laura anthes' thesis - au purepure.au.dk/portal/files/45318347/laura_anthes_thesis.pdf · mmc....
TRANSCRIPT
BA.MMC.–BACHELORTHESISSUPERVISOR–SARAHAMIDALWAN
STUDENTNUMBER301114TOTALCHARACTERS(WITHOUTSPACES):54.247
1OF38
FASHIONCO‐BRANDING
ACASESTUDYOFSUCCESSFULCO‐BRANDINGFACTORS
FROMASOCIALSCIENCEPERSPECTIVE
Author:LauraAnthes10
Supervisor:SaraHamidAlwan
BAinMarketingandManagementCommunication
DepartmentofBusinessCommunication
BA.MMC.–BACHELORTHESISSUPERVISOR–SARAHAMIDALWAN
STUDENTNUMBER301114TOTALCHARACTERS(WITHOUTSPACES):54.247
2OF38
20
Abstract
Purpose–Thepurposeofthisthesisistofindtheformulaforsuccessfulfashionco‐branding
strategies,aswellastoanalyseco‐brandingmotivationsandadvantages,mentionitsdrawbacks,
andputthesetheoriesintoperspectivewithinareal‐lifeco‐brandingcase.
Methodology–Theresearchofthisthesiswillbebasedonthesocialsciencesapproachasthereare
limitedempiricalstudiesconcerningco‐branding.Scholar’stheorieswillbecomplementedwithdata
fromconsumerreportsandconsumerbehaviouranalysis.
Findings–Thethesisprovidesthecharacteristicsforsuccessfulco‐brandingmodelasaconceptual30
frameworktodrawupon.Theintentionistoguideanycompanythroughtheirfirststepswhen
embracingco‐brandingaimingforsuccessfuloutcomes.Thefindingsincludeadditionalfactorsfor
successfulco‐brandingthatwerenotdiscovereduntilthemodel’sapplicationtoH&M’scases.
Researchlimitations/practicalimplications–Thisthesishasfoundusefulguidelinesforbrand
managerstouseintheco‐brandingprocess.However,furtherempiricalresearchinconsumer
behaviourisrecommended.
Originality/value–Thevalueofthisthesisisthatthemodelcreatedhasbeenputintoperspective
withreal‐lifeco‐brandingcases.Thus,itsfindingsintroduceapracticalapproachinco‐branding’s
literature.
BA.MMC.–BACHELORTHESISSUPERVISOR–SARAHAMIDALWAN
STUDENTNUMBER301114TOTALCHARACTERS(WITHOUTSPACES):54.247
3OF38
40
TableofContents
Abstract ......................................................................................................................................... 2
1.INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................... 41.1.MOTIVATION............................................................................................................................................................... 41.2.PROBLEMSTATEMENT.......................................................................................................................................... 51.3.LITERATUREREVIEW............................................................................................................................................. 51.4.METHODOLOGY ......................................................................................................................................................... 71.4.1.HERMENEUTICS .....................................................................................................................................................7
1.5.DELIMITATIONS ........................................................................................................................................................ 850
1.6.STRUCTURE ................................................................................................................................................................. 8
2.CONTEXTUALFRAMEWORK........................................................................................................ 92.1.FASHIONCONSUMERBEHAVIOUR................................................................................................................... 92.1.1.THEHISTORYOFCONSUMERBEHAVIOUR................................................................................................92.1.2.WHATDRIVESFASHIONCONSUMERS? .................................................................................................... 102.1.3.CONCLUSION ......................................................................................................................................................... 13
3.WHATDEFINESCO‐BRANDINGSTRATEGIES? ............................................................................ 143.1.THEHISTORYOFCO‐BRANDING .................................................................................................................... 143.2.MOTIVATIONFORCO‐BRANDING.................................................................................................................. 163.3.DRAWBACKSOFCO‐BRANDING ..................................................................................................................... 1960
3.4.MODELFORCO‐BRANDING............................................................................................................................... 213.5.CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................................................ 25
4.CASEANALYSIS......................................................................................................................... 264.1.HISTORYOFH&M................................................................................................................................................... 264.2.H&M’sCO‐BRANDINGCASESANALYSISANDDISCUSSION................................................................ 284.3.CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................................................ 32
5.CONCLUSION............................................................................................................................ 33
6.FUTURERESEARCH ................................................................................................................... 34
7.BIBLIOGRAPHY ......................................................................................................................... 36
8.APPENDICES ............................................................................................................................. 3870
BA.MMC.–BACHELORTHESISSUPERVISOR–SARAHAMIDALWAN
STUDENTNUMBER301114TOTALCHARACTERS(WITHOUTSPACES):54.247
4OF38
1.INTRODUCTION
1.1.MOTIVATION
“Brandsarejudgedbythecompanytheykeep”1,MichelleGreenwald.
Greenwald’squotesumsuphowcarefulbrandsneedtobewhenimplementingco‐branding
strategies.Whenfindingaco‐brandingpartnercompaniesshouldbeawarethattowhomtheyare
relatedwithreflectsdirectlyonthem(Greenwald,2011).Consequently,consumerswilljudgeto
someextendabrandwiththesamestandardsastheyjudgetheirco‐brandingpartner.Inevitably,80
somequalitiesofoneofthebrandswillbeimprintedontheotherandviceversa.Whenthisoccurs,
itmayeitherhavepositiveornegativeassociationoutcomes,orboth.Thusthiscanaffectthebrand
inmanyways.However,theseassociationoutcomesaredifficulttopredict.
ScholarssuchasAaker(1990)andKeller(2012)statethattobuildabrandmanycommunication
effortsarenecessary.However,todestroyitonesinglemisstepcanbeenough.Consequently,co‐
brandingisnotonlyastrategyaboutsalesbutitisalsoaboutstrategiccorporatecommunication.
Companiesapplybrandingandco‐brandingstrategiesinordertocommunicatetheirdesiredbrand’s
imagetotheircustomersandpositionthemselvesdifferentiatedfromotherbrands.
Thisthesisauthorbelievesthatco‐brandingwithahighfashiondesignercannotonlyboost
companies’salesbutalsoincreasetheirwebsitetraffic,socialmediafollowers,mediaattention,and90
reinforcebrandequity.Inotherwords,ifdonewell,thesestrategicpartnershipscanachieveresults
thatwillnotonlyreinforcetheirbrands’equitybutalsoincreasegeneralbrandawareness.Agood
co‐brandingstrategycansaymoreaboutabrandthanmanycommunicationexperts’effortsto
communicatethebrand’svalues.
Sincethepastdecade,therehasbeenanincreasingamountofco‐brandingcasesbetweendifferent
massfashionretailersandluxuryfashiondesigners,butlittleresearchaddressingthisspecific
strategy.Hence,itappearsthenecessitytoattempttofindthefirstschemaofwhatcouldformlater
aconceptualframework–inordertohelpresearchestostudyco‐brandingcases,andhelp
companiestoimplementsuccessfulstrategies.
