See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/247518663

Measuring brand strategy: Can brand equity and brand score be a tool to
measure the effectiveness of strategy?

Article  in  Journal of Strategic Marketing · December 2009

DOI: 10.1080/09652540903371737

CITATIONS READS

18 6,650

1 author:

Rajesh Srivastava
Sydenham Institute of Management Studies and Research and Entrepreneurship Education
71 PUBLICATIONS   988 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Impact of Psychic Distance on Global Brand Acceptance View project

impact of social marketing in corona View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Rajesh Srivastava on 06 April 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Innovative Marketing, Volume 5, Issue 1, 2009

Rajesh Kumar Srivastava (India)

Measuring brand strategy – can brand equity and brand score be a

tool to measure the effectiveness of strategy?
Abstract
Measuring the effectiveness of brand strategy is a difficult task. This paper examines the approach to measurement of
strategy through application of brand score and brand equity as a tool.
The study was done in two phases. In the first phase brand score was calculated by 150 post graduate management stu-
dents. The second phase of the study was to calculate brand equity using the same respondents for the same brands. Top
three brands in food, cold drink and telecommunication service provider segments were selected for the study.
Higher McDonald’s brand score also had higher brand equity index when compared to Domino and Pizza hut. It means
strategy is working quite well as reflected in two measurable tools. Individual component study for exploring the brand
score and brand equity index can give insight into impact of strategy on these two measurable approaches of strategy. It
can also helps in reducing wastage of promotional expenditure. This could give a scope of further research due to less
work done in this area.
Keywords: brand score, brand equity, brand image.

Introduction1 age of a brand in customer mind in a measured ap-

proach. This could be affected by brand image as
In a growing economy, the importance of assets like
perceived by consumer. Image is important as
brands is increasing. Brand represents very impor-
brands are competing in the international arena and
tant asset (Günter and Kriegbhaum-Kling, 2001).
therefore it becomes essential to maintain core es-
Therefore, understanding of brand is an important
sence of the brand across boundaries (Pappu et al.,
step in building the brand and equity. Though brand
2006). Stern et al. (2001) suggest that image is gen-
equity can be affected by many factors, its valuation
erally conceived as the outcome of a transaction
on yearly basis may be difficult and time consuming.
whereby signals emitted by marketing unit are re-
According to Andrew (2003), there is greater en- ceived by a receptor and organized into mental per-
hancement of gap between perception and reality ception. Therefore, perception that consumers hold
caused due to promotion of a brand. The higher about brands referred to collectively as the brand
the share of consumer mind is, the larger brand image is an important part of equity (Driesener and
equity and market share can be. However, how Romaniuk, 2006). There are many different methods
mind share and brand equity can be transferred to of measuring brand image but scaling technique
tangible market share? determines an association between a brand and
attribute but also the strength of that association. It
Brand strategy could affect the same. Brand man-
is effective in capturing brand attribute linkage.
agement strategy should be used for initiating and
However, a brand score technique not only covers
maintaining a continuing dialog with the customers
the perception but also takes core of perceived bene-
and for enhancing relationships (Vargo and Lusch,
fit, relevance of the brand, pricing perception and
2004). There is ample evidence in the literature that
service expectation etc. Therefore, brand score
suggests that various marketing communications
could be the key driver to develop brand strategy
influence brand equity, including advertising (Aaker
and develop better brand equity.
and Biel, 1993; Cobb-Walgren, Ruble and Dontha,
1995), sponsorship (Cornwell, Roy and Steinard, Hence, challenges that marketers face are to opti-
2001), and various alternative communication op- mize the brand score and convert it into tangible
tions (Joachimsthaler and Aaker, 1997). market share. Branding score can help in formulat-
Brand score could be one of the tools to measure the ing and determining the impact of strategy. It can
effectiveness of brand strategy (Srivastava, 2005). also be linked to brand equity as higher brand score
Brand score is the score provided by consumers on can enhance brand equity (Srivastava, 2004).
different parameters. It incorporates ranking accord- 1. Problems and issues
ing to customer, brand at delivering the benefit cus-
tomers truly desire, brand staying relevant to cus- The challenges that marketers could face are to op-
tomer, perceived pricing in customer mind, brand timize the brand score and to find the key drivers of
portfolio and customer service expectation calculat- brand score, profiling it accordingly and developing
ing the brand score. Brand score can reflect the im- the core strategies. Pre-purchase, purchase and post-
purchase experience can play an important point in
© Rajesh Kumar Srivastava, 2009. building up the brand score and image. Number of
2626
 Innovative Marketing, Volume 5, Issue 1, 2009

