific knowledge of the boundaries of a brand's core associations is a key factor. But the question of how far to extend a brand overlooks the more fundamental question of how to extend a brand.

Many brand-leveraging efforts rely solely on one strategy: the direct extension of a brand across product categories. Such an exclusive focus puts many valuable brands at unnecessary risk and neglects other possible strategies for leveraging brands.

For example, research has shown that successful direct extensions of very strong brands are often limited to closely related product categories. The extraordinary strength of an existing brand association can interfere with customers' ability to learn the new associations needed for a successful category extension. In this article, we show how to bypass the risks of direct extensions by leveraging brands indirectly across product categories.

BRAND MEANING

The first task in brand leveraging is to determine the core associations evoked by the brand. In other words, what does the brand mean to customers?

Most brands evoke several types of associations. Figure 1 shows that a given brand is associated with categories having products bearing its name as well as with the usage situations for which it is appropriate. (Figure 1 omitted) Likewise, a brand may be associated with specific product attributes or customer benefits. Other types of brand associations include celebrity endorsers, sponsored events, geographic affiliations, user groups, etc.

For example, the brand Dove is associated with bar soap, dishwashing detergent. ice cream, chocolate, and various other product categories. In the soap category, Dove is appropriate for the usage situation "facial cleansing." The Dove brand advertises the customer benefit "doesn't dry your skin like soap can." This customer benefit is supported by Dove's highly accessible association with the product attribute "one-quarter moisturizing cream." This unique, easily remembered point-of-difference affords Dove a market niche as a "beauty bar." Its strategic positioning insulates Dove from competitive products and enables it to command a premium price from customers.

Different methods are available for eliciting the set of core associations of a brand. One can ask customers directly about the brand in questionnaires, in-depth interviews, and focus group discussions. Or one can unobtrusively observe customer "protocols" of product purchase and usage experience.

Such studies also help to establish the importance of brand effects in relation to other factors, compare brand users with nonusers, and analyze the positioning of competitive brands. Alternately, brand meaning can be assessed with free association tasks, projective methods, and other qualitative procedures.

Peter Farquhar notes that building brands involves three principal activities: developing favorable brand associations with customers, making these associations readily accessible in customers' minds, and establishing a unique point-of-difference that is both easy to remember and consistently reinforced over time.

Subsequent efforts at brand leveraging can be greatly simplified, though, if brand building develops core associations that are easily generalized. Brand associations naturally tend to be more concrete (e.g., product-or attribute-related) than abstract (e.g., situation-or benefit-related).(1) Although such concrete associations help to establish the brand franchise in its initial product application, they greatly restrict the brand's extendibility later. Philip Kotler notes, "Such brand extensions as Bic pantyhose and Life Savers gum met early deaths."

In building the brand, therefore, marketers should endeavor to link the brand to an association that has enough flexibility to provide a platform for both current positioning and subsequent leveraging.

Anheuser-Busch created the Eagle brand for its honey roast peanuts as part of a strategic platform for launching other products. The Eagle name was easily extended to a line of nut products and then generalized to several different types of snack foods based on its flexible positioning ("Check out our team").

In contrast, trying to extend the Planters brand from peanuts to snack foods is a much more difficult task. The Planter's brand strongly evokes nut products (and Mr. Peanut) for many people.

The transformation of brand associations from a functional product to more general qualities is part of creating a brand image. Unless the brand adds something intangible to the product, leveraging the brand to other products will be difficult. One reason extending the well-known Country Time brand to apple cider did not succeed was that Country Time simply meant "lemonade" to most customers.

Brands tied too closely to a particular product risk extinction if later technologies or competitive offerings render the product obsolete. Cracker Jacks and Legos are still around, but Victrola "talking machines" and Pickett slide rules are not. A brand that embodies more pervasive qualities can outlive many of its products.

Nevertheless, the core associations that determine a brand's meaning can and do change over time. Established brands may evolve to mirror changes in their target customers or to grow in profitable new directions.

The Aunt Jemima brand has been well known for years for its association with pancakes. Although the extension from pancake mix to pancake syrup has fared well, the brand's core association with pancakes is obviously self-limiting. Recently, the company began promoting a broader meaning for the Aunt Jemima brand. It is repositioning the core association by moving from a product category (pancakes) to a usage situation (breakfast) with a new line of frozen entrees.

Category extensions, if used effectively, can reposition the brand's meaning, though such efforts are typically slow and costly. The Dole brand has taken many years and a huge investment to gradually shift its core association from the product category "pineapple" to the customer benefit "delicious and healthy" for its fruits, vegetables, and other products.

The Chiquita brand is still trying to reposition its core association away from bananas. Its "ill-fated 1987 attempt to introduce frozen juice bars cost the I company over $30 million," according to Business Week (April 30, 1990). Recent efforts to extend the brand to "exotic juices" may prove more successful.

