A Conceptual Study of Brand CommunitiesHarsh Arora*

It is a common strategy for every brand in the world to develop a strong base of brand loyal customers. Due to immense competition, brand loyalty has become a Holy Grail for the brands. All brands are running to build brand loyal customers. Therefore, the pertinent question is how to develop this base of brand loyal customers? According to Porter (1990), in the world of competition, the companies, which want to get success, have to follow any of the three generic strategies. These are cost leadership, differentiation and focus. Some international brands have followed the strategy of differentiation and initiated brand communities. These brand communities are not specific to any particular product category. Be it a motorcycle brand as Harley Davidson, or Apple Computers, all are putting considerable emphasis in developing brand community for their brands. Through these brand communities, they will be able to develop a strong bonding of their customers with their brands, which can further deepen the brand loyalty. This paper studies the concept, and its positive and negative facets by emphasizing on its management perspectives for the international brands.

IntroductionFrom the time the orientation of businesses shifted from production to marketing, the entire focus of the companies moved from product to customers (Sheth et al., 1988). The companies have realized that the customers are the beginning and the end of any business. A business can only survive with growth, if it find out and satisfy the needs and wants of the customers. Later the idea to satisfy the customers further looked upon and the businesses moved ahead of mere customer satisfaction, to customers delight. The increase of competition in the marketplace which gave an opportunity to the customers to choose among various alternatives, reinforces the idea of customers delight for the businesses. The sole reason of this is to create loyal customer base of a company. This loyal customer on one hand will continue buying the companys product. On the other these loyal customers act as an advocate of the product. This advocacy for the product will generate positive word-of-mouth communication (Brooks, 1957; Engle et al., 1969; Haywood, 1989; and Ennew et al., 2000). Later on with the emergence of globalization in the economy of many countries, the competition has increased massively. In this context, Mr. Rajeev Bakshi, managing director, Cadburys India, in an interview to Indian Express (August 31, 2000)1 mentioned* Lecturer, Eastern Institute for Integrating Learning in Management, Kolkata 700091, E-mail: harshiimt@gmail.com1

India.

http://www.financialexpress.com/old/fe/daily/20000831/fst29027.html (Dated: December 28, 2008 at 11:30 h). 7

2009 The Icfai University Press. All Rights A Conceptual Study of Brand Communities Reserved.

that customer loyalty is fast becoming a disappearing phenomenon, with an increasing demand for brand variety. Although the environment was asking for something more than brand loyalty among the customers, many businesses were striving to achieve the requirement of brand loyalty among customers. Businesses were running to achieve brand loyalty as Holy Grail (McAlexander et al., 2002). As stated by Rosenberg and Czepiel (1984) customer loyalty erodes when there is a wide range of nationwide products and retailers (p. 46). The objective of customer retention by developing loyal customers, market-oriented companies (Gronroos, 1989) were forced to innovate continuously to offer customers something different from its competitors, in view of gaining high acceptability followed by retention substantiated with loyality. When businesses are striving to gain better acceptability and success among the competitors, Porter (1985) recommends three generic strategies to gain success and competitive advantage in the marketplace. These are cost effectiveness, differentiation and focus. Later, Porter (1990) reinforces the idea of differentiation by saying, advantage once gained is only sustained by a continual search for different and better ways of doing things and through modifications in firm behavior within an overall strategic context. The firm competing with a differentiation strategy, for example, must find a stream of new ways to add to its differentiation, or, minimally, improve its effectiveness in differentiating in old ways (p. 580). Later, during the advent of globalization, companies considered Porters (1990) view and looked forward towards differentiating their brands from their competitors in some old ways. Here, old ways can be interpreted as strategies that the industry has already applied in the past but, currently, it is not in use. It can also be an idle resource in the organization (Abrahamson, 2004). In this context, companies on the one hand relooked the concept of symbiotic marketing (Adler, 1966), which deals with the mutual beneficial relationship among various entities, and on the other, thought of reorienting an existing nature of human civilization. Here, existing nature of human civilization means the nature of human beings to live in communities developed by like-minded people. Among customers, companies have traced out like-mindedness, which have formed informal networks (Abrahamson, 2004). These networks are a promising source of attaining sustainable competitive advantage. It is the brand which plays a central role in these informal networks. Members of these networks have something in common. They hold an emotional association with the brand. For the companies, to achieve sustainable competitive advantage, they need loyal emotional association of the customers towards the brands (Martesen and Gronholdt, 2004). They thought of developing a community that will have an overlapping relationship, i.e., relationship between the customers and a common brand with which all have a positive association. Shang et al. (2006) have mentioned with respect to the virtual community for a particular brand that since the impact of lurking and the impact of the perceived attitude of the messages on loyalty are independent, companies should encourage the establishment of communities about their products and try to attract8 The Icfai University Journal of Brand Management, Vol. VI, No. 2, 2009