studies has been conducted on brand image (Shiva, perception of the brand (Shiva, 2005). Positive ex-
2004). Measurement of image can be perceptive but perience with the brand creates positive word of
it is not a comprehensive approach. Similarly, brand mouth. Generating a positive word of mouth (WOM)
equity can be used to measure the effectiveness of among consumers has become a very important tool
strategy but its usage is occasional. Therefore, brand for marketers (Browman and Narayandas, 2001).
score could be a tool to measure the impact of brand This is possible if brand has a positive image. It is
strategy on a brand. Will the brand score go up with well-known that word of mouth (WOM) plays a sig-
higher brand equity? How a brand strategy can affect nificant role in influencing perception (Plunmer,
brand score? How brand score and brand image are 2007). Same time, impact of consumer image of a
related to each other? Therefore, we assume that im- brand is such that national brands are perceived to be
superior to international private labels (Sung et al.,
pact of brand strategy is an independent variable, and
2007). Asian Paints is a national brand in India and
brand score is a dependent variable. Consumer’s
has overtaken in sales and market share when com-
images of a brand and brand equity are also depend-
pared to international brands like Godless-Nerolac,
ent variables for the study. This paper tries to study Berger Paint in India. Similarly, GSK, Pfizer, Merck
how brand score and brand equity can be used to are far behind in pharmaceutical segment compared
measure the effectiveness of brand strategy. to CIPLA in India. Consumers in India have positive
1.1. Literature review. It was divided into three seg- image for these brands but on relative measures In-
ments based on variables. It can be strategy as an inde- dian brand is on higher side. Brand score could be a
pendent variable with brand equity and brand score as tool to compare and assess the image on a compara-
dependent variables were considered for the study. tive scale. It is possible that brand score may be
higher if the image of a brand is higher.
2. Impact of brand strategy on a brand
A study of brand score could give an insight on brand
Much attention over the years has been payed to the image and suggest the ways to improve image. Image
development of effective brand strategies for acquir- can influence brand score. Comparative study of
ing and retaining customers (Knox and Freeman, brand score can help in studying the brand image in
2006). Customer retention and acquisition will de-
the market and can play a role in measuring the effec-
pend on how brand is projected through marketing
tiveness of strategy. Brand image and strategy can
strategies as consumers tend to engage for partner-
ship with a brand (Marianne, 2007). Winning strategy have a direct relationship to brand score.
will lead to better understanding of brand and devel- 4. Brand equity and its interface with brand score
oping a robust personality. At the same time, in order
to enhance brand benefit compared to others, a com- Keller (1993) defines brand equity as the differential
parative advertising according to Jain et al. (2004) effect of brand knowledge on consumer response to
has led to lower brand attitude score. No doubt, a the marketing of the brand and suggests brand
right strategy has helped to make a successful brand awareness and brand image as the constructs related
due to building up the positive brand image. Strategy to customer based brand equity. In contemporary
forms the basis for the firms and, hence, contributes marketing, brand equity has emerged as key strategy
to the firm’s brand equity. The brand strategist can asset that needs to be monitored and nurtured for
ensure a more synergistic and effective communica- maximum long-term performance (Srivastava,
tion (Sreedhar et al., 2005). Therefore, companies 2008). Customer equity and brand equity are the
that manage a successful brand can enjoy higher most important topics to academic researcher
sales, repeat purchase and help to meet consumer (Leone et al., 2006). Brand equity as a central busi-
expectation (Gibson, 2003). A good strategy not only ness concept for organization has recently emerged.
helps in building brand equity and image but also Brand score and brand equity can be interdependent
helps in improving brand score – the barometer for as higher brand equity means brand score could be
measuring effectiveness of any strategy. on the higher side. Brand score could be easier to
calculate and for linking strategy and brand equity.
3. Impact of consumer image on brand In the earlier study (Srivastava, 2004) brand equity
measurable as brand score for Lux was higher and brand score on over all per-
formance compared to others soaps was on also
Brand image is created due to total experience of a
higher side. Brand equity should correlate with the
customer. It is essential that a brand must make
brand score. Brand score technique could be one of
meaningful connection with its customer (Display
the alternatives to measure the strategy impact on
and Design l, Dec., 2007). However, only 8% cus-
the perception and can be correlated with brand equity.
tomers rated their most recent experience as supe-
rior and therefore, one must understand brand image Share of equity provides a customer based under-
(Marianne, 2007). Brand image relates to consumer’s standing of brands position in customer mind

