Understanding Brand Image

Brand Image as a phenomenon, has been reviewed by several authors over the years; these reviews have several descriptors, qualifiers and meanings. In the context of this study, efforts will be geared towards addressing brand image within the service sector, linking it with the HE sector and more precisely with the JHE sector. This study will review several literatures within these perspectives as shown in Table 2.1.

Table 2. 1: Provides the Literature on the Concept of Brand Image

Authors and years

Definition of Brand Image

Schmitt (2012) A collection of ideas, feelings and attitudes that consumers have about brands

Keller (2008) Brand image is consumer’s perception about the brand, as reflected by brand association held in the consumer memory.

Aaker (1996) How customers and others perceive the brand.

Kapferer (2008) The image refers to the manner in which [a brand's] public decodes all the signals emitted by the brand through its products, services and communication programme.

Biel (1993) That cluster of attributes and associations that consumers connect to the brand name.

Dobni &Zinkhan (1990)

Brand image is a perceptual phenomenon formed through consumer interpretation and is largely a subjective.

Lee (1990) A symbolic meaning commonly shared by the majority of consumers Park et al. (1986) Brand image is the understanding consumers derive from the total set

of brand-related activities engaged in by the firm. Newman (1985)

Herzog (1963)

Perception of consumers about the total attributes of a product. General impression and perception of consumers about a brand Noth (1988)

Levy (1973) Sommers (1964)

The symbolic meaning engraved in the service or product. Product or service purchases’ symbolic implication

18

characteristics of a product

Sirgy (1985) Brand image resembles the personality of human beings Levy (1973)

Gardner & Levy (1955)

Overall product or brand impression that the consumer holds including feeling, recognition and attitude towards brand.

Consumers’ attitudes, emotions and opinions toward a brand form the brand image, which illustrate the brands’ psychological or cognitive components.

Source: Adapted from Zhang, (2015, p.60).

Image is defined as an abstract entity representing something concrete (Ditcher, 1985).

Akin to the above definitions, the shorter Oxford English dictionary defined image as “an artificial depiction or imitation of the external form of any type of object” (Boorstin, 1961; p. 201). The entire notion is believed to be a replacement or replication of reality. Later, studies suggested that images are defined as ‘archetypes’ and are a representation of a concrete article or unconscious demonstration of original ideals which have emerged over the course of societies and history (Jung, 1969). O’Loughlin & Szmigin, (2005) cited Padgett & Allen, (1997) stated that brand image is also referred to as the characteristics and functional ramifications of, as well as the symbolic implications associated with, a particular service.

Holistic approaches to creating brand image borrow from Gestalt psychology. Gestalt psychologists consider perception as an active process; when people are given partial information about things, they “fill in the gaps” (Fournier et al., 2008; Cho & Fiore, 2015). This suggests that consumers absorb information from a variety of sources and, as a result, create their own overall picture. Dowling (1988) points out that humans rely less on specific facts than on total impressions, thus a brand image “describes not individual traits or qualities but the total impression an entity makes on the mind of others” (Dichter, 1985, p. 77). It has powerful influences on the way people perceive things and it should be a crucial concept in shaping our marketing, advertising, and communications efforts. Therefore, more attention must be paid to the overall impression, the "harmony," (i.e. the functional or emotional appeal) of an advertising or marketing campaign, rather than to its specific claims.

Key authors suggest that brand image benefits comprise of three classes: symbolic; experiential; and functional benefits (Park et al.1986; Keller, 1993; Knox & Freeman, 2006). The relevance of functional benefits was found to be associated with the

19

intrinsic benefits of the consumption of products or services and typically tally with the attributes related to product (Sondoh et al., 2007). For instance, experiential benefits are described as what the use of a product or service feels like and generally corresponds to the attributes relevant to the product. On the other hand, symbolic advantages were found in synchronicity with the primary needs to gain society’s consent or personal expression, outer-centred self-esteem and are essentially matched with non-product related characteristics.

Functional and emotional approaches of brand image can be divided into two groups: rational and symbolic (Bhat & Reddy, 1998). Rational approaches portray consumers as trying to obtain the greatest utility in choosing or consuming goods and services (Schiffman & Kanuk, 1997). In doing this, customers may go through a variety of rational process-gathering information, judging the importance of each available attribute, identifying the optimal brand, and so forth (Fournier et al., 2008; Khanna et al., 2014). It is plausible that rational approaches are appropriate only, if at all, for goods and services that consumers value for their utilitarian benefits, and that they have little place for goods and services that satisfy emotional needs (Bhat & Reddy, 1998; Michel & Rieunier 2012).

Consumption based on the emotional and symbolic benefits of a product, as perceived by the individual, is termed emotional (Schiffman & Kanuk, 1997) or hedonic consumption (Fournier et al., 2008; Chapleo, 2011). Such consumption is not motivated by the intrinsic properties of the product or services, rather by what such products or services suggest. This is supported by a number of conceptual and empirical studies (Johar & Sirgy, 1991; Fournier et al., 2008; Chapleo, 2011). For example, people reading advertisements only after they have purchased the product bear witness to this. That people sometimes show irrational behaviour, however, does not suggest they are totally, or always, irrational. Indeed, symbolic and rational elements together can create a gestalt (Schiffman & Kanuk, 1997). Such “combined images” may also help consumers decide between competing brands. Moreover, although some brands are seen as either mostly functional or mostly emotional, Bhat & Reddy (1998) show that some strong brands, such as Harvard or MIT, can have both functional and symbolic attributes. Indeed, most brand images have both rational

20

and symbolic components (de Chernatony & Cottam, 2006; Brečić et al., 2013; Li et al., 2014).