consumers to participate in virtual communities, even if someone else operates it (p. 413). Companies, irrespective of their product category, consider this idea as a way to take the concept of brand loyalty to a new height. Companies, like Harley Davidson, Apple Computers, Nikon, Chrysler, Saab, Starbucks and many other, have initiated this idea and promoted it. On the assumption of raising the association (both rational and emotional) with the brand, like-minded people having one to one relationship with the brand put together to form a formal community (Martesen and Gronholdt, 2004). It is nothing but to put informal group of people into a structured community with common goals and orientation. Although the companies name these communities (viz., Apple Newton, Nikonians, Harley Davidson Owners Group, etc.) as per their suitability, the core idea behind is to bring up a brand community.

Brand and CommunityAs for an individual, its name creates a distinctive image among other people, for a product or a company, it is the brand which serves the similar purpose. According to Haigh and Knowles (2004) brand includes everything from simple logos and trademarks up through the creation of a brand-focused company culture (p. 24). Brand is not a new concept and it has received considerable attention since the late 1950s (Zinkhan and Hirschheim, 1992). Brand is something, which separates it from the rest of the world. Companies give a distinctive name, logo or symbol, etc., to create distinctiveness for themselves and their offering, from its competitors (Gunther and Kling, 2001). As stated by Dolak (2001)2, the word brand, when used as a noun, can refer to a company name, a product name, or a unique identifier such as a logo or trademark. In a time before fences were used in ranching to keep ones cattle separately from other peoples cattle, ranch owners branded or marked their cattle so that they could later identify their own herd. But, what the companies will achieve if they create a distinctive image for themselves among their competitors? The answer is very clear: when a customer identifies a need, he should recall a distinctive brand to satisfy his needs among the competitors. If this happens, the expectation of the company that the customer will go for a specific brand will hold true. And the customer will continue its association with the brand. This, in turn, develops a sense of loyalty towards the brand (Martesen and Gronholdt, 2004). However, this recall will only happen when the customers will be convinced of the value the brand is going to provide to them and if this recall happens then the companies consider brand as a competitive advantage (Gunther and Kling, 2001). In this regard, the brand conveys the value proposition. As mentioned by Dolak (2001) a brand is an identifiable entity that makes specific promises of value. The literature also reveals the concept of brand loyalty. Shang et al. (2006) has said, brand loyalty originally referred to consumers repeated purchasing (p. 401). But, just repeat purchase cannot give2

Dolak Dave (2001), Building A Strong Brand: Brands and Branding Basics, available at http://www.metro.as/ index.php/content/content/download/185/806/version/file/36BuildingAStrongBrand.pdf (Dated: December 30, 2008 at 12:40 h). 9

A Conceptual Study of Brand Communities

a clear perspective of brand loyalty. Sheth and Park (1974) put forth the multidimensional factors in defining brand loyalty as, a positively based emotive, evaluative and/or behavioral response tendency towards a branded, labeled, or graded alternative or choice by an individual in his capacity as the user, the choice maker, and/or the purchasing agent (p. 449). If a company can find out and evaluate brand loyalty, it can offer more and more personalized offers with the brand to the loyal customers for their delight. This act will bind the customers with the brand tightly followed by their retention with the brand. This bondage with the brand can be furthered with the feeling of emotional association of the customer with the brand (Martesen and Gronholdt, 2004). Now, if we look at the researches done by social scientists, it reveals that the basis of a community kind of societal structure, formed with the like-minded people, is the emotional association and togetherness among the members. These people share a social bonding and behavioral rootedness (McMillan and George, 1986). It is also revealed that community is based upon two factors, i.e., geography/territory (neighborhoods) and relationship (professional, spiritual, etc.), (McMillan and George, 1986). Later on, MacQueen et al. (2001) defined community as a common definition of community emerged as a group of people with diverse characteristics who are linked by social ties, share common perspectives, and engage in joint action in geographical locations or settings (p. 1929). At the same time, Muniz and OGuinn (2001, p. 413) after reviewing the literature on community came across with three core components on which a community is build. These three core components are: Shared consciousness, a way of thinking about things that is more than shared attitude or perceived similarity. Presence of shared rituals and traditions. Sense of moral responsibility, which is a felt sense of duty or obligation to the community as a whole, and to its individual members. Both the terms, brand and community, are studied exhaustively in their respective domains. However, if both the terms are put together, it becomes the matter of study in the domain of marketing. It is quite natural that when people with same need and choice meet together, a sense of togetherness evolves among them. As a result, they start sharing their experiences and if the experiences are positive, it creates a positive word-of-mouth. This, in turn, not only develops their knowledge-base on the matter of common choice but also develops a sense of emotional association with it. Ultimately, this togetherness and emotional association enable these people to form a community. Moreover, if it is a brand, which is common among people, forming a community, due to the basic nature of the community, these members or people develop a sense of loyalty, emotional association with the brand. They share a common belief about the brand, the information about the brand (Luedicke, 2006), advocate the brand selection to others (Jang et al., 2008), also at times spread negative word-of-mouth for the opponent brands (Hickman and Ward, 2007; and Thompson and Sinha, 2008).10 The Icfai University Journal of Brand Management, Vol. VI, No. 2, 2009