27
Innovative Marketing, Volume 5, Issue 1, 2009

(Srivastava, 2008). Therefore, interface with brand Brand score

score could be one of the alternatives for assessing
strategy on brand equity.
5. Construction of the concept and research
proposition
Brand
The paper thus would illustrate how brand score can strategy
be the mirror image of the implementable brand strat-
Brand image Brand equity
egy. The flow of the concept for this research could be:
On Target Fig. The linkage between brand score, image and equity

Brand
A proper scoring can help in measuring the effec-
Brand strategy Consumer
tiveness of strategy, finding out the image of the
brand as higher image could enhance brand score.
Similarly higher brand equity could mean higher
brand score. There should be strong correlation be-
Implementation of Measured as Consumer tween strategy, image and equity which can be as-
marketing strategy brand score image based on sessed by brand score. The present study tries to
experience
probe into this hypothesis.
6. Objectives
The objective of the study, therefore, is to investi-
Strong brand
image gate and find out:
Higher brand score
i whether impact of strategy on brand image and
equity can be measured by brand score;
Higher brand i how brand score can be correlated to brand equity;
equity
i whether successful strategy implementation
mean higher brand score?
Fig. 1. The flow of the brand score and brand strategy concepts
Right blend of brand score could serve as the central
Thus, this paper will try to correlate the independent core in developing brand strategy in the right direction.
factor – brand strategy with three dependent factors
like brand score, brand image in consumer mind and 7. Research methodology
brand equity. The focus area will be brand score and Brand score exercise was performed to evaluate the
brand equity as image developed in the consumer performance of brands in different categories.
mind could influence the brand score and equity. Brand measurement exercise can give insight also
on brand weakness compared to competitive brand.
6. Hypotheses It was a perception metrics wherein factors like
Business that intend to reap the benefits of using salient brand relevance, perceived quality, consis-
brand as a driver of business success needs to tent brand image, credibility and brand support and
begin the process by identifying and managing in development were measured based on earlier study
a more systematic and structured way. The asso- (Srivastava, 2004). A set of six questions compris-
ciation that contributes to brand score, image, and ing various parameters of a brand was used to col-
lect the primary data. The study was based on two
equity could affect business financially. There-
phases. In the first phase brand score was calculated.
fore, right strategy implementation could enhance
In the second phase non-financial brand equity in-
brand image and equity. The impact of strategy
dex was calculated based on RKS model
could be directly measured by brand scores. (Srivastava, 2004) for the same brand.
Therefore, our hypotheses are:
7. Sample size
H1: Brand score is the key driver to brand strategy
assessment and improvement. Higher brand score A set of five questions comprising parameters based
means higher brand equity. on earlier study of Srivastava (2004) like rank,
H2: Strategy could influence brand score and brand excelling in delivering benefits brand stays
relevant, consumer perception of value and brand
brand equity.
portfolio and service expectation was selected while
Brand scores – the key driving area for measure- framing questionnaire. Each respondent related each
ment – are linked to image and strategy. parameter for a particular brand on a 0-5 scale. Thus,