For many years, Tokyo Tsushin Kogyo Ltd. used its Sony brand exclusively on transistor radios. When the company extended the Sony brand to a new product category, tape recorders, consumers were rather confused. But after some time had elapsed for consumer education and tape recorders gained acceptance in the marketplace, consumers updated their meaning of the brand.

Inconsistent category extensions, in contrast, run the risk of diluting the brand's meaning and jeopardizing the customer franchise. What will the Domino's brand mean if its recent extension from pizza delivery to a fruit-flavored bubble gum is successful? How will Harley Davidson's customers react to its new men's cologne? It is essential to consider in advance how category extensions will affect the brand's meaning.

DOMINANCE MEASUREMENT

The second task in brand leveraging is to understand the brand' s boundaries. The associations made in Figure 1 are directional. On the one hand, brand meaning rests with the directional associations from the brand to such associates as product categories, usage situations, product attributes, or customer benefits.

On the other hand, brand leveraging decisions depend mainly on the directional associations from the associates to the brand. For example, Regis McKenna observes, "If you say 'instant photography' to someone, they'll probably think of Polaroid. If you say 'innovative computers,' chances are they'll think of Apple. If you say 'high-quality copying machines,' they might think of Xerox."

The question to ask in brand leveraging is, "What strongly evokes the brand?" The answer requires mechanisms for measuring association strength. We define dominance here as the strength of the directional association from an associate to the brand. Dominance is measured then by either a naming method or a latency method.

Naming methods present customers with the associate label and ask them to list the brands that come to mind. Both the order of recall and the frequency of recall measure dominance. For example, take 30 seconds and list the brands that come to mind when you think of the usage situation "washing windows" or the product category "toothpaste."

The latency method measures dominance by response time. For instance, a category label (toothpaste) is flashed on a computer screen and is then followed by a brand name (Crest, Close-up, Coppertone, etc.).(2) A respondent answers by pressing a "yes" or "no" button as quickly as possible to indicate whether or not the brand is a member of that product category. The computer records the time to respond. Dominance is measured by the speed (in milliseconds) of correct identification that the brand belongs to the product category. The faster the response time, the stronger the category-to-brand association, and the more dominant is the brand in the category.

BRAND BOUNDARIES

The third step in brand leveraging is to examine the ease with which customers learn new associations. Figure 2 illustrates some of the factors involved. (Figure 2 omitted)

The direct extendibility of a brand from its parent category to a prospective target category depends on at least two factors: (1) the dominance from the core associate of the parent category to the brand and (2) the relatedness of the parent and the target category with respect to this core association.

Customers' ability to learn new associations depends upon how strongly dominant the brand is in its parent category. The stronger the directional association from the core associate to the brand, the greater the possibility for interference in learning new brand associations. When a brand becomes too strongly linked to a given associate, its extendibility is restricted to closely related categories.

The curve in Figure 3 illustrates the ease of learning new associations (extendibility) for a given brand at varying possible strengths of its core association (dominance). The curve thus represents how far the brand might reasonably be stretched.

The relatedness of a prospective target category and the brand's core associate in the parent category determines the stretch required in extending a brand from the parent to the target.

Three scenarios exist for possible brand extensions. Dominance is rather weak in the Region 1, so trying to learn new associations makes little sense. The brand is not strong enough to be extended--it is necessary to build the brand first.

In Region II, dominance is strong enough to consider directly extending the brand's core association to the target shown.(3) If the target category were less closely related to the core associate, more stretch would be required and the horizontal broken line in Figure 3 would be raised accordingly.

A target category extension reaching the upper mark on the vertical axis requires greater stretch than the brand depicted in Figure 3 can ever have. This point marks the upper boundary of the brand's stretch.

In Region III, the core associate of the parent category is so strongly associated with the brand that direct extensions are more constrained, and it is difficult for customers to learn new associations. The usual advice is to focus on fortifying the brand and protecting its market position.

UNDERSTANDING MASTER BRANDS

A master brand is an established brand so dominant in customers' minds that it "owns" a particular associate. Just the mention of a product category, a usage situation, a product attribute, or a customer benefit, for example, instantly brings the master brand to mind. Moreover, customers' top-of-mind awareness of the master brand effectively reduces the number of competitors' brands recalled.

Farquhar asks, "How many other brands can you name in each product category besides Arm & Hammer baking soda, Band-Aid adhesive bandages, Bacardi rum, Alka-Seltzer antacid, Jell-O gelatin, Campbell's soup, Crayola crayons, Morton salt, Lionel toy trains, Philadelphia cream cheese, and Vaseline petroleum jelly?"