The purpose of this paper is to understand, if these two terms put together, as brand community. Although some work is available on brand community, still there is a scope for understanding its perspective. Its scope is increasing considerably with the rapid growth of information technology. Again globalization and increasing competition is compelling the companies to think differently to acquire and retain their customers. These in turn enhance the need to understand the concept of brand community as an opportunity for the companies to get success. At the same time, it is some sort of a challenge for both the marketer and academicians to relook the concept of brand community periodically, for changes in managing the application of it (McAlexander et al., 2002). As stated by Amine and Sitz (2004)3, the brand community presents a special interest both for the marketing researchers and brand managers because it gives new theoretical perspectives on key concepts (e.g., the brand loyalty, word-of-mouth, and lead usership) and because of its considerable implications for marketing strategies (p. 2). Therefore, this paper looks into the perspective of brand community, its managerial implication along with the advantages and disadvantages, the sustenance and growth of itself and the brand under consideration.

Brand CommunityThe current marketing orientation and cutthroat competition in the global sphere had enforced marketers and academicians to look into the matter of customer relationship building in view of retaining the customers. In this regard, consumer behavior has considerable importance. The focus of the companies is to get closer to the customers to retain them and make them loyal towards the brand. On the other hand, customers once get the value for their money followed by satisfaction of their need from a particular brand, compel them to come closer to the brand. They prefer to maintain a rational and emotional relationship with that brand (Martesen and Gronholdt, 2004). Martesen and Gronholdt (2004) have measured brand equity based on the rational and emotional variables (Figure 1). It is not only relationship, but also the feeling of pride to be associated with the brand as, for example, owners of Harley Davidson motorcycle (McAlexander et al., 2002; and Cova and Pace, 2006), owners of GMs Hummer vehicle (Luedicke, 2006), users of Apple Newton computers (Schau and Muniz, 2006). The owners also share their satisfaction with the prospective and existing customers. The tendencies to share views, opinions regarding the product they are associated with, make them come closer to the brand and to the existing customers of the brand. These in turn form a community and in marketing, it is called brand community. Many social scientists have studied the idea of community and many researchers in the area of marketing have studied brands. However, brand community, as an idea, was3

Amine Abdelmajid and Sitz Lionel (2004), How Does a Virtual Brand Community Emerge? Some Implications for Marketing Research, University of Paris, available at http://lionel.sitz.googlepages.com Howdoesabrandcommunityemerge.pdf (Dated: December 30, 2008 at 15:00 h). 11

A Conceptual Study of Brand Communities

Figure 1: The Customer-Based Brand Equity ModelBrand Associations Product Quality Service Quality Price CustomerBrand Relations Promise Differentiation Trust and Credibility Emotional Evaluations (feelings) Rational Evaluations Brand Evaluations

Source: Martesen and Gronholdt (2004).