99
1http://www.inc.com/michelle‐greenwald/innovative‐co‐branding‐and‐creative‐partnerships.html
BA.MMC.–BACHELORTHESISSUPERVISOR–SARAHAMIDALWAN
STUDENTNUMBER301114TOTALCHARACTERS(WITHOUTSPACES):54.247
5OF38
Asmorethan90%ofco‐brandingcasesfailinreallife(Miller,2010;Lindstrom,2002),thepurposeof100
thisthesisistoanalyseco‐brandingmotivations,explainitsadvantagesanddrawbacks,aswellasto
contrastrecentmodelsofco‐brandingpracticewithareal‐lifebusinesscaseinordertoputthese
theoriesintoperspective.
Inaddition,itfeelsindispensabletoincludeconsumerbehaviourresearch,asitisoneofthemain
areasofstudyofmarketing–beingco‐brandingavariantofbrandingandbrandingapartof
marketing.Consumerbehaviourresearchisrelevanttothisthesisbecauseitwillhelptounderstand
theopinionoftheconsumersaboutco‐brandingandtheirroleintherecentsuccessofthisfashion
trend.
1.2.PROBLEMSTATEMENT110
Whatdefinesasuccessfulcollaborationinfashionco‐branding?
Tworesearchquestionswillattempttoanswertheoverallproblemstatement:
1 Whatdrivescompaniestoco‐branding?
2 WhichcharacteristicsdoH&M’scollaborationshave?
1.3.LITERATUREREVIEW
MichaelSolomon
MichaelSolomon,Ph.D.,hasbeeninvestigatingthecomplexrelationshipbetweenmarketing
strategiesandconsumers'preferences.HereceivedtheCuttySarkMen'sFashionAwardforhis
researchonthepsychologicalaspectsofclothing.Dr.Solomon2said,“Peopledon'tbuythings120
becauseofwhattheydo;theybuythingsbecauseofwhattheymean”3.
121
2https://michaelsolomon.wordpress.com/about/3http://www.sju.edu/news/experts/marketing/solomon.html
BA.MMC.–BACHELORTHESISSUPERVISOR–SARAHAMIDALWAN
STUDENTNUMBER301114TOTALCHARACTERS(WITHOUTSPACES):54.247
6OF38
Histheorieswillhelpthisthesistoexplorefashionconsumerbehaviourinrelationwithco‐branding,
andbetterunderstandtrendsasareflectionofconsumerdemand.
UcheOkonkwo
AnotherauthorthisthesistakesintoconsiderationisUcheOkonkwo4,directorofLuxeE.t.cbusiness
strategyconsultancycompany.OkonkwoisaDoctoratecandidateatEcoleSuperieurdeCommerce,
Rennes,France.Shealsohasextensivecross‐sectorexperienceinluxurygoodsmanagementand
brandingstrategies.
Herbookonluxuryfashionbrandingprovidesvaluableinsightintotheluxuryconsumerbehaviour.
Herworkisrelevantforthisthesissincethisthesisisbasedonfashionco‐brandingbetweenfast130
fashionbrandsandhighfashiondesigners.Theboundariesbetweenfastfashionandluxuryfashion
canbeblurredthus,someknowledgeofluxuryfashionconsumerbehaviourwillberequired.
SolomonandOkonkwo’smethodologycanbeconsideredfromthephilosophicalhermeneuticspoint
ofview–asconsumerbehaviourstudiesrequirerecreatingwhatisinconsumers’mindsand
understandingthementalprocessesthatconsumersgothroughinordertoarrivetoadecision.The
selectionofthesetwoauthorsisnotarbitrary,asthisthesismainmethodologyisalsothe
philosophicalhermeneutics.
BerndHelmig,Jan‐AlexanderHuber&PeterS.H.Leeflang
BerndHelmigisprofessor,chairandheadoftheDepartmentforBusinessAdministration,Public&
NonprofitManagementattheUniversityofMannheim,Germany.Hiscolleague,Jan‐Alexander140
Huber5worksinGlobalHeadCorporateDevelopmentandisheadofprogramoffice
"Restructuring"atHSHNordbank.Theirothercolleague,PeterS.H.Leeflang6isprofessorof
marketingattheUniversityofGroningen,TheNetherlands;andguestprofessoratdifferent
universities.
Togethertheywroteanarticle(2008),whichmainpurposewastodiscussanddevelopatheoretical
modelthatcouldhelpstrategiststoimplementco‐brandingwithsuccess.Theysuggesthowever
146
4http://www.speakersacademy.eu/speakers/uche‐okonkwo5http://www.linkedin.com/pub/dr‐jan‐alexander‐huber/10/48/aa76http://www.rug.nl/staff/p.s.h.leeflang/CVMepa.pdf
BA.MMC.–BACHELORTHESISSUPERVISOR–SARAHAMIDALWAN
STUDENTNUMBER301114TOTALCHARACTERS(WITHOUTSPACES):54.247
7OF38
furtheranalysesbasedonempiricalresearch,leavingopensomequestionsregardingfitdimensions
ornewalternatives.
AlthoughHelmig’setal.(2008)modelisaresultfromcriticalrationalistmethodology,itsrelevance
forco‐brandingstudiescouldnotbeoverlooked.150
Euromonitor&Datamonitormarketreports
Duetothelittlepreviousempiricalresearchintheco‐brandingfield,differentmarketreportswillbe
usedthroughoutthisthesisasdatatocontrastwithscholars’theoriesinordertoaccomplisha
betteroverviewoftheactualmarketsituation.
EventhoughsomeEuromonitorreportsreflectcurrenttrendsfromacriticalrationalistpointofview
–contrastingannualreportsorfinancialresults–,manyofthemtrytounderstandthereasonof
currentsituationsfromthephilosophicalhermeneuticspointofview.
1.4.METHODOLOGY
1.4.1.HERMENEUTICS160
Hermeneuticsisasocialphilosophyfromthefieldofthesocialsciences.Gadamer(1975)wasoneof
itsmostprominentacademics.Hebelievedthatinordertoreachunderstandingscholars’should
operatewithinahermeneuticcircle(Skinner,1986;p.24).
Theobjectiveofthisthesisistoachieveunderstandingofconsumerbehaviourthroughtheanalysis
ofrelevantliteratureandreports.Thus,theusageofthehermeneuticcirclewillhelptointerpretall
theresultsdrawninthefollowingchapters,andconsequentlyfindvalidhypotheses.Inotherwords,
theuseofthehermeneuticcirclewillhelpthisthesistounderstandthemeaningofco‐branding
fromtheeyeoftheconsumerandconsequentlyfindthehypothesesthatmayformapractical
conceptualframeworkforacademicsandcompanies.