According to this definition, not all leading or powerful brands are "master brands." A product might owe its market leadership to factors other than its brand associations, such as its broad distribution, low selling price, or unique product features.

Furthermore, some product categories (such as socks) may have no master brands, whereas other categories (such as airlines) may have more than one. The key test is whether the brand owns an associate with customers--that is, does cueing the associate automatically activate the brand without any conscious search of memory.

The strongly dominant associations that generate a master brand are both a blessing and a curse. Master brands do enjoy widespread customer recognition and often have a substantial share of their product markets, but they also have substantial inertia in trying to extend very far.

For more 125 years, the McIlhenny Co. has successfully marketed its master brand Tabasco pepper sauce. Although the company stretched the Tabasco brand to a Bloody Mary mix about 20 years ago, its 1982 extension into picante sauce is "merely limping along against more established brands," according to the Wall Street Journal (May 11, 1990).

FORTIFYING A MASTER BRAND

The difficulties in extending a master brand to new categories suggest an obvious strategy: stay close to home and fortify the master brand. This strategy can be accomplished in two basic ways: (1) by strengthening the brand's competencies and (2) by expanding the customer franchise.

The dominant associations that produce a master brand also reflect the "core competencies" of a company. In particular, brand competencies are those marketing activities that give a brand meaning and provide its added value to products.

Brand competencies can deteriorate through over-extension to marginal products, underinvestment in product development, or inattention to the competitive marketplace. To protect brand competencies from erosion, many brand decisions are now being made by senior managers instead of category managers and brand teams. One result is a much tighter focus on the brand's distinctive competencies.

Gatorade pioneered a new product category of isotonic beverages some 25 years ago. It continues to build around its brand competencies of "healthfulness" and "sports." Gatorade remains a tightly focused brand with very few extensions. Staying close to home is a wise strategy as competition intensifies with the possible entry of Coca-Cola's PowerAde into this category.

A second way of fortifying a master brand is to expand the customer franchise. The classic recommendations are: (1) attract new users for the brand, (2) develop new uses for the brand, or (3) encourage more usage. These suggestions are most appropriate for broadening the customer base in mature product categories with established brands.

In highly competitive markets where product life cycles are short. the customer focus shifts to enduring brand associations and leading-edge products. Newcomers will surely displace a master brand if its products no longer meet the needs and expectations of customers. In the late 1970s, Nike's innovative running shoes displaced the master brand. Adidas, in athletic footwear because of the latter's weak promotional support for its brand and its slowness in introducing advanced-design products.

Thus, fortifying the brand also means "getting out in front customers" and using technology to create markets ahead of the competition. Innovations that anticipate unmet customer needs or better satisfy existing needs pose a special opportunity for master brands.

"Simply being customer-led is not enough," according to Gary Hamel and C.K. Prahalad in the Harvard Business Review (July-August, 1991). "Go back a decade or two. How many of us were asking for microwave ovens, cellular telephones, compact disc players, home fax machines, or electronic whiteboards? Of course it is important to listen to customers, but it is hard to be a market leader if you do no more than that."

A recent illustration is Procter & Gamble's revitalization of the aging Pert brand with its technological breakthrough combining shampoo and conditioner in one product, Pert Plus.

LEVERAGING MASTER BRANDS

A master brand's core associations make direct extensions difficult to all but closely related product categories. These core associations are so strong they can interfere with customers' learning new associations to other product categories. The secret is to focus on leveraging master brands indirectly.

Our strategies for indirect extensions bypass possible interference by leveraging alternate associations for the master brand that come from brand hierarchies.

Figure 4 illustrates various elements of a brand hierarchy. (Figure 4 omitted) For example, General Motors' Chevrolet Camaro Z28 sports car represents a hierarchy consisting of a corporate brand, a family brand, an individual brand, a modifier. and a product generic. Other branded products, of course, may not have all of these elements or have them in the sequence shown.(4) The associations between elements in this brand hierarchy can be used to leverage master brands.

The brand-leveraging compass in Figure 5 illustrates four principal directions for leveraging master brands. (Figure 5 omitted) Each direction corresponds to a different strategy whereby new associations link the master brand with a category extension. Combined strategies produce intermediate directions on the brand-leveraging compass.

The north-south axis in Figure 5 depicts vertical branding strategies (super-branding and sub-branding) that add new elements to an existing brand hierarchy. The west-east axis represents horizontal branding strategies (brand bundling and brand bridging) that combine elements across different brand hierarchies.

These principal strategies have a number of variations.

VERTICAL BRANDING

SUB-BRANDING STRATEGIES

Sub-branding introduces a new element into the brand hierarchy below the level of the master brand. The traditional role of subordinate brands has been to signal refinements in the branded product.