introduced by Muniz and OGuinn (2001), and defined as a specialized, non-geographically bound community, based on a structured set of social relationships among admirers of a brand (p. 412). From this definition of brand community, it is easily revealed that the notion of brand community is a specialized structure. The companies plan it purposely to increase retention of brand loyal customers and initiate positive word-of-mouth. Generally customers for the brands having a strong image, a rich and lengthy history (Muniz and OGuinn, 2001), usually form this kind of communities by themselves. However, to reap benefits from the brand communities, formed by the customers, the management of the company needs to put considerable effort. At the same time some companies, whose customers are not aware of the concept of brand community, which are interested in brand community, need to put considerable effort to build and manage a community for their brand. As also mentioned by Prykop and Heitmann (2006), a community usually builds around a common interest and a shared set of values. Companies use that social phenomenon to initiate communities that encourage interaction about their brands and to establish a link between their customers (p. 302). As stated by Thompson and Sinha (2008), Apple actively supports the formation of customer-run Macintosh user groups. Although, these groups are founded by volunteers and enthusiasts, the company encourages customers to join and participate in them through the Apple website, in mailings to registered customers, and by hosting events at conferences, such as MacWorld. By encouraging customers to join this community, Apple hopes to foster greater loyalty among its customers and thus enhance its bottom line (p. 65).12 The Icfai University Journal of Brand Management, Vol. VI, No. 2, 2009

In addition, with the increasing use of Internet, the scope of building brand communities among different countries has increased manifold (Prykop and Heitmann, 2006). It is true that information technology, especially World Wide Web, has given enormous opportunities to the companies to build brand communities globally. However, at the same time, the advent of Internet has raised the communities considerably formed by the customers by themselves (Amine and Sitz, 2004; and Jang et al., 2008). At times, companies are not even aware of these types of brand communities formed by its customers, e.g., Microsoft Xbox Game Consol (De Almeida et al., 2007). In general, as the relevant literature on brand community reveals, there are two forms of brand community, i.e., customer initiated and managed brand communities and company initiated and managed brand communities (De Almeida et al., 2007; and Jang et al., 2008). The studies by De Almeida et al. (2007) find out the differences between firm-managed and customer-managed brand communities, which reveals certain facts. These are: Many of the most active participants tended to post and respond to messages actively in both community venues. Firm-managed communities tended to be employed primarily for instrumental purposes by customers, such as seeking assistance with a specific problem, learning about upcoming product launches, events, etc. In contrast, customer-managed communities allow more for broader off topic interactions not necessarily involving the firms products and brands. In these communities, we found the emergence of small friendship groups of a firms customers. Firm-managed communities to be largely targeted toward specific, well-defined consumer segments by the firm. In contrast, customer-managed communities appeared less clearly targeted, and were likely to be formed by members of customer groups that the firm may have overlooked. As such, customer-managed communities may enable the discovery of new marketing opportunities for the firm (p. 645). Another aspect of the definition of brand community given by Muniz and OGuinn (2001), says that it is non-geographically bound. With the spread of information technology upcoming social sites (www.orkut.com, www.facebook.com, etc.) are enabling people around the world to share their thoughts. This is allowing the users to develop virtual communities. It gives considerable emphasis for the companies to build brand communities globally by removing the political and geographical boundaries (Shang et al., 2006). In the era of globalization when companies are going global, their customer-base is also becoming global. However, getting a global base of customers is not enough; the pertinent issue for the companies is how to retain and manage diverse customers belonging to diverse culture from various countries? At the same time, the growth in information technology in the world enabled these companies get the diverse customers come closer and form a community. This in turn, gave the companies the opportunity, to get homogeneity out of heterogeneous customers in the world. As stated by Jang et al. (2008), firms like Dell and Cisco Systems have transformed suppliers and customers into members of their corporate communities, thereby enabling exchanges of valuableA Conceptual Study of Brand Communities 13