170
BA.MMC.–BACHELORTHESISSUPERVISOR–SARAHAMIDALWAN
STUDENTNUMBER301114TOTALCHARACTERS(WITHOUTSPACES):54.247
8OF38
1.5.DELIMITATIONS
Thisthesisisacommunicationpaperbasedonthefieldofintegratedmarketingcommunication
(IMC)inwhichbrandingisanimportantfactor.Overthepastyears,co‐brandinghasbeenincreasing
inpopularityamongstmarketersandbrandsyetco‐brandingisstillanemergingfieldinside
branding.Consequently,thisthesishaschosentofocusonco‐brandingasitsmainsubject.
Asmentionedpreviously,therearelimitedstudiesconcerningco‐branding.Thereisasmallamount
ofscholarsthathavedonequantitativeandqualitativeresearchonthefield.Likewise,thereisnota
conceptualframeworkoronebestpracticetofollowbyacompanytobesuccessfulinco‐branding.
Therefore,thisthesiswillnottakeatruenaturalscienceapproach,asitseemsunrealisticatthe
moment–duetotheresourcesathand.Thus,theresearchofthisthesiswillbebasedonthesocial180
sciences,asoneofthisthesis’aimsistounderstandthebenefitsofco‐branding.
Anotherfacttohighlightisthatdespiteanalysingconsumerbehaviour,thisthesisaimistoanalyse
co‐brandingfromthecompanies’perspective,theimplicationsthatco‐brandingmighthaveforboth
oftheinvolvedbrands,andwhetheraco‐brandingstrategycouldpossiblyenhanceordecreasetheir
imageintheeyeoftheconsumer.
Manyofthecompaniesdonothavepublicannualreportshencenotallmarketdataisavailable.
H&Mhasbeenchosenasthespecificcasebecauseitsreportsarepublicandhenceitsfinancial
results.
Thisthesisisnotgoingtoanalysecelebritycollaborationsorendorsements,oranyother
collaborationthatisnotwithinthefashionindustry.190
1.6.STRUCTURE
Tobeginwith,consumersandtheirbehaviourwillbeanalysedinordertounderstandthefactors
thatdrivethem–becauseforcompaniestosucceedtheymustunderstandconsumerbehaviour.
Afterwards,whatdefinesanddrivesco‐brandingstrategieswillbeexplained.
Subsequently,Helmig’setal.(2008)modelwillbecontrastedwithotherscholars’theoriesinorder
tooutlinethemostimportantpoints.
BA.MMC.–BACHELORTHESISSUPERVISOR–SARAHAMIDALWAN
STUDENTNUMBER301114TOTALCHARACTERS(WITHOUTSPACES):54.247
9OF38
Finally,H&M’scasewillbepresentedandanalysedincontrastwiththepreviouslydefinedmodel.As
aresult,thereistrusttodeterminewhatdefinessuccessinfashionco‐brandingandtheguidelines
necessarytoaccomplishit.200
2.CONTEXTUALFRAMEWORK
Thepurposeofthischapteristounderstandwhatdrivesconsumerstoco‐branding,whatfactors
drivecompaniestoco‐branding,andhowcanfashioncompaniesusethisknowledgetobecome
successful.
2.1.FASHIONCONSUMERBEHAVIOUR
Thepurposeofthefollowingchapteristotrytoexplainwhyandhowfashionconsumerbehaviour
haspropitiatedthepopularityofco‐brandingstrategiesamongstfashionbrands.
Firstly,thehistoryofconsumerbehaviourandthebasicstepsintheconsumerdecision‐making210
processwillbeoutlined.Secondly,theactualfashionconsumerbehaviourpanoramaandtrendswill
beanalysed.Andthirdly,abriefconclusionrelatingconsumerbehaviourtoco‐brandingpreparing
thereaderforthefurtherdevelopmentofthisthesis.
2.1.1.THEHISTORYOFCONSUMERBEHAVIOUR
Forcompaniestosucceedtheymustunderstandconsumersandtheirbehaviour.Theobjectiveof
consumerbehaviourstudiesistounderstandhowconsumersmakepurchasedecisionstosatisfy
needsanddesires(Solomonetal.,2002;p.5).
Therearefivestepsinconsumerdecision‐makingprocessesandmarketershavelearnedhowto
influenceeachstage(Solomon,2002):220
BA.MMC.–BACHELORTHESISSUPERVISOR–SARAHAMIDALWAN
STUDENTNUMBER301114TOTALCHARACTERS(WITHOUTSPACES):54.247
10OF38
Inthefieldoffashionconsumerbehaviour,forexampletheproblemrecognitionphaseusuallyisan
opportunityrecognition,whichismorerelatedwithdesiresthanwithneeds–apersonmaynotneed
newclothesbuttheystillwanttobuynewgarments(Solomon,2002;p.236‐9).Marketershave
developednewstrategiestotriggerdesire–becausedesireunlikeneedsneverends–beingco‐
brandingoneofthemostusednowadays.
Fashionco‐brandingaimstocreateashortcutinconsumers’memoriesandmakethepre‐purchase
decisioneasierbyassociationwiththeluxurybrand.Peopledonotneedmoreclothesbutthe
exclusivityofthecollaboration,thelimitededition,andthethoughtofitbeingaonceinalifetime
opportunitygeneratethedesiretobuy.Suddenly,theinformationsearchandtheevaluationof230
alternativesphasesbecomeirrelevantandtheconsumer’smindgoesdirectlytotheproductchoice
phase.Beliefslikeabettervalue‐for‐the‐priceortheonceinalifetimeopportunityconstitute
consumers’argumentstosatisfytheirdesires(ibid).
2.1.2.WHATDRIVESFASHIONCONSUMERS?
Okonkwo(2007)explainshowthe21stCenturyhaswitnessedfundamentalchangesinconsumer
behaviour.
Forthelasttwodecades,anewsocialclass,thewealthymiddleclass,hasraisedandwithitan
increaseonthedemandofluxuryfashion.Becauseofthedemandmanyyoungluxurybrandswere
born,increasingthelistofbrandstochoosefrom.Anotherfactorthathasinfluencedthe240
widespreadofluxuryfashionhasbeentheInternet.Today’sconsumersaresmarterandtheInternet
offersthemanunlimitedsourceofinformation.Fashionconsumersarehighlyinvolvedinthe
consumptionprocessresearchingtheInternettoseekinformationabouttheproductsinorderto
BA.MMC.–BACHELORTHESISSUPERVISOR–SARAHAMIDALWAN
STUDENTNUMBER301114TOTALCHARACTERS(WITHOUTSPACES):54.247
11OF38
makeadecision.Theyarefashionistas7,whichmeansthattheyknowaboutbrandsandtrends,and
theyarenotafraidofmixingluxuryfashionwithmassfashionbrands.Asaresult,theboundaries
betweenluxuryfashionandmassfashionareweakernowadays.Thenewterm“thedemocratisation
ofluxury”byitsowndefinitionexplainswhy(Solomonetal.,2002;p.93‐96,103‐5,228).