These refinements might distinguish different quality levels (e.g., Johnnie Walker Red Label, Black Label, and Gold Label scotch whisky), different flavors (e.g., Wrigley's Spearmint, Doublemint, and Juicy Fruit chewing gum), different functions (e.g., Kodak's Kodacolor 100, 200, and 400 print film), and so on. Note that the traditional use of sub-branding is to add refinements within a single product category.

In leveraging master brands to other product categories, sub-branding modifies the meaning of the master brand. By highlighting an alternate association. the sub-brand directs attention to the intended new meaning of the master brand and thus makes it easier for customers to link the master brand with a target category extension.

Our first set of examples illustrates this strategy with brand modifiers. These descriptive words or phrases are usually not trademarks, though their role is similar to that of actual sub-brands.

Jell-O's dominant association with gelatin dessert makes it risky to leverage the brand directly to other desserts. In extending the Jell-O brand to fruit-topped cheesecake, the modifier "No Bake" highlights an alternate association-the customer benefit "convenience." This modifier tries to reposition the meaning of Jell-O from a physical product to an intangible benefit for desserts.

Contadina is a well-known brand of canned tomato paste. When the name was extended to pasta after the acquisition of Lambert's, the combination of Contadina with pasta unexpectedly activated "canned" in customers' minds, and sales were off. To move away from this undesirable association with a product attribute, the modifier "Fresh" was inserted after the Contadina name, and sales went up.(5)

Some modifiers do become trademarks because they develop secondary meanings from their unique association with a master brand. Only Uncle Ben has "Converted Rice," and only Orville Redenbacher sells "Gourmet Popping Corn." Even some "product generics" are trademarks, such as Purina Dog Chow and Bailey's Irish Cream.

A sub-brand combines with a master brand to create a "dual mark." The difference between sub-branding and other leveraging strategies that use dual trademarks is that the same company owns both marks and the subordinate brand derives its meaning from the master brand. The latter condition usually implies that the master brand and sub-brand are permanently bonded.

The master brand is the "primary mark," and its meaning is moderated by the associations cued by the sub-brand. The Du Pont Stainmaster coupling both enhances the corporate image of Du Pont and sells carpets. The sub-brand is a "secondary mark" that serves both as a modifier and as a small platform for similar products.

Binney & Smith recently introduced several sub-brands to leverage its Crayola brand beyond crayons. The Crayola Washable dual mark appears on a new line of nonstaining markers, paints, and crayons. Crayola ColorWorks is the dual mark on colored pens and pencils, and Crayola Claytime is on clay. Other products, such as chalk and scissors, appear for the first time under the Crayola brand. Thus, Crayola is moving from being an individual brand for one product line to being a family brand that means "colors, kids, and crafts."

Many subordinate brands serve in the shadow of their master brands and have little recall with customers. Occasionally a sub-brand becomes widely recognized and achieves the status of an individual brand. Dom Perignon premium champagne, for example, is better known than its master Moet & Chandon.

A fundamental purpose of a brand (or sub-brand) is to emphasize a unique point of difference that is easy for customers to remember. If the sub-brand is not sufficiently distinctive, however, its positioning can be diluted by competitors.

Spreadable fruits have become a popular gourmet food item. Which of the following sub-brands offer 100% fruit: Welch's Totally Fruit, Smucker's Simply Fruit, or Polaner All Fruit? Answer: all of the above.

Moreover, if several sub-brands are used, the resulting "multiple mark" may carry too many associations for customers to remember easily. The positioning of Kendall Company's multi-mark "Curad Kid Size Happy Strips plastic bandages with McDonaldland characters" is certainly less memorable than "BandAid Sesame Street patches" or "Mickey & Pals adhesive bandages."

Because sub-branding can modify the master brand's meaning, it is essential with each prospective extension to consider potential impacts on the entire brand portfolio. Negative interactions among different products can diminish the master brand, even though the individual contributions from each sub-branded product are positive.

The master brand Hershey's is synonymous with "chocolate"--even the syrup label says, "From Hershey. The Chocolate People." With its dominance in chocolate syrups, the company recently introduced Hershey's Strawberry Syrup in a bright pink, squeezable container. This line extension could prove successful-and the core association of Hershey's brand will be irrevocably changed. Will Hershey's mean "chocolate," or will it mean "syrup"?

Sub-branding should be part of a strategic "brand plan" that defines what the master brand means and avoids extensions that unnecessarily dilute this meaning. Excessive sub-branding can sink the master brand under the weight of its own portfolio.

Deirde Fernand and Margaret Park (as reported by Chris Macrae in World Class Brands) contend that Laura Ashley was the "Ralph Lauren of Britain, selling the epitome of Englishness and traditional values. The look was country cottage...." But Fernand and Park said the company blew its image in the late 1980s by extending to expensive clothing, such as taffeta ballgowns and jodhpurs, as well as an array of "wallpaper, soap, perfume, curtains, paint, iron bedsteads, crystal, copper saucepans, ceramic tiles. china, bedroom screens, chaise lounges, scalloped blinds, tapestry cushions, mirrors-and the perennial hats."