information and knowledge with them. More and more firms are recognizing the advantages of online brand communities, which include the opportunity for effective communication with customers and of obtaining valuable ideas (p. 60). These online brand communities allow existing and new users for a particular brand to get information and give a platform to share opinions about the brand. As also stated by Jang et al. (2008), many companies have established online brand communities, accessible through the companys home page or online portal. In addition, active consumers have built their own online brand communities that respond to the members needs by providing plentiful information about the pre-purchase, purchase, and after-service of branded products and services (p. 57). The third aspect of the definition given by Muniz and OGuinn (2001), says that the brand community is based on a structured set of social relationships among admirers of a brand. Let it be a brand community in physical or an online brand community, the members use to share their views and thoughts about the brand they are associated. As stated by Schau and Muniz (2006), they are stories told by consumers to consumers, to remind themselves of the brand history, the brand meaning, and educate users on issues related to product use and community ethos. They infuse the brand community with focused, brand-related, product-oriented energy to thwart the stigma of using a now obsolete technological device and to defy the marketplace logics. They inspire users and codify the tenets of the brand community (p. 32). The members of the brand community consider the brand as a part of their lives. They develop an emotional bondage with the brand (Martesen and Gronholdt, 2004) similar like a fan develops with a superstar whom he/she admires (Cova and Pace, 2006). This bondage is the same bondage, which a person develops with a school. The feeling of bondage, based upon the nostalgic feeling of association with the institution, celebrity or brand develops strongly when the same feeling is found with some more people. There are various alumni associations of schools or colleges, which share the same kind of structured social relationship among the members. This social relationship with a brand converts the members into a loyal admirers of the brand (Cova and Pace, 2006; and Jang et al., 2008). As stated by Rosenbaum (2005), customers who socially interact with other customers via participation in brand communities, often exhibit an intense loyalty to the sponsoring brands (p. 222). Apart from Muniz and OGuinn (2001), some other researchers have defined brand community with a different perspective. McAlexander et al. (2002) from a customer point of view defined a brand community from a customer-experiential perspective is a fabric of relationships in which the customer is situated. Crucial relationships include those between the customer and the brand, between the customer and the firm, between the customer and the product in use, and among fellow customers (p. 38). Jang (2008) tried to explain brand community as, a community that consists of personal and institutional relationships between the members, their interactions, the atmosphere, the evolution of individual and collective identities, and last but not least, physical or virtual spaces for meeting (p. 58). Shang et al. (2006) defined a different form of brand community. They explained it as, the increasing number of people chatting in cyberspace may have14 The Icfai University Journal of Brand Management, Vol. VI, No. 2, 2009

potential social influences and create characteristics similar to traditional communities. These communicating groups in cyberspace have been called virtual communities (p. 398). Study done on virtual communities for brand by Shang et al. (2006), also reveals that the emotional belongingness is less in virtual communities than it is there in physical brand communities. Mostly people involve into this kind of brand communities to get the information related to a brand.

Management Implications of Brand CommunityBrand community as a concept is not very old. It is less than a decade the concept has evolved and attracted the of the academicians and managers. However, in this short span of time it got considerable attention by the multinational companies. It is all because of its advantages. It has been experienced by the companies and studied by the researchers that a brand community is capable of developing brand loyalty of the customers of a brand (Martesen and Gronholdt, 2004; Amine and Sitz, 2004; Parkins, 2004; Rosenbaum et al., 2005; and Thompson and Sinha, 2008). This in turn enables the company to increase the brand equity in the market place (Martesen and Gronholdt, 2004). As soon as the brand satisfies a customers need, the customer turn out to be a loyal customer of the brand, and it becomes an advocate of the brand. He not only continues with the brand, but also initiates positive word-of-mouth to help company in its promotional activities. A brand community is a group of brand loyal customers, which actively instigates positive word-of-mouth (Amine and Sitz, 2004; and Jang et al., 2008). It is a general human tendency that whenever few people meet and form a structure of community, they tend to share various experiences. Moreover, if that community is a brand community, its members, along with the positive word-of-mouth, share the information and experiences related to the brand with other members of the community and to the new members and prospective customers of the brand (Luedicke, 2006; Shang et al., 2006; and Jang et al., 2008). This act of the community members helps company to gain new customers without any additional attraction cost. These loyal members of the brand community become brand ambassador and promote the brand. In addition, in a brand community, irrespective of its initiator, i.e., company initiated or customers initiated, brand loyal customers are associated both rationally and emotionally (Martesen and Gronholdt, 2004) with the brand. It is not that brand communities have only advantages for a company. It also has certain disadvantages too. Some of the disadvantages are quite natural, as brand communities for a particular brand oppose the competitors brand (Hickman and Ward, 2007; and Thompson and Sinha, 2008). They not only oppose the competitors brand, they also spread negative word-of-mouth among the community members as well as outside the community about the rival brand (Hickman and Ward, 2007). For this reason, most of the time rival brands find it very difficult to make the customers, for a particular brand in the particular brand community, shift to their brand. They impose a threat to the competitors to acquire and retain customers for their brand. As the members of a brand community are associated with the brand, they also expect the company owning the brand to share the same association with them. They expect thatA Conceptual Study of Brand Communities 15