Massfashionbrandshavenoticedtheweakenedboundariesand,haveadaptertheirmarketing
strategiesthereafter.Okonkwo(2007)mentionsthosestrategiesinherbook,withinthemitshould
bepointedoutthelimited‐editionstrategy(p.229).However,limitededitionsappearnottobe250
enoughthesedaysandmassfashionbrandsneedmoretoattractthesavvyconsumer.Itseemsthat
theyhavefoundthesolutioninco‐branding.NowadaystheInternetandsocialmediaarealso
changingthebasisofmarketingandcommunication.
TheInternethaspropitiatedtheexposureofluxurybrandstotheaveragemiddleclass(Okonkwo,
2007;p.233).Beforeluxurygoodswereinaccessibletomostpeople.However,nowevenifmostof
theconsumerscannotaffordtobuyluxurybrandstheyarestillexposedtothem–propitiating
desire.Consequently,thishasledtoademandonmassluxuryfashionbytheaveragemiddleclass,
seekingtosatisfytheirdesireswithaffordableluxuryfashion(Okonkwo,2007;p.93‐96,99,102,
226‐7).Itisnecessarytohighlightthatwithinthisgroupofconsumers,youngstersandyoung
professionalsformagreatproportion.Thisthesiswillfocusontheconsumerbehaviourofthis260
segmentastheyshopmoreoftenthanothersegmentgroupsandtheyaretheheaviestbuyersof
fashionforwardgarments8(Yinyin,2010;p.32).So,consideringthatthemaintargetaudienceoffast
fashionbrandsareyoungstersandyoungadultsfromtheageof13to26,itisnecessaryto
understandtheirneeds(ibid,p.12).
Youngstersandyoungadultshavelimitedresourcesandcannotpaytheextrapricethatluxury
brandsrequire.Therefore,theychoosetobuyfastfashionbrands,likeH&MandZara,withinthe
massfashionmarketbecausetheyarecheap,trendyand“goodlooking”(Yinyin,2010;p.13,15).
Yinyin(2010)statesinherstudythatfastfashionconsumptiondeclinesaftertheageof31.Thismay
beduetotheshiftfromfastfashionbrandstomasstigeorevenhigher‐levelbrandsastheirsalaries
increase(p.11).270
270
7http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=fashionista8http://www.holijoli.com/fashion‐and‐apparel‐purchase‐outlook‐and‐consumer‐segments‐2010/
BA.MMC.–BACHELORTHESISSUPERVISOR–SARAHAMIDALWAN
STUDENTNUMBER301114TOTALCHARACTERS(WITHOUTSPACES):54.247
12OF38
Youngstersandyoungadultsareespeciallysensibletotrendsandtheinfluenceofopinionleaders.
Theyareusuallyhighself‐monitors–whichmeansthattheyareveryconcernedaboutwhatothers
thinkaboutthem(Gass&Seiter,2011).Theydresstoexpressthemselvesneedingtoreinforcetheir
imagethroughbrands,andfantasisingaboutachievingpopularityliketheiridols,opinionleadersor
celebrities–thustheirconsumptionismainlyhedonic(Solomonetal.,2002;p.93‐6).Currently,
younggirlsarelookinguptoitgirls.
TheInternethascreatednewopinionleadersandreferencegroups,whichareresponsibleforsome
brands’actualpopularity.Thetermitgirlreferstoyounggirlsthatarerelatedsomehowwiththe
fashion,cinemaorartworlds9.Theyareusuallywealthyandgetphotographedbythemedia.Their
tasteinclothesandpopularityspreadsfastthroughouttheInternet.Theseitgirlsforman280
aspirationalreferencegroup,makingtheaspirationalshopperdesiretodresslikethem.One
examplewasthecollaborationofKateMossforTopshop.Inaddition,socialmedialikeFacebookor
onlinepublishingserviceslikeBloggerorLookbook10fuelthesedesiresevenmore(ibid).
Fashioncompanieshaveusedtheneedsanddesiresoftheirtargetaudiencestocaptivatetheir
attention.
Fastfashionbrandsandfastfashioncollaborationshavebeenthemostresourcefulstrategiesto
attractyoungadultsastheycannotaffordtobuytheluxurybrandstheiraspirationalreference
groupswear.Inthecaseofcollaborations,theassociationofluxuryfashiondesignerswithfast
fashionbrandspropitiatesstimulustobuy–itisamethodofconditioning.Fastfashionbrandswant
theirtargetaudiencetofeelthatcollaborationsaretheclosestastheycangettoattainwhattheir290
aspirationalreferencegroupswear.Whenafastfashionbrandisassociatedwithaluxuryfashion
branditaffectstheformer’sbrandequityandqualityperceptionpositively.Forexample,whenH&M
releasesimagesoftheluxurydesignerhimselfsewingH&M’sclothes,theyarecreatingperception
orschemasaboutthequalityoftheclothes–conveyingsomepropertiesoftheluxuryfashion
designertothefastfashionbrand,asexclusivityandlimited‐editions.
Iffastfashionwasalreadypopularamongstitstargetaudience,duringtherecessionithasbecome
evenmorepopularwithinconsumersmainlyinUSandinEurope,anditmaycontinuebeingin‐
demandforseveralyears.However,despitefastfashion’spopularity,inUStherehasbeenashift298
9http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It_girl10http://lookbook.nu/
BA.MMC.–BACHELORTHESISSUPERVISOR–SARAHAMIDALWAN
STUDENTNUMBER301114TOTALCHARACTERS(WITHOUTSPACES):54.247
13OF38
towardsvalueshoppingatthebeginningoftheendoftherecession–consumersareseekingquality.
Likewise,inEasternEuropeconsumersarestartingtospendmore,andin2010qualitywasvalued300
overquantity.Forexample,theRusianmarkethasseenagrowthinluxuryandpremiumbrands
demand.ThesameconsumertrendwasnoticedalsoinLatinAmerica,mainlyBrazil.Cheap‐buys
satisfiedconsumers’necessitiesintherecessionbutitisuncertainifconsumerswillremainsatisfied
withlowqualityaftertherecession(SeeAppendix1).
Fastfashionmaystillrunforyearsbutthereisagrowingtrendonvalueandpremiumshopping,
mostlyincountrieswheretheincomesarerising.Therefore,fastfashionbrandsaretryingtomeet
theseemergingtrends.Theirintentionistoofferconsumers,throughtheircollaborationsand
specialeditions,valueanddesignatrelativelylowprices.Atthesametime,theycontinuekeeping
theirfastfashionessence–highturnoveroftrendygarments,andcheapprices.Inconclusion,both
consumersaresatisfied,theconsumerthatwantsqualityanddesign,andtheconsumerthatwants310
cheapandtrendygarments.