The key is to focus on brand competencies--even a big umbrella can cover only a few things. Sometimes it is better in the long run to invest in additional brand umbrellas.

SUPER-BRANDING STRATEGIES

Master brands can be leveraged with another vertical branding strategy. Super-branding adds new elements to an existing brand hierarchy above the level of the master brand. The traditional role of this strategy is to add a modifier or super-brand to reflect some product improvement (e.g., Ultra Dry Pampers, Extra Strength Tylenol, or PowerPro Dustbuster Plus).

With sufficient marketing effort, companies may be able to upgrade the meaning of a master brand by using super-brands directly, as in the case of Holiday Inn's Crowne Plaza hotels, Sear's Craftsman tools, or Eveready's Energizer batteries.

But "extending a popular brand upmarket is rarely a profitable maneuver," says Macrae. The risk of failure in upgrading a master brand is even greater for direct extensions to other product categories.

Levi's is a master brand in the jeans category. Its 1981 move into men's wool-blend suits with the Levi's Tailored Classics super-brand has not fared well. In contrast. Levi's introduction of the Dockers brand on casual slacks in 1986 has met with great success. Note that Dockers is a super-brand linked indirectly to the Levi's master brand.

Indirect extensions are less risky than direct extensions when moving a master brand upmarket. Our recommendation is to veil the master brand from the customer's view. The new super-brand will then draw attention to itself and the merits of the product. Later unveiling of the super-brand's link to the "hidden master brand" may provide familiar reassurance to the customer. Premature connection with the master brand can generate skepticism and indecision.

RCA ColorTrak was the top-of-the-line color television for years. But competitors entered the market with improved products, and it was difficult for the RCA brand to shed its dominant associations with older technologies. ProScan is a 1991 entry into the advanced-design television market. Only by looking carefully or by asking a salesperson will you discover that ProScan is "an RCA Entertainment Product."

Similar "hidden brand" strategies are used by automobile companies such as Saturn (General Motors), Acura (Honda), and Lexus (Toyota).

Coleman is a master brand for camping equipment. Its initial move upmarket to backpacking equipment was not very successful. When directly extended to backpack stoves, for example, the Colman brand evoked secondary associations of "heavy and cumbersome."

With redesigned products, the Coleman brand hidden from view, and the new Peak 1 super-brand, the company finally captured this profitable segment. A few years later the veil was lifted--the Coleman brand appeared together with Peak 1. Now the sub-brand Feather has been added to the Coleman Peak 1's dual mark on its more advanced compact stoves.

Vertical branding is driven mainly by competition. In product categories with entrenched competitors, new entrants often seek a foothold by targeting an available niche in the market. Once an emerging brand becomes established in the niche, super-branding becomes a credible way to move its new products upmarket. This vertical marketing strategy has been effective for some companies in automobiles , cameras, office copiers , consumer electronics, and other products.

Brands that are "old masters" may also lose business to emerging brands or to a declining market. Only if the old master can revitalize its brand with a substantially improved product does super-branding make sense. Yamaha recently developed an acoustical control system to retrofit traditional pianos, so customers could record and play high-quality music at home. Yamaha introduced this breakthrough under the super-brand Disklavier.

Another variation of super-branding is to brand an innovation that adds value to the product line. For example. Sony has the "Trinitron" color tube for television sets, Oreo has "Double Stuff" extra filling for cookies, AT&T has "Clarity Plus" sound for cordless telephones, and Ziploc has the "Gripper" zipper for plastic storage bags.

HORIZONTAL BRANDING

BRAND-BUNDLING STRATEGIES

Instead of branding key part of a product with your own super-brands, it may be quicker and more effective to use someone else's established brand with your product. Brand bundling is a strategy for fortifying a master brand through associations with other's brands.

Brand bundling or "cross-branding" is often an appropriate strategy if the company does not have the resources or inclination to build a product value already strongly associated with an existing master brand.

The positive ruboff from bundling different brands can provide mutual advantages. The key is to recognize the limits of a master brand's competencies and be careful about the secondary associations created by other brands.

Branded ingredients can attract attention, add value to a host product, and enhance the primary brand. Branded ingredients (e.g.. Dolby, Intel, or NutraSweet) usually signal a higher quality product to customers.

The catalog description for L.L. Bean's winter sports gloves boasts of a "breathable Gore-Tex waterproof liner. Fully insulated with Hollofil II. Back of glove is layered with Thinsulate for added warmth....Outer shell is Antron nylon with adjustable Velcro closures....$45.00."