the company to support them and satisfy them by delivering the quality service continuously along with branded goods. But, if the company fails to do so in spite of repeated recommendations by the customers, and on the contrary if the competitor provides satisfactory goods and services as per the need of the customers, there is a chance that the customer will shift. As stated by Martesen and Gronholdt (2004) if the company for some reason cannot live up to the expectations, and a gap results between the promise that the company has given and the experience the consumers perceive, it may create negative brand associations and evaluations (p. 41). This will prove to be a disadvantage for the existing brand of the brand community and advantageous for the competing brand. However, the chances are less, as stated by Thompson and Sinha (2008) in the case of new products, this process would involve comparing the new product from the preferred (or rival) brand with equivalent products from the rival (or preferred) brand. Because participation strengthens social identity, higher levels of participation enhance negative bias toward comparable products from other brands in terms of the type of information discussed and attitudes toward the products. In turn, this negative out group bias increases oppositional loyalty and leads to a reduced likelihood that a member will adopt a new product from a competing brand, given the presence of a comparable product from the preferred brand (p. 67). Again, it is evident that if the brand owning company fails to comply with the needs and wants of the customers, especially the brand community members, and if the emotional bondage between the brand and community members is considerably strong, the community member takes the responsibility of its upbringing and helps it to sustain its existence. Take, for example, Apple Newton brand. Muniz and Schau (2007) revealed that the consumers of the abandoned Apple Newton brand are now charged with responsibility for the entire brand-sustaining experience: modifying, repairing, and innovating the product, as well as creating and sustaining brand meaning and community. As a part of these activities, members engage in vigilante marketing (p. 45). Thus strong brand communities can act as an opportunity if properly managed by the companies, otherwise they pose a threat if ignored or the management is unable to manage it.

Managements Initiatives to Manage Brand CommunitiesThe companies having operation internationally need to look the concept of brand community as an opportunity for their growth. Customers with diverse cultures in different countries believe more their fellow citizens than a foreign company initially. For this, internationally operated companies can promote an existing brand community initiated by its customer or initiate brand community for their brand internationally. It may ask its members to take the advantage of information technology to increase the member-base internationally. This will give the scope to the customers in various countries to join these communities. They can seek information regarding the brand from the people of their origin in foreign countries who are also members of the community. This generates a positive communication for the brand and an international company can gain the advantage of acquiring new customers easily. This is not all, the companies need16 The Icfai University Journal of Brand Management, Vol. VI, No. 2, 2009

to support the activities. A study in the context of the brand community of Jeep and Harley Davidson, McAlexander et al. (2002) revealed that marketers may also take an active role in establishing the shared rituals, traditions, and meanings that foster consciousness of kind. Tools such as a History of Jeep exhibited at Camp Jeep and Jeep 101 helped underscore a sense of similarity, authenticity, and exclusivity among participants. Promotional materials that depict the product in use may help establish shared aspirations (p. 42). In the same context, McAlexander et al. (2002) again said that as community members, marketers also contribute to the process of community building by creating the context in which owner interaction occurs (p. 42). At times, it is observed that strong brand communities do not allow the companies to improve over the brand. Due to their high emotional attachment with the existing brand, the change is restricted. At that time although it is difficult for the management to make the community members understand the need but still if the management is closely tied up with the brand community it can have an advantage over the community members to convince them over the change and still be loyal to the brand. Another aspect is, there may be a difference in the opinion among the community members. A study by Luedicke (2006), about the Hummer Brand Community (HBC), found that within the HBC, differences exist about the importance of social distinctiveness. Among the urban H2-fractions of the HBC (approx. 70,000 owners), design and social attention are more likely to be predominant motives for purchase. H1-owners (approx. 10,000) seem to be more attracted by the vehicles off-road capability. However, these particularities of the HBCs social distinctiveness presuppose social environments that pay attention and feedback to the community. In this empirical context, social attention appears to be given for both sides (p. 489). Thus, segmented brand community can be an option in minimizing this kind of discrepancy, leading to unsatisfied customers of the brand. There is another facet of brand community, which requires attention from the managers as it can lead to problems from the brand community. As research done by Cova and Pace (2006), reveal that with the advent of internet, many virtual brand community members, not only share the information about the related brand, they also share products that can be shared using internet, like movies, etc. This compels other industries, like the entertainment industry, which have no stake over the brand community, as the brand community is for a product not related to entertainment industry, to incur losses. The findings reveal that the community members of the non-convince products were sharing the movies online among the members. To protect the empowerment companies like Coca Cola, Red Bull formed online communities but restored the options of community members to see the information on the community sites but can share their feeling only with the companies. With the advent of internet and increase in the scope of online brand community, it is a challenge for the companies initiating online brand community to manage the unwanted information over the net. Even though the chance of spreading rumor over various onlineA Conceptual Study of Brand Communities 17

communities remain, the company needs to keep a close vigil so that it can prevent itself from the ill effects of those rumors. At the same time, although difficult, the companies need to look into the profile of the members of the brand communities, as it is also possible that the competitors are trying to include their people to spread negative word-of-mouth about the brand among the members of brand community.