Higher‐levelmassfashionbrandscalledmasstigehavealsoembracedtheco‐brandingtrendinorder
tocompetewiththefastfashionmarket.BrandslikeHunterorAcnehavecollaboratedwithJimmy
ChooandLanvin,respectively.Intheircase,theyaretryingtofulfiltheneedsofhigher‐status
consumersthatwantfastforwarddesignswithaffordableprices,andthatmayhavespentsomeof
theirbudgetintendedtomasstigebrandsinfastfashioncollaborationswithluxurydesigners.
2.1.3.CONCLUSION
Co‐brandinghasbeenthelateststrategyofmassfashionbrandstoattractthesavvyconsumer.
Collaborationsareinnovativeandhavegivenanewmeaningtofashion.Therefore,itwillbe320
interestingtostudytheiringredientsforsuccessandunderstandhowsomecollaborationsare
successfulwhileothersarenot.
Thestudyofco‐brandingwillalsothrowsomelighttothefutureofco‐branding,sinceconsumer
behaviourfluctuatestogetherwithsocietythus,itisunknownforhowlongthesecollaborationswill
continueattractingconsumers.
BA.MMC.–BACHELORTHESISSUPERVISOR–SARAHAMIDALWAN
STUDENTNUMBER301114TOTALCHARACTERS(WITHOUTSPACES):54.247
14OF38
3.WHATDEFINESCO‐BRANDINGSTRATEGIES?
Thepurposeofthischapteristounderstandwhatdefinesanddrivesco‐branding,aswellastodraw
upondifferentscholars’theoriesinordertodefinethefirstdraftofwhatcouldbeco‐branding’s
conceptualframework.330
Thischapterwillfirst,brieflyanalysethehistoryofco‐brandinganddefinedifferentco‐branding
categories.Second,analysethemotivesoffashioncompaniestoco‐brandalongwithitsadvantages.
Third,pointoutthedrawbacksofco‐branding.Andfourth,delineateamodelforsuccessfulco‐
brandingbasedonHelmig’setal.(2008)modeltogetherwithconsiderationsderivedfromthisand
thepreviouschapter2,incombinationwithotherscholars’theories.
3.1.THEHISTORYOFCO‐BRANDING
Okonkwo(2007)definesco‐brandingasthestrategythattwocompaniesadoptwhentheypairtheir
namesandresourcestolaunchanewproduct(p.168).
Thebelieveisthatthefirstcaseofco‐brandingoccurredin1959,whenPierreCardinlauncheda340
readytowearcollectionforFrenchdepartmentstorePrintemps11(ibid).Atthattime,the
collaborationwasoutrageousforsomepeople,buttimeschangeandconsumerattitudesdoaswell.
Thephenomenonofco‐brandingstartedtobeusualaroundthemid1980’sandincreasedits
popularityduringthelate90’s12.Nowadaysdaysrarelypassbywithoutanewco‐branding
announcementwithinanyindustry.
Therearedifferentformsofcollaborationswithindifferentindustries(SooKyoungetal.,2010;p.6).
Thefirstarecalledinter‐industrialcollaborations,whichareco‐brandingcasesbetweentwo
differentbrandspertainingtodifferentmarketsectors.Forexample,in1997,Lexuslauncheda
limited"CoachEdition"LS400incollaborationwithAmericanaccessoriesmanufacturerCoach13.
Andthesecondaretheintra‐industrialcollaborations,whichareco‐brandingcasesbetweentwo350
differentbrandspertainingtothesamemarketsector.Theyhavebecomeincreasinglymorepopular
351
11http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Cardin12http://www.brighthub.com/office/entrepreneurs/articles/46418.aspx13http://trendwatching.com/trends/BRANDED_BRANDS.htm
BA.MMC.–BACHELORTHESISSUPERVISOR–SARAHAMIDALWAN
STUDENTNUMBER301114TOTALCHARACTERS(WITHOUTSPACES):54.247
15OF38
withinthefashionworldwiththelaunchofhighprofiledesignercollaborationsandthehelpof
socialmedia.Forexample,since2004thefashionindustryhasseenmanynewemergingco‐
brandingallianceslikeMaryKatrantzouforTopshop,StellaMcCartneyorValentinoforGAP,Missoni
orJasonWuforTarget,KarlLagerlfeldorMarniforH&M,DVFforGAP14,OpeningCeremonyand
manydesigners15,etcetera.However,thisisnoteventhebeginning.Ontheonehand,in2012new
collaborationswillflourish,likeAltuzarraforJ.Crew,andotherlong‐termcollaborationswill
continue,likeTheyskensforTheoryorStellaMcCartneyforAdidas.However,ontheotherhand
othercollaborationsareabouttoseetheirend.Forexample,Targethasannouncedthattheyare
notgoingtocontinuetheirco‐brandingstrategywithluxuryfashiondesignersbutinsteadtheywill360
starttosponsorsmallU.S.boutiques16.Thereasonsforthischangeofstrategymaybemany,but
onemightbetheshiftoftheirconsumers’latentdemands.
Apartfromthetwodifferentformsofcollaborationswithinindustries,therearedifferentformsof
collaborationbetweenmassfashionbrands,luxuryfashionbrands,luxuryfashiondesignersor
youngdesigners,whichdifferontheirmotivations:
366
14http://www.dvf.com/inside/Article/inside‐dvf‐acticles/dvf‐hearts‐gap15http://www.blackbookmag.com/fashioneer‐1.110/opening‐ceremony‐collaboration‐sluts‐1.3838516http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article‐2087439/Target‐moves‐away‐high‐end‐fashion‐collaborations‐support‐small‐
U‐S‐boutiques.html
Figure1.Fashionco‐brandingcases
BA.MMC.–BACHELORTHESISSUPERVISOR–SARAHAMIDALWAN
STUDENTNUMBER301114TOTALCHARACTERS(WITHOUTSPACES):54.247
16OF38
3.2.MOTIVATIONFORCO‐BRANDING
Co‐brandinghasseenmorethana40%annualgrowthsincethelastdecade.Brandsmayembrace
co‐brandingforvariousreasons,dependingonwhethertheyareluxurybrandsormass‐market
brands(Chang2008,p.498).However,onethingisclear,thebenefitsofco‐branding–canbe370
substantialforanybrand.Thefollowingparagraphswillanalyseandsuggestmotivationalgroundfor
differentsortsofbrandstoco‐brandandtheadvantageshereof.Chosenscholars’theoriesand
researchreportsareincludedtosupporttheseconsiderations,alongwiththeknowledgeacquiredin
chapter2.
Bothbrands’motivations
Therearecommonmotivationsforco‐brandingregardlessofthestatusofthebrandsinvolved.
Thefirstmotiveisthedesiretoreinforcebrandequity(Geylanietal.2008,p.730;Chang2008,p.
498).
Aaker(2010)explainsthatco‐brandingbringstheadvantagesofbrandextensionbutwithlessrisk
andmorevisibility(p.298).Hedefinesbrandequityas:380
thesetofassets(andliabilities)linkedtoabrand’snameandsymbolthataddsto(or
subtractsfrom)thevalueprovidedbyaproductorservicetoafirmand/orthatfirm’s
customers(p.7).