But new product risks are not shared equally by all participating brands. When their licensed brand names, logos, and trade dress are prominently displayed on cookie packages. venerable branded ingredients such as Heath English toffee, Skippy peanut butter, and Land O'Lakes butter surely have more at stake than the Delicious brand.

Brand images can also become blurred, for example, when Sweet 'N Low licenses its brand name for frozen dairy bars that highlight NutraSweet as the artificial sweetener.

Product complementarity is another reason for brand bundling. Promotions encourage customers to form their own "product" using branded ingredients that complement each other.

Pre-existing combinations such as Seagram's 7 and 7-Up can be reinforced in customers' minds, or new combinations and uses can be suggested, such as Pace Picante Sauce and Velveeta Cheese for making nachos. Tie-in promotions are effective ways of fostering product usage. Special discounts and options may apply if you charge a Budget car rental on your American Express card.

Cooperative branding allows customers to obtain the benefits of multiple brands with a single product purchase or service transaction. For example, customers using a Citibank AAdvantage Visa card simultaneously obtain the convenience of a charge card, free mileage credit on American Airlines, and the trustworthy service of Citibank.

Cooperative branding is also being tested in alliances between restaurant chains and packaged-food brands. Friendly's restaurants feature several brands on the breakfast menu. such as Aunt Jemima pancakes, Thomas' English muffins. and others. Last year Burger King restaurants tested Heinz's Weight Watchers line in Miami and Domino's pizza in Columbia, S.C., according to Advertising Age (July 22, 1991).

Sometimes multiple benefits are already present in the product, but the brand partnership is not widely known by customers. The Sear's Michelin Roadhandler multimark finally tells customers which company is supplying the store's top-of-the-line radial tires.(6)

BRAND-BRIDGING STRATEGIES

Because the associations created by a sub-brand are usually permanent. many large companies have explicit policies restricting the use of master brands in dual marks. Such policies arc particularly important when the master brand is the company's name, such as Du Pont, General Electric, 3M, or Nestle.

Brand-bridging strategies use the master brand to endorse a new brand as the company attempts to move to a more distant product category. While the master brand is not initially hidden from customers' view, as in super-branding, it does play a secondary role in the dual mark. Once the "endorsed brand" is sufficiently strong, however, the master brand usually fades from view and may even disappear.

The Johnson's brand of foot soap has been around for more than 150 years. It was popular some 30 or more years ago, when it bridged into a new category of deodorizing foot insoles by endorsing a new brand called Odor Eaters. As this new brand became more widely recognized, the connection with the Johnson's master brand was no longer needed. The Odor Eater's brand now appears on athletic socks, foot powders, and other products, while the Johnson's brand is still used on foot soap.

One test of successful brand bridging is whether a consumer can recognize the endorsed brand without knowing the master brand. How many of the following brands pass this test: (Lipton's) Cup-A-Soup, (Hostess) Twinkies, (Vaseline) Intensive Care, Fairfield Inn (by Marriott), (Colgate) Peak, ProCare (BP), (Arm & Hammer) Dental Care, and (Vaseline Intensive Care) BlockOut? Endorsed brands require adequate marketing support and cannot ride on the coattails of their sponsoring master brands to be effective.

The temporary use of the master brand thus provides a "stepping stone" for the company to develop new brand competencies. Although a direct extension to a target category would avoid the expense of building a new brand, such a strategy could put the master brand at unnecessary risk.

The master brand can only stretch so far without sacrificing its core associations. The bridging strategy reduces both the risk to the master brand the support needed to create a new brand platform.

The core associations of Neutrogena soap make it difficult to extend very far. The endorsed brand T/Gel opens up another product category--therapeutic shampoos--that differs from the current positioning of the master brand. Without the initial sponsorship of Neutrogena, however, T/Gel is an unknown brand that might not generate much trial with customers. The Neutrogena brand plays a secondary role in supporting T/Gel and will probably disappear as the new brand becomes well known. In this way, Neutrogena can return to its brand heritage without much change.

Brand bridging can fail for several reasons. One mistake is trying to connect categories that are simply too far apart in customers' minds.

Cadbury's Smash instant potato product is a giant step away from its chocolates. The promise of Woolite's Tough Stain rug cleaner conflicts with the brand's image for washing delicate clothes. Moreover, SOS Glassworks glass cleaner seems to evoke negative associations from its scouring pads.

Another common mistake is to confuse bridging and sub-branding strategies. Endorsed brands should be the primary mark in bridging away from the master brand. The opposite holds in using a sub-brand: the master brand is the primary mark and the sub-brand is secondary. The main purpose in bridging to another category is to create over time a free-standing brand.