ConclusionThe concept of brand community is emerging. It has gained momentum among many multinational companies like Harley-Davidson, Hummer, Apple Computers, Nikon, Chrysler, Saab, Starbucks, etc. It has also found attention by many eminent scholars and researchers. But, still it is in its nascent state. With the development of World Wide Web both customers and companies or brands have taken the opportunity to form online brand communities to share information, experiences (both positive and negative), promote, ideas to improve, suggestions, etc. This poses the advantage of developing brand loyalty among the customers by involving them into a community structure. It allows companies to promote their brand to retain them by developing a sense of emotional and rational association with the brand. This enables to instigate positive word-of-mouth and protect its image by developing a sense of relationship among the brand, customer and other community members, which usually restrict the rival companys positioning. In the Indian scenario, although the multinational companies, which have online brand communities, allow customers to join these communities but lack of awareness about the concept of brand communities and its advantages, restrict the customers to join these communities. Recently some of the companies have been taking certain steps to promote and apply the concept of brand community in India. Among them, Cadburys India recently introduced an online community, meethamoments.com4 for Indian customers. Chevrolet SRV5 has started hosting space over their website for the Indian customers where visitors can sign in to get an opportunity for a test drive. PepsiCo India6 allows customers in India to share their association with the brand on its website. Rediff, Yahoo, Gmail are also attracting customers to initiate brand communities. ITC has its e-choupal7 where it allows customers to get together to share information related to their business. But, still a lot is to be done in creating awareness about the brand communities in the country. Although, Indian customers and companies need to understand the concept of brand community, companies have already applied this as a tool to promote and generate loyal4 5

http://www.meethamoments.com h t t p : / / w w w. c h e v r o l e t . c o . i n / a c t i o n / r b C N B r o c h u r e B y M a i l A c t i o n ? a c t i o n = MA&cnInput=TESTDRIVE&cntry_cd=IN&lang_cd=en&website_cd=GBPIN&MMNAMPLT=001 http://www.pepsiindia.co.in/pwp.html www.echoupal.com The Icfai University Journal of Brand Management, Vol. VI, No. 2, 2009

6 7

18

customers who can keep a close watch on its activities and proceedings. If the activities are not managed properly, the companies may get their brand image hampered, lose control over decision making on the brand, and cannot achieve competitive advantage through it. Therefore, the application of brand community has considerable management implications. These aspects of brand community in the current marketing environment provide scope for further research. Again, the dynamic nature of the customers gives an opportunity to the researchers to explore the concept further. The concept is important for brand managers, consumers and marketing researchers in the current competitive environment. Hence, its implementation, management and control require more researches to validate and generalize its applicability.

References1. Abrahamson Eric (2004), Change Without Pain: How Managers Can Overcome Initiative Overload, Organizational Chaos, and Employee Burnout, HBS Press Book. 2. Adler Lee (1966), Symbiotic Marketing, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 44, pp. 59-71. 3. Brooks Jr Robert C (1957), Word-of-Mouth Advertising in Selling New Products, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 22, No. 2, pp. 154-161. 4. Cova Bernard and Pace Stefano (2006), Brand Community of Convenience Products: New Forms of Customer EmpowermentThe Case My Nutella the Community, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 40, Nos. 9-10, pp. 1087-1105. 5. De Almeida, Stefnia Ordovs, Dholakia, Utpal M and Vianello Silvia (2007), Understanding Differences Between Firm-Managed and Customer-Managed Brand Communities, Advances in Consumer ResearchNorth American Conference Proceedings, Vol. 34, pp. 645-646. 6. Engle James F, Kegerreis Robert J and Blackwell Roger D (1969), Word-of-Mouth Communication by the Innovator, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 33, No. 3, pp. 15-19. 7. Ennew Christine T, Banerjee Ashish K and Li Derek (2000), Managing Word of Mouth Communication: Empirical Evidence from India, International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 18, No. 2, pp. 75-83. 8. Gronroos Christian (1989), Defining Marketing: A Market Oriented Approach, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 23, No. 1, pp. 52-60. 9. Gunther Thomas and Kling Catharina K (2001), Brand Valuation and Control: An Empirical Study, Schmalenbach Business Review, Vol. 53, pp. 263-294. 10. Haigh David and Knowles Jonathan (2004), How to Define Your Brand and Determine Its Value, Marketing Management (AMA), Vol. 13, No. 3, pp. 22-28. 11. Haywood Michael K (1989), Managing Word of Mouth Communication, The Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 55-67.A Conceptual Study of Brand Communities 19