Washburnetal.(2000)provedthatco‐brandingimprovesconsumers’opinionsofbrandequity–
whethertheconstituentbrandshadhigh‐equityorlow,alwayswhenpositiveopinionsoccurred
afterproducttrial(p.600).Brandswanttoreinforcecustomer‐basedbrandequitybecausewhen
thishappens,consumersrespondfavourablytothetotalofabrand’squalities,identifythebrand
asareflectionoftheirmainpreferencesandconsequentlybuytheproductandcommittothe
brand–creatingcompetitivepositionadvantage.
Furthermore,themainobjectiveofbrandequityistocreatebrandvalue.Theformerisrelatedto390
consumerbehaviour,butthelattertofinancialgains.Subsequently,brandequitycanresultin
financialsuccess.
Consequently,thesecondmotiveofco‐brandingisfinancialsuccess(Geylanietal.2008,p.730;
Chang2008,p.498).Apartfromallthebenefitsforthebrand,collaborationsmayleadtoan
BA.MMC.–BACHELORTHESISSUPERVISOR–SARAHAMIDALWAN
STUDENTNUMBER301114TOTALCHARACTERS(WITHOUTSPACES):54.247
17OF38
increaseinsales,whichisoneofthemainfinancialobjectivesofeverycompanyfromasimplistic
pointofview.
Thethirdmotiveofcompaniesforco‐brandingistoobtainoperationalbenefits(ibid).Companies
canlearnfromtheirco‐brandingpartners,usetheirresourcesontheirbehalfandapplytheacquired
knowledgeinthefuture.Whenco‐branding,bothcompaniescanlearnandprofitfromeachother.
Forexample,theluxurybrandmayusethefastfashionbrandchainofretailerstodistributetheir400
productandlearnabouttheirbusinessmodel,whilethefastfashionbrandmayusetheluxury
designercustomerbasetoattractnewconsumers.
Uggla(2006)statesthatco‐brandingproductsreinforcebrandvaluesandreachnewtargetgroups
(p.786).Thus,thefourthmotiveofcompaniesforco‐brandingisthedesiretoaccessnewmarkets,
engagingwithanewconsumerbase,respondingnewconsumerneeds–asseeninchapter2.
Fifthandfinally,nowadaysco‐brandingreceivessubstantialmediaattention,whichcanbe
translatedintoconsiderableamountsoffreepublicity.Manymarketers17statethatthisisoneofthe
underlyingmotivesforco‐branding,andthatcollaborationsareastrategybasicallytogetthe
attentionfromthepublicandthemedia–togeneratebuzz.
Massfashionbrands’motivations410
Therearemotivationsmoreinherenttomassfashionbrandsbecauseluxurybrandsmaynotneedto
enhancethesecharacteristics(Geylanietal.2008,p.730;Chang2008,p.498).
First,Raoetal.(1999)statedthatthecombinationoftwobrandsinaco‐brandingstrategydeliversa
higherqualityperceptionaboutthebrandsandtheproductthaniftheproductwassinglebranded
(Helmigetal.,2008;p.360).Thisisbecauseconsumersjudgethenewproductinbaseofits
constituentbrandshencetheirbrandequity(Washburnetal.,2000;p.593).So,theassociationof
massfashionbrandswithluxuryfashiondesignersbringscredibilitytothemassfashionbrand–
indicatingqualityandincreasingconsumer‐perceivedvalue.Asaconsequence,thisassociation
possiblywillalsoattractnewcustomersthatmaynothavebeenpurchasersofthemassfashion
brand–soiftheylikewhatthemassfashionretailerhastooffertheymaycomebackevenoutside420
thecollaborationtimespan(Kondej,2011;Appendix2).
421
17http://www.mediabistro.com/prnewser/fashions‐high‐low‐collaborations‐measured‐by‐media‐impressions_b30447
BA.MMC.–BACHELORTHESISSUPERVISOR–SARAHAMIDALWAN
STUDENTNUMBER301114TOTALCHARACTERS(WITHOUTSPACES):54.247
18OF38
Second,Miller(2010)wroteonherdatareport(SeeAppendix2)thatcollaborationsbetweenhigh
streetchainsanddesignerbrandsimprovetheirfashioncredentialsandallowthemtobeinspiredby
theluxurybrands.
Ontheotherhand,Miller(2010)alsowrotethatcollaborationswithrecentlyfashiongraduatestend
tobeseenasmoreoriginalbecausetheircutting‐edgedesigns–feelingthatgetstransferredtothe
fastfashionretailer’sbrandimage.Asaresult,third,collaborationswithyoungdesignersarea
brilliantPRstrategy,lesscostlythanotherstrategiesbuteffectivein“raisingtheprofile”.For
example,BritishmassfashionbrandTopshopisknownfortheirsupporttoyoungBritishfashion
talents,astheCFDA/VogueFashionFundisinU.S.However,youngdesignerscollaborationsmaynot430
beasprofitableasitseem.In2011,GAPDesignEditions18partnership19withtheCFDA/Vogue
FashionFund20sawitsend.Reportedly,GAP21decidedtoinvestitsmoneyinfamousluxuryfashion
designerscollaborationsinstead,sincethepartnershipwithCFDA/VogueFashionFundwasrequiring
considerableamountsofmoneyandnotreturningtheprofitsGAPexpectedincomparisonwith
StellaMcCartney’scollaboration(SeeAppendix2).Nonetheless,themainreasonmighthavebeen
thatthefinancialdemandsfromtheCFDA/VogueFashionFunddidnotpropitiateanadequate
returnininvestment–ROI.
Luxuryfashionbrands’motivations
Luxuryfashiondesignersfirstmotiveisthedesiretointroducetheirbrandtoyoungsterssowhen
theseyoungstersgrowolderandeconomicallymorepowerfultheretrievaloftheirbrandiseasier.440
Inotherwords,theywanttoengagewithpotentialfutureconsumers.
Furthermore,Okonkwo(2007)discusseshowZarahasscoredhigherbrandequitythanHermèsor
CartierontheontheTop100GlobalBrandsScoreboardbyInterbrand/Businessweek.Okonkwo
(2007)believesthatbecauseconsumersinteractmorewithamassbrandthevalueofthismass
brandislikelytobehigher(p.230).Therefore,luxuryfashionbrandssecondreasontoco‐brandwith
445
18http://www.style.com/peopleparties/parties/scoop/041608GAP19http://www.cfda.com/gap‐cfdavogue‐fashion‐fund‐introduce‐limited‐edition‐collection/20http://www.cfda.com/cfdavogue‐fashion‐fund/21http://fashionista.com/2010/08/why‐gap‐relinquished‐sponsorship‐of‐the‐cfdavogue‐fashion‐fund‐to‐j‐crew‐and‐ann‐
taylor/
BA.MMC.–BACHELORTHESISSUPERVISOR–SARAHAMIDALWAN
STUDENTNUMBER301114TOTALCHARACTERS(WITHOUTSPACES):54.247
19OF38
massfashionbrandsmaybethedesiretoincreasetheirinteractionwithconsumersthus,increase
theirbrandvalue.