2828
 Innovative Marketing, Volume 5, Issue 1, 2009

maximum possible score for a brand was 5 x 6 = 30. It could be also due to right implementation of the
Top three brands in food, cold drinks and telecom- strategy. Marketing communication may provide the
munication service provider (TSP) segments were means for developing strong, customer based brand
selected. Their average mean data were taken for equity (Keller, 2003). Brand score and brand equity
analysis (n = 150). This was the phase I study. It index in the current study are given in Table 2.
was administered to 150 post graduate management
Table 2. Brand score and brand equity index in 3
students of SIMSR Top Management Institute, Uni-
segments
versity of Mumbai. Their profile is given in Table 1.
Brand
Table 1. Profile of respondents Brand
equity
Brand Segment score Rank
index
Age (yrs) Without work exp. With work exp. Total (N=150)
(N=150)
21-25 112 15 127 McDonald’s Food 4.5 29 1
>25 - 23 23 Domino Food 4.2 27 2
Total 112 38 150 Pizza Hut Food 3.8 23 3
Coca-Cola Soft drink 4.6 30 1
This was followed by the second phase of the study.
Pepsi Soft drink 4.0 28 2
Phase II. The same respondents were taught on cal-
Telecom. service
culating non-financial brand equity index using Reliance
provider
4.0 27 1
RKS Model (Srivastava, 2004) in the second phase Telecom. service
Airtel 3.8 25 2
of the study. The following parameters were used to provider
measure brand equity: product offers something Hutch (Vodafone)
Telecom. service
3.4 22 3
more to consumer, product will improve or change provider
the habits like usage or buying pattern, product of- Source: Pearson’s test = -0.15020802.
fers an advantage over existing competitive prod-
ucts, perceived benefits score over the price, product A comparative study of two competitive products
matches with current requirement of consumer can definitely give an idea on impact of strategy
which is not fully met, product profile can be com- on brand score and brand equity index. Individual
municated in media effectively and there is no con- point analysis under each phase can give insight
cept selling for products. Each parameter was evalu- into customer rating, and weakness of individual
ated on a scale of 0-5. The maximum possible brand brand can be identified as for taking further ac-
equity index can be 7 x 5 = 35. Top three brands in tion. A brand, which should give benefits to con-
three segments which were studied in phase I partici- sumer he truly desires, is a part of the study
pated in the second phase of the study too. The re- linked to brand score. A clear implementable
spondents of phase I participated in phase II of the strategy could lead to better brand score and eq-
study. Average mean data were taken for analysis. uity index. Thus, brand strategy could be meas-
ured through brand score and equity calculation.
8. Results and discussions These data give the effect of brand strategy on the
In the earlier study by Srivastava (2004), in case of dependable variables like brand score and brand
television and pharma products categories, those equity. Study can give weakness of the brand
products which scored highly on brand score per- based on other parameters while calculating the
formance also scored high on brand equity index. It brand score and equity. Thus, it can be said that
means the higher the brand scores are, the higher the brand strategy could influence brand score and
brand equity index will be. This could be due to brand equity. The effectiveness of brand strategy
higher image of the brand in the customers mind can be measured using these two criteria. The
developed due to right brand strategy. This could brand score is given in Table 3 using two parame-
lead to belief in the customers mind (Kotler, 1988). ters to make understanding clear.
Table 3. Brand score. Average mean score
Food segment Cold drink TSP segment
McDonald’s Domino Pizza Hut Coca-Cola Pepsi Reliance Airtel Hutch
Ranking according to
4.3 4.0 3.7 4.5 4.3 4.0 3.7 3.5
customer
Brand excels in delivering the
4.5 4.0 4.0 4.5 4.5 4.0 3.7 3.7
benefit customer truly desire
Brand stays relevant 4.5 4.0 3.5 4.2 4.0 4.3 3.7 3.5
Pricing strategy is based on
4.7 4.0 3.7 4.3 4.0 3.7 3.5 3.5
consumer perception of value
Brand portfolio make sense 4.0 3.5 3.0 4.7 4.5 4.3 3.7 3.5
Service expectation 4.7 4.3 4 4.5 4.5 3.7 3.7 3.5