12. Hickman Thomas and Ward James (2007), The Dark Side of Brand Community: Inter-Group Stereotyping, Trash Talk, and Schadenfreude, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 32, pp. 314-319. 13. Jang Heehyoung, Olfman Lorne, K O Ilsang, Koh Joon and Kim Kyungtae (2008), The Influence of On-Line Brand Community Characteristics on Community Commitment and Brand Loyalty, International Journal of Electronic Commerce, Vol. 12, No. 3, pp. 57-80. 14. Luedicke Marius K (2006), Brand Community Under Fire: The Role of Social Environments for the HUMMER Brand Community, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 33, pp. 486-493. 15. MacQueen, Kathleen M, McLellan Eleanor, Metzger David S, Kegeles Susan, Strauss Ronald P Scotti Roseanne, Blanchard Lynn, Trotter II and Robert T (2001), What , Is Community? An Evidence-Based Definition for Participatory Public Health, American Journal of Public Health, Vol. 91, No. 12, pp. 1929-1938. 16. Martesen Anne and Gronholdt Lars (2004), Building Brand Equity: A Customer-Based Modelling Approach, Journal of Management Systems, Vol. 16, No. 3, pp. 37-51. 17. McAlexander James H, Schouten John W and Koenig Harold F (2002), Building Brand Community, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 66, No. 1, pp. 38-54. 18. McMillan David W and George David M C (1986), Sense of Community: A Definition and Theory, Journal of Community Psychology, Vol. 14, pp. 1-19. 19. Muniz Jr. Albert M and OGuinn Thomas C (2001), Brand Community, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 27, No. 4, pp. 412-432. 20. Muniz Albert M Jr. and Schau Hope Jensen (2007), Vigilante Marketing and Consumer-Created Communication, Journal of Advertising, Vol. 36, No. 3, pp. 35-50. 21. Porter Michael E (1985), Competitive Aadvantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance, The Free Press. 22. Porter Michael E (1990), The Competitive Advantage of Nations: With a New Introduction, The Free Press. 23. Prykop Catja and Heitmann Mark (2006), Designing Mobile Brand Communities: Concept and Empirical Illustration, Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce, Vol. 16, Nos. 3-4, pp. 301-323. 24. Rosenbaum Mark S, Ostrom Amy L and Kuntze Ronald (2005), Loyalty Programs and a Sense of Community, Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 19, No. 4, pp. 222-223.20 The Icfai University Journal of Brand Management, Vol. VI, No. 2, 2009

25. Rosenberg Larry J and Czepiel John A (1984), A Marketing Approach for Customer Retention, The Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 45-51. 26. Schau Hope J and Muniz Jr Albert M (2006), A Tale of Tales: The Apple Newton Narratives, Journal of Strategic Marketing, Vol. 14, pp. 19-33. 27. Shang R, Chen Y and Liao H (2006), The Value of Participation in Virtual Communities on Brand Loyalty, Internet Research, Vol. 16, No. 4, pp. 398-418. 28. Sheth Jagdish N and Park Whan C (1974), A Theory of Multidimensional Brand Loyalty, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 1, pp. 449-459. 29. Sheth Jagdish N, Gardner David M and Garrett Dennis E (1988), Marketing Theory: Evolution and Evaluation, Wiley Publication. 30. Thompson Scott A and Sinha Rajiv K (2008), Brand Communities and New Product Adoption: The Influence and Limits of Oppositional Loyalty, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 75, pp. 65-80. 31. Zinkhan George M and Hirschheim Rudy (1992), Truth in Marketing Theory and Research: An Alternative Perspective, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 56, pp. 80-88.

Reference # 25J-2009-06-01-01

A Conceptual Study of Brand Communities

21