Additionally,Miller(2010)statesthatluxuryfashionisnowmoreaccessibletoconsumersthanksto
co‐branding,afactthatalsobenefitsdesignerswithanincreaseofthemedia’sinterest.Anexample
istheCFDA/VogueFashionFund,withVogue’sdirectorAnnaWintourandCFDA’spresidentDiane450
vonFurstenberg,whichhashelpedyoungAmericandesignerslikeTakoontoachievesuccessfaster
thansomelong‐establishedluxurybrands.TheCFDA/VogueFashionFundrequiredtheirsponsors–
formersponsorGAP,andactualsponsorJ.Crew–thateveryyear,theCFDA/VogueFashionFund’s
winnersshouldlaunchacollectionco‐brandingwiththem.
460
3.3.DRAWBACKSOFCO‐BRANDING470
Ontheotherhand,somedisadvantagesmaymenaceco‐brandingalliances.Thefollowing
paragraphsbrieflyconsiderthepossibledrawbacksofco‐branding.
Figure2.Motivationsforco‐branding
BA.MMC.–BACHELORTHESISSUPERVISOR–SARAHAMIDALWAN
STUDENTNUMBER301114TOTALCHARACTERS(WITHOUTSPACES):54.247
20OF38
Forbothbrands
Oneofthemaindangersofco‐brandingisthepossibleharmdonetoabrand’sequity.Brandsare
afraidthatconsumersmayattributenegativeassociationsiftheyhaveanegativeexperiencewith
theco‐brandingproduct,orhadanegativeexperiencewiththeco‐brandingassociate(Washburnet
al.,2000;p.593).However,thelatterstatementhasbeenfalsifiedbySimoninandRuth(1998)when
theyprovedthatunderpositiveco‐brandingproductreviewshigh‐equitybrandsarenotdamaged
bytheirassociationwithlow‐equitybrands(Washburnetal.,2000;p.599).
Formassfashionbrands480
Miller(2010)wroteonherEuromonitorreportthatwhenco‐brandingarrivestothepointthatitno
longerseemsexclusiveitwillbemoredifficulttouseasastrategyofbrand‐building.
Moreover,withthelossofnoveltythescepticismandthelossofeffectivenessmayalsofollow.
Consumersmaynotcontinuetobeconvincedthattheyaregettingextravalueforthemoneypaid–
alongwiththescepticism,thebeliefthatthecollaborationsareoverpricedfastfashionclothes
insteadofbargaindesignergarmentsmayalsofollow.
Forluxurybrands
Some authors believe that co‐branding could damage the luxury fashion brand and make it less
exclusive.Forexample,KondejwroteonherEuromonitorreport“H&M’sloveaffairwithdesigners
showsnosignof cooling” (2011) thatprobablyco‐brandingbetween luxury fashiondesignersand490
massfashionbrandslikeH&Mwillcometoanend,andwhenitdoes,thoseluxurybrandsthatdid
not collaboratewithmass fashionbrandswill beperceivedasmoreelitist andwithhigher equity
than the luxury brands that did collaborate withmass fashion brands. This claim is sustained by
Okonkwo(2007):
True luxury and prestige brands do not utilise mass‐market strategies in order to become mass‐
marketbrands.Rather,theyhaverecognisedthechangesintheluxurymarketplaceandareattuning
theirstrategiesaccordingly,withoutsacrificingtheircoreheritageandbrandessence(p.241).
500
BA.MMC.–BACHELORTHESISSUPERVISOR–SARAHAMIDALWAN
STUDENTNUMBER301114TOTALCHARACTERS(WITHOUTSPACES):54.247
21OF38
3.4.MODELFORCO‐BRANDING
Helmigetal.(2008)developedatheoreticalmodelforco‐brandingbasedonliteratureandsample
research(p.366‐7).
OneoftheobjectivesofthischapteristoexplainHelmig’setal.(2008)modelfroma
straightforwardpointofview,toupdateitwiththepreviousknowledgeacquiredthroughoutthis
thesis(seechapter3.2&3.3),andtocomplementitwithotherscholars’relevanttheoriesthathave
beenregardedasrelevantforthepurposeofthisthesis.Anotherobjective,consignedtothenext
chapter,willbeapplyingthemodelonH&M’sco‐brandingcases.
FourdimensionscomposeHelmig’setal.(2008)model.Thefirstdimensionisthecomposedbythe510
characteristicsoftheoriginalbrands/productsandisrelateddirectlytobrandequity–since
Okonkwo(2007)statesthattheindicatorscomposingbrandequityarebrandimageattributes,
awareness,loyalty,qualityperception,andassociations(p.121).
Consequently,Helmigetal.(2008)statethatco‐brandingwillbesuccessfuliffirst,brandawareness
ishigh,whichmeansthatbothoratleastoneofthebrandsiswellknownwithintheirpublics.
Figure3.Drawbacksofco‐branding
BA.MMC.–BACHELORTHESISSUPERVISOR–SARAHAMIDALWAN
STUDENTNUMBER301114TOTALCHARACTERS(WITHOUTSPACES):54.247
22OF38
Second,theperceivedqualityishigh,whichmeansthatbothoratleastoneofthebrandsis
consideredtohaveagoodquality‐pricerelationship.
Third,thebrandimageishigh,whichmeansthatbothoratleastoneofthebrandsisconsideredto
haveastrongimageonconsumers’minds.
Andfourth,Lindstrom(2002)andUggla(2006)mentionthatbothcompaniesshouldachieveequal520
valueoutoftheco‐brandingpartnership.Thisfourthcharacteristicisimportantbecauseitwillavoid
laterdiscomfortandpossibleproblemsbetweenthebrandscomposingtheco‐brandingdeal.
ThefifthcharacteristiccorrespondstotheseconddimensionofHelmig’setal.(2008)model,
characteristicsoftheco‐brandedproduct.Thus,fifth,iftheadvertisingisrelevant,whichmeansthat
theadvertisingoftheproductisappropriateandindicatessomeoftheadvantagesoftheco‐
brandedproductovertheothers,theco‐brandedproductwillbesuccessful.
AakerandKeller(1990)proposedthreedimensionsoffitforbrandextensions:complementarity,
substitutability,andtransferability(SooKyoungetal.,2010;p.9).InHelmig’setal.(2008)modelthe
thirdofthesedimensionscanbetranslatedintocomplementariness,thefirstintofitbetweenthe
brandsandtheco‐brandedproduct,butthesecondhowever,cannotbetranslatedintoanyofthe530
characteristicsofthemodel.Substitutabilityrelatesconsumersandhowtheyseetheproductasa
substituteforotherproduct.Therefore,consideringsubstitutabilityasanimportantcharacteristic
forco‐brandingsuccess,itshouldbeaddedtoHelmig’setal.(2008)model.