Chiquita tried a few years ago to bridge from bananas into fruit drinks with Chiquita Orange Banana drink. Unfortunately, "Orange Banana" is a secondary modifier, not a primary brand; it dilutes the master brand and does not generate a new brand position in fruit drinks.

Chiquita recently changed to bold, colorful containers for its new line of "exotic juices." The Chiquita brand mark subtly endorses such new brand names as Calypso Breeze, Caribbean Splash, Tropical Squeeze, Island Orchard, Raspberry Passion, and Hawaiian Sunrise. Depending on consumer acceptance of these flavors, some brand names may be dropped. The survivors will indirectly leverage Chiquita in a promising new category.

Some endorsed brands are purposely underdeveloped, even though they might give the outward appearance of being failures. If a master brand is so strongly connected with an associate that its trademark status is at risk of becoming generic or misappropriated, then legal protection for the brand can come from extending or bridging to remote categories.

Mercedes Benz has extended into credit cards, and Winnebago has endorsed camping equipment. Cadillac recently established three boutique sports-wear collections: the Cadillac Golf, Stars & Stripes, and Indy Pace Car collections. "A division spokesman notes it was done to protect Cadillac's image and combat the unauthorized use of Cadillac's name and symbol on shoddy merchandise," according to Autoweek (Jan. 27, 1992).

Endorsed brands may be underdeveloped for a different reason. In some cases, their purpose is to rescue a master brand in danger of sinking with an obsolete product. As new technologies emerge, some old master brands must be repositioned or face extinction.

Although this purpose is analogous to moving upmarket with a superbrand, the key differences with the positioning strategy are (1) the weakened master brand is conspicuous as a secondary mark, and (2) the endorsed brand eventually switches to a secondary mark as the master brand is successfully repositioned and regains its health.

The Rolodex brand has long been associated with an index-card file for keeping addresses and telephone numbers. Recently, the company has sponsored a wave of new brands that are repositioning the aging one: "The Business Card by Rolodex" is an address book in a compact minicomputer, "Electrodex by Rolodex" is a telephone-dialing minicomputer, and "The FAX-Sender by Rolodex" has 128K of memory, an autodialer for telephones, and fax transmittal capabilities. Now there is both an "old Rolodex" and a "new Rolodex" brand image.

THE NEW FRONTIERS OF BRANDING

The structure of brand management is changing as more companies recognize the value of their brand assets. The strategies for leveraging master brands often require a senior-management perspective and a long-term orientation.

As costs escalate for developing, supporting, and defending trademarks around the world, top management is focusing more on master brands. Many organizations have formed corporatewide "brand committees" to sustain their brand competencies.

Such committees are composed largely of managers whose charge is to coordinate branding practices by (1) setting policies to consistently reinforce the meaning and image of key brands (2) establishing corporate guidelines for the u se of present brands, the development of new brands, and the disposition of abandoned brands; and (3) reviewing brand impact assessments of proposed brand extensions, licensing agreements, and sponsored activities.

In addition, division-level "brand expertise centers" are emerging in many companies to provide research assistance and collective experience to brand teams on managing their brand resources.

As the branding responsibilities move up the organization, emphasis is shifting to managing the customer franchises. This new frontier of branding should provide more ways of adding value to products and increased attention on building and leveraging master brands.

AUTHORS' NOTE

The authors acknowledge support for their research from the BEARS Group, the Marketing Science Institute, the Center for Product Research, and the Carnegie Bosch Institute. The authors also thank Allan L. Baldinger, Battle M. Brown, Andrea P. Farquhar, Frank Kardes, Joel Rubinson, Edward M. Tauber, and the many marketing managers for their discussions and comments on this research. A previous version of this article was presented at the AMA's Attitude Research Conference and at the Advertising Research Foundation's Advertising and Promotion Workshop in 1992.

ENDNOTES

1. Concrete associations are particularly strong when a brand pioneers a new product category, such as Kleenex tissues, Frisbee flying discs, or Rollerblade in-line skates, or when the brand becomes closely identified with a product or attribute over time (e.g., Levi's jeans or Clorox bleach). The brand itself may even reinforce such concrete associations with names such as Liquid Paper, Cheez Whiz, or Shredded Wheat.

2. Note that the same procedure applies if other brand associates are used instead of a product category. For simplicity, we illustrate the latency method for the category-to-brand association.

3. A brand's ability to stretch to a given target category is a necessary but not sufficient reason for making an extension. A prospective brand extension might not prove profitable because the customer segment is too small, the channels are saturated, etc.

4. Other elements--such as logos, country of origin, trade dress, retailer tie-ins, certification marks, additional modifiers, etc.--may be added to the basic hierarchy illustrated in Figure 4.