29
Innovative Marketing, Volume 5, Issue 1, 2009

Thus, Domino or Pizza should work harder in im- hypothesis that brand score is the key driver to as-
proving total customer experience as customers get sess and improve brand strategy (H1) at the same
better value with McDonald’s compared to Domino time will influence brand score and brand equity (H2)
or Pizza hut. This could be one of the reasons for and thus confirms H1 and H2 hypotheses. The role of
lower brand equity index for Domino or Pizza Huts. brand strategy was not studied in earlier study and for
the first time an attempt is made to measure the effec-
Individual component study for brand score and tiveness of the strategy by using brand score and
brand equity index can give better insight into im- brand equity index as measurable tools. This was not
pact of strategy on these two measurable approaches died till now as per published and available literature
of strategy. It not only can help in improving brand on the subject. It also suggests ways to improve strat-
image but also in reducing the wastage of promo- egy effectiveness in a competitive environment for
tional expenditure. Brand image is one of the inputs brand with usage of brand score and brand equity.
and should be an integral part of strategic brand
analysis wherein the brand strategists carefully ana- Limitation of the study and scope of further
lyze their own exiting brand image and competitors research
brand images to help them determine their own
This study was conducted in metro city which may
brand identity (Shiva, 2005).
represent different culture but not rural marketer B
Conclusion class town population. It was done with MBA stu-
The present study confirms the earlier finding of dents whose experience was limited, however, their
Srivastava (2004). However, present study covered knowledge was superior due to their background. It
TSP, food and soft drink segments which were not will be good to explore the same with consumers and
covered in earlier study. The study confirms the industry personnel doing the same exercise in future.
References
1. Aaker, D.A. and Biel A.L. (1993). Brand equity and advertising: Role in building brand, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
2. Adrew, A. (2002). Additive versus inclusive approach to measuring brand equity, Brand Management, Vol. 10,
pp. 342-352.
3. Browman, D. and Narayandas, D. (2001). Managing customer initiated contacts: The impact of word of mouth, Journal
of Marketing Research, Vol. 38, No. 3, pp. 281-297.
4. Cheng Julian Mingsung, Chenlily Shui Lien, Lin Julia Ying Chao, Wang Edward Shintse (2007). Do consumers per-
ceive differences among national brands international Pvt Label and local private label case of Taiwan? Journal of
Product and Brand Management, Vol. 16, No. 6, pp. 368-376.
5. Cobb-Walgreen, Ruble, C.A. and Dontha, N. (1995). Brand Equity, Brand Preference, and Purchase Intent, Journal of
Advertising, Vol. 24, Fall, pp. 25-40.
6. Cornwell, T.B., Roy, D.B., and Steinard E.A. (2001). Exploring of Brand Equity, Journal of Advertising, Vol. 30, No. 3,
pp. 41-52.
7. Diesinker, C. and Romaniuk, J. (2006). Comparing methods of brand image measurement, International Journal of
Market Research, Vol. 48, No. 6, pp. 681-698.
8. Display and Design Idea (2007). November, Vol. 19, No. 11, p. 60.
9. Gibson, D. (2003). Service Industries Journal, Vol. 23, pp. 166-182.
10. Günter and Krieghaum-Kling (2001). Brand Valuation and control: An Empirical study, Schalenbach Business Review,
October, Vol. 53, pp. 263-294.
11. Jain, S.P., Steven, S. (2004). Journal of Marketing Research, Feb., No. 1, Vol. 3, pp. 37-52.
12. Joachimsthaler, E. and Aaker, D.A. (1997). Market orientation antecedence, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 6, pp. 39-50.
13. Keller, K.L. (1993). Conceptualization, Measuring and managing consumer based brand equity, Journal of Marketing,
Vol. 55, pp. 1-22.
14. Knox, S. and Freeman, C. (2006). Measuring and Managing Employer brand image in the service industry, Journal of
Marketing Management, Vol. 22, pp. 695-716.
15. Kotler, P. (1988). Marketing Management Analysis, Planning and control: Prentice-Hall, Englewood Clif, NJ.
16. Leone, R.P., Rao, V.R., Keller, K.L., Luo, A.M., McAlister, L., Srivastava, R. (2006). Linking brand equity to customer
equity, Journal of service research, November, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 125-138.
17. Marianne, W. (2007). Understand your target, Management Science, October, Vol. 53, No. 10, pp. 1634-1644.
18. Pappu, A.R., Quested, P.G. Cooksey, R.W. (2006). Consumer based brand equity and Country of origin relationship,
European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 40, No. 5/6, pp. 696-717.
19. Parker, Jane (2007). Journal of Medical Marketing, Vol. 7, No. 4, pp. 309-331.
20. Plummer, J.T. (2007). Word of Mouth – New advertising discipline, Journal of Advertising Research, pp. 385.
21. Shiva, N. (2005). An exploration of the brand identity – Image linkage: A communication perspective, Brand Manage-
ment, April, Vol. 12, No.4, pp. 264-278.