Nonetheless,thenewaddedsixthcharacteristictoHelmig’setal.(2008)modelshouldbeexplained
fromaco‐brandingpointofview–insteadofabrandextensionpointofview.Theproductisnot
onlyasubstituteforapreviousproductbutanupgradethusthecharacteristicsareimprovedand
mayevencoverconsumerneedsthatwerenevercoveredbefore,anexampleofthisisY3.Since
1987luxuryfashiondesignerYojiYamamotoisdesigningalineofsportswearforAdidascalledY3.
Nowadaysthisco‐brandingcasestillexistsandY3evenpresentstheirnewcollectionswitha
runawayshowinNewYork’sFashionWeek.ApartfromtheY3line,AdidascollaborateswithStella540
McCartney(Okonkwo,2007;p.169).Bothcollaborationsfulfilledneedsofconsumersthat
previouslywereneversatisfied,theneedfordesignersportsclothes.Inaddition,bothcollaborations
arelong‐termanddefyoneofthecharacteristicsmanyscholarssaidthatco‐brandingstrategies
shouldhave,ephemerality.
BA.MMC.–BACHELORTHESISSUPERVISOR–SARAHAMIDALWAN
STUDENTNUMBER301114TOTALCHARACTERS(WITHOUTSPACES):54.247
23OF38
Lindstrom(2002)andUggla(2006)relatetheseventhcharacteristictotargetaudience.Iftheco‐
brandingproduct/alliancecannotbepresentedeasilytoitspotentialcustomers,itwillnotsucceed–
peopleneedclearideasofwhataproductcanoffertothem.So,theseventhcharacteristicwillbe
clearfunctionality.
TheeighthcharacteristiccorrespondstothethirddimensioninHelmig’setal.(2008)model,brand
andproductfit.Thischaracteristicwillbecomplementariness,whichmeansthatbothbrandsshould550
becomplementaryinthemindoftheconsumerregardingfitwithoneattributeoftheco‐branded
product,brandfit,andproductfit.Inaddition,Lindstrom(2002)statedthatbeforeanything,
companiesshouldlookintotheirvaluesandseeiftheco‐brandingpartnertheyaimforhasthe
samevaluesasthembecauseifnot,theco‐brandingstrategywillfail.Sobrandvaluematchwillbe
theninthcharacteristicofthethirddimensioninHelmig’setal.(2008)model.
Finally,otherresearchers(Euromonitor)expressedthatco‐brandinginthefashionworldshouldbe
donebetweenlowfashionbrandsandhighfashiondesigners,henceco‐brandingbetweenmasstige
andluxuryfashiondesignersisaformulatoavoid.Themotiveforthisstatementisthebeliefthat
co‐brandingshouldnotexceedaparticularpricerange.Somecollaborationsdefythisformulaand
haveproventobeprofitable.Thismaybetruedependingondifferentfactors,thethoroughstudyof560
thetargetaudiencebeingoneofthemostimportant.
Atleastoneofthebrandscomposingtheco‐brandingshouldbeafitwiththetargetaudience.For
example,OpeningCeremonyhascollaboratedwithmanyluxuryfashiondesignersanddespitetheir
higherpricestheyhavesucceededintheirstrategyalsowinningthe2011WGSNGlobalFashion
Awardsfortheiroutstandingfashioncollaborations(SeeAppendix2).Anotherexamplecouldbe
fairlyclassicItalianluxurybrandofaccessoriesTod’sincollaboration22withJeffersonHack,editorof
magazineDazed&Confused.Itcouldbesaidthattheirtargetaudienceisquitedifferent.However,
withthiscollaborationTod’shasaccomplishedtorejuvenatetheirbrandandgiveitahiptouchthat
wasmuchneeded.Theseexamplesconfirmthatwhenabrandtakestheirtargetaudienceinto
considerationandprofoundlyknowstheirconsumeritcanachievesuccessdespitedefyingscholar’s570
recommendations.ThisclaimwillbethelastcharacteristicincludedinHelmig’setal.(2008)model
togetherwithfactorsasproductinvolvementandbrandorientation–becausethemoreinvolveda
572
22http://www.styleintel.com/2012/01/exclusive‐tods‐and‐jefferson‐hack‐pair‐up‐for‐new‐shoe‐design/
BA.MMC.–BACHELORTHESISSUPERVISOR–SARAHAMIDALWAN
STUDENTNUMBER301114TOTALCHARACTERS(WITHOUTSPACES):54.247
24OF38
personiswithabrandandaproductthemoreinteresttheywilltakeintheco‐brandedresulting
product(seechapter2).
Thefollowingmodelresultsfromthemergerofalltheoriesinthischapterandconsiderationsdone:
Havingmentionedthecharacteristicsthatmakesuccessfulco‐brandingstrategies(Fig.4),itisvisible
someoverlapwiththedifferentmotivesandadvantagesforco‐branding(Fig.2).Therefore,before
startingco‐branding,brandsshouldthinkaboutwhattheywanttoaccomplishandwhatthey580
alreadyhave,andconsidertheiroptionsforco‐brandingpartners.Afterwards,theymaytakeuseof
themodel(Fig.4)andconsideriftheco‐brandingcasewouldworkwiththecomponentstheyhave
athand.
Okonkwo(2007)developedsometacticalguidelinesfromherexperienceintheco‐brandingand
luxurybrandingfields.Shestatesthatfirstly,foreveryco‐brandingstrategytheremustalwaysbea
strategicpurpose,forexampleastoreopeningoramarketentrance.Thepurposemaybe
consideredinadvancetogetherwiththebrands’motivationsandcharacteristicsforsuccessstatedin
theco‐brandingmodelsabove(Fig.2&4).
Figure4.Characteristicsofsuccessfulco‐branding
BA.MMC.–BACHELORTHESISSUPERVISOR–SARAHAMIDALWAN
STUDENTNUMBER301114TOTALCHARACTERS(WITHOUTSPACES):54.247
25OF38
Secondly,Okonkwo(2007)alsoaddedthatfashioncollaborationsshouldalwaysbelimitededitions
inordertoretaintheluxurysensation.Andfinally,theco‐brandresultmustbeclearly590
communicatedtoconsumersgivingnoplaceofmisunderstandingsregardingbrandequityand
image(p.171,242).Inotherwords,itshouldbeclearthatforexample,thegarmentsarearesult
fromco‐brandingofaluxurybrandwithamassfashionbrand,andthatthemassfashionbrandis
theoneadaptingtheluxurybranddesignstotheirsystemproducing,anddistributingtheproduct.
3.5.CONCLUSION
Collaborationswillcontinueaslongasthebenefitsaremoreadvantageousthanthedrawbