Value slippage in brand transformation: a conceptualization
| Published date | 21 March 2016 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBM-12-2015-1058 |
| Date | 21 March 2016 |
| Pages | 3-10 |
| Author | Bernard Cova,Bernard Paranque |
| Subject Matter | Marketing,Product management,Brand management/equity |
Value slippage in brand transformation:
a conceptualization
Bernard Cova and Bernard Paranque
Kedge Business School, Marseille, France
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore brand transformation and the value slippage that can ensue.
Design/methodology/approach – This is a conceptual paper drawing upon a solid bibliographic base; its intended contribution is to create a
linkage among constructs. It mobilizes a socio-economic framework which enables the multiple transformations of the brand to be monitored. Two
case vignettes of Nutella brand are used to discuss this brand transformation framework.
Findings – The framework identifies four key brand transformation practices: brand appropriation by consumers forming a brand community, brand
“surfeiting” through brand community actions, brand genericization throughout the society and brand regeneration in the market. The discussion
highlights four categories of value slippage effects that enable us to ascertain whether the use value generated by the brand community slips – or
does not – to another actor who captures it in the form of use or exchange value.
Research limitations/implications – This paper is a conceptual paper.
Practical implications – The challenge for the firm is, therefore, to play an active role in these dynamics to gain ownership of new value that
emerges beyond its confines and to offer its shareholders and/or external investors with new spaces within which to grow the value of their capital.
Originality/value – Value slippage concerns the way any actors involved in these processes, particularly brand community members, exploit brand
transformation for their own benefit.
Keywords Brand communities, Value capture, User generated content, Brand co-creation, Nutella, Use value, Exchange value
Paper type Conceptual paper
Introduction
Brands play a major role in the society (Kornberger, 2010), and
the society, in turn, significantly influences brand development
(Holt, 2004). Although an established fact, the interface between
brands and the society has not yet been fully explored (Levy and
Luedicke, 2013). The actors involved – firms, consumers and
other stakeholders – develop practices around the brand that
transform the brand (Nakassis, 2013). These practices are
deployed in different social spheres: domestic, private,
community, public, market, etc. (Vallaster and von Wallpach,
2013). The deployment of these brand-related practices provides
opportunities to create and enhance value for each actor through
value slippage from one social space to another (Lepak et al.,
2007). One actor in particular plays a paramount role in this
context: the brand community (Pongsakornrungsilp and
Schroeder, 2011;Taute and Sierra, 2014).
In today’s economies, understanding how actors exploit brand
transformation for their own benefit is essential. The aim of this
paper is the conceptual development of value slippage in brand
transformations. Alongside empirical papers, conceptual papers
play an important role in the development of marketing theory
(MacInnis, 2011). This paper mobilizes extant multi-level
knowledge on value co-creation with brand communities (Hatch
and Schultz, 2010), mixing concepts from different theoretical
backgrounds into a socio-economic framework (Caillé, 2000).
The resulting conceptual framework includes four key
transformation practices: brand appropriation by consumers
forming a brand community, brand “surfeiting” through brand
community actions, brand genericization throughout the society
and brand regeneration in the market. These transformation
practices can trigger four different value slippage effects in
relation to the company, the community or other actors.
Conceptual background
The brand as a process of becoming
Today, the brand is understood less in its narrow sense as “a
name, term, design, symbol or any other feature that identifies
one seller’s good or service as distinct from those of other
sellers” (Wood, 2000, p. 664) and more in its broader sense as
an interface among actors in contemporary societies
(Kornberger, 2010). A brand is no longer merely an
instrument wielded by marketers; much of its functioning
occurs through its interactions with different actors, including
consumers, employees, distributors and the media. “Powerful
brands are the products of multiple sources authoring multiple
narrative representations in multiple venues” (Diamond et al.,
2009, p. 130). In this context, marketing becomes a function
of branding, instead of branding being a function of marketing
(Levy and Luedicke, 2013). However, the brand does not only
belong to the corporate management but is constantly used,
deviated, reclaimed and exploited by different actors. The
brand is not a static object but a field of practices and a
platform linking internal and external actors. The boundaries
between consumption and production are blurred; “brands
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on
Emerald Insight at: www.emeraldinsight.com/1061-0421.htm
Journal of Product & Brand Management
25/1 (2016) 3–10
© Emerald Group Publishing Limited [ISSN 1061-0421]
[DOI 10.1108/JPBM-12-2015-1058]
3
To continue reading
Request your trial