3030
 Innovative Marketing, Volume 5, Issue 1, 2009

22. Sreedhar, M., Vishag, B. and McDonald R.E. (2005). IMC and brand identity as critical components of the brand equity
strategy, Journal of Advertising, Vol. 34, No. 4, pp. 69-80.
23. Srivastava, R.K. (2004) How brand score/equity can effect branding strategy development? Indian Journal of Market-
ing, December, pp. 35-42.
24. Srivastava, R.K. (2008). 8th Annual Hawaii International Conference on Business, May 22-May 25, 2008 at the Waikiki
Beach Marriott Resort and Spa in Honolulu, USA.
25. Stern, B., Zinkhan, G.M. and Jaju, A. (2001). Marketing Image: Construct Definition, Measurement issue, Journal of
Marketing Theory and Practices, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 201-244.
26. Vargo, S., Lusch, R.F. (2004). Evolving to a new dominance logic for marketing, Journal of Marketing,Vol. 68,
pp. 1-17.
Appendix
RKS index and calculation of brand equity

Factors 1 2 3 4 5 Total score

1 Does it offer something new? ¥ 4

2 Will it alter the habits like usage, buying pattern? ¥ 4
3 Does it offer advantages over the existing competitive products ¥ 3
4 Whether perceived benefits scores are over the price? ¥ 3
5 Matching of product profile with current requirements of consumer which is not yet fully filled. ¥ 2
6 Can product profile be projected in communication effectively? ¥ 4
7 Does product profile require concept selling? ¥ 3

Index score: (total score / 35) x 100

1. Brand score: The brand excels at delivering the benefits customers truly desire.
i Have you attempted to uncover unmet consumer needs and wants? By what methods?
i Do you focus relentlessly on maximizing your customer’s product and service experience?
i Do you have a system in place for getting comments from customer to the people who can effect change?
Rate each point on scale of 1-10.
2. Brand score: The pricing strategy is based on consumers’ perceptions of value.
i Have you optimized price, cost, and quality to meet or exceed customers’ expectations?
i Do you have a system in place to monitor customers’ perception of your brand’s value?
i Have you estimated how much value your customers believe the brand adds to your product?
Rate each point on scale of 1-10.
3. Brand score: The brand is consistent.
i Are you sure that your marketing programs are not sending conflicting messages and that they haven’t done so
over time/conversely?
i Are you adjusting your programs to keep current?
Rate each point on scale of 1-10.
4. Brand score: The brand portfolio and hierarchy make sense.
i Can the corporate brand create a seamless umbrella for all the brands in the portfolio?
i Do the brands in the portfolio hold individual niches?
i How extensively do the brands maximize market coverage?
i Do you have a brand hierarchy that is well thought out and well understood?
Rate each point on scale of 1-10.
5. Brand score: The brand makes use of and coordinates a full repertoire of marketing activities of brand equity.
i Have you chosen or designed your brand name, logo, symbol, slogan, packaging, signage, and so forth to maximize
brand awareness?
i Have you implemented integrated push and pull marketing activities that target both distributors and customers?
i Are you aware of all the marketing activities that involve your brand?

31
 Innovative Marketing, Volume 5, Issue 1, 2009

i Are the people managing each activity aware of one another?

i Have you capitalized on the unique capabilities of each communication option while ensuring that the meaning of
the brand is consistently represented?
Rate each point on scale of 1-10.
6. The brand’s managers understand what the brand means to consumers.
i Do you know what customers like and don’t like about a brand?
i Are you aware of all the core association people make with your brand, whether intentionally created by your company
or not?
i Have you created detailed, research driven portraits of your target customers?
i Have you outlined customer driven boundaries for brand extensions and guidelines for marketing programs?
Rate each point on scale of 1-10.
7. The brand is given proper support, and that support is sustained over the long run.
i Are the successes or failures of marketing programs fully understood before they are changed?
i Is the brand given sufficient R&D support?
i Have you avoided the temptation to cut back marketing support for the brand in reaction to a downturn in the mar-
ket or a slump in sales?
Rate each point on scale of 1-10.
8. The company monitors sources of brand equity.
i Have you created a brand charter that defines the meaning and equity of the brand how it should be treated?
i Do you conduct periodic brand audits to assess the health of your brand and to set strategic direction?
i Do you conduct routine tracking studies to evaluate current market performance?
i Do you regularly distribute brand equity reports that summarize all relevant research and information to assist
marketers in making decisions?
i Have you assigned explicit responsibility for monitoring and preserving brand equity?
Rate each point on scale of 1-10.

3232

View publication stats