5. Edward M. Tauber provided this example.

6. Bridgestone recently replaced Michelin, however, in this multimark.

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

Peter H. Farquhar is Professor of Management at the Peter F. Drucker Graduate Management Center and Director of the Product Strategy Institute, Claremont Graduate School, Claremont, Calif.

Paul M. Herr is Associate Professor of Marketing, Graduate School of Business Administrations, the University of Colorado at Boulder.

Julia Y. Han is a member of the Consulting Group, Price Waterhouse & Co., Cleveland, Ohio.

Yuji Ijiri is the Robert M. Trueblood University Professor of Accounting and Economics, Graduate School of Industrial Administration, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh.

ADDITIONAL READING

Aaker, David A. (1991), Managing Brand Equity. New York: The Free Press.

--and Kevin Lane Keller (1990), "Consumer Evaluations of Brand Extensions," Journal of Marketing, 54 (January), 27-41.

Danziger, Robin L. (1992), "Cross Branding With Branded Ingredients: The New Frontier," in Researching the Power of Brands. New York: Advertising Research Foundation, 219-237.

Farquhar, Peter H. (1989), "Managing Brand Equity," Marketing Research: A Magazine of Management & Applications, 1 (September), 24-33.

--, Julia Y. Han, and Yuji Ijiri (1992a) "Brands on the Balance Sheet, 1 (Spring), 24-31.

--, --, and -- (1992b) "Measuring Brand Momentum," Marketing Management, 1 (Spring), 24-31.

--and Paul M. Herr (1992), "The Dual Structure of Brand Associations," in Building Strong Brands, David A. Aaker and Alexander L. Biel, eds. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates (in press).

--, --, and Russell H. Fazio (1990), "A Relational Model for Category Extensions of Brands," in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 17, Marvin E. Goldberg, Gerald Gorn, and Richard W. Pollay, eds. Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 856-60.

Fazio, Russell H. (1987), "Category-Brand Associations and Their Activation From Memory," unpublished report, Ogilvy Center for Research and Development.

--(1990), "A Practical Guide to the Use of Response Latency in Social Psychological Research," in Review of Personality and Social Psychology. Vol. 11, Clyde Hendrick and Margaret S. Clark, eds. Newbury Park, Calif: Sage Publications, 74-97.

Hamel, Gary and C.K. Prahalad (1991), "Corporate Imagination and Expeditionary Marketing," Harvard Business Review, 69 (July-August), 81-92.

Herr, Paul M., Peter H. Farquhar, and Russell H. Fazio (1990), "Using Dominance Measures to Evaluate Brand Extensions," working paper, Claremont Graduate School (revised July 1992).

--and Russell H. Fazio (1991), "The Attitude-to-Behavior Process: Implications for Consumer Behavior," in Psychology and Advertising: Ad Exposure, Memory, and Choice, A.A. Mitchell, ed. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates (in press).

Interbrand Group (1990), Brands: International Review. London: Mercury.

John, Deborah Roedder and Barbara Loken (1990), "Diluting Brand Equity: The Negative Impact of Brand Extensions," working paper, University of Minnesota.

Keller, Kevin Lane and David A. Aaker (1992), "The Effects of Sequential Introduction of Brand Extensions," Journal of Marketing Research, 29 (February), 35-50.

King, Stephen (1991), "Brand-Building in the 1990's," Journal of Marketing Management, 7 (Spring), 3-13.

Kotler, Philip (1991), Marketing Management: Analysis, Planning, Implementation, and Control, 7th ed. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall Inc.

Loden, D. John (1992), Megabrands: How To Build Them, How To Beat Them. Homewood, Ill.: Richard D. Irwin Inc.

Macrae, Chris (1991), World Class Brands, Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co.

McKenna, Regis (1985), The Regis Touch. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co.

Murphy, John (1990), Brand Strategy. Cambridge, England: Fitzwilliam Publishing.

Ogilvy, David (1983), Ogilvy on Advertising. New York: Crown Publishing.

Ohmae, Kenichi (1988), "Getting Back to Strategy," Harvard Business Review, 66 (November-December), 149-56.

Prahalad, C.K. and Gary Hamel (1990), "The Core Competence of the Corporation," Harvard Business Review, 68 (May-June), 79-91.

Reeves, Rosser (1960), Reality in Advertising. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

Ries, Al and Jack Trout (1986), Positioning: The Battle for Your Mind, 1st ed., rev. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co.

--and--(1989), Bottom-Up Marketing. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co.

Tanaka, Hiroshi (1991), "Branding in Japan," Admap, Issue 312 (November,) 12-17.

Tauber, Edward M. (1981), "Brand Franchise Extension: New Product Benefits From Existing Brand Names," Business Horizons, 24 (2), 36-41.

--(1988), "Brand Leverage: Strategy for Growth in a Cost-Control World," Journal of Advertising Research, 28, (August-September), 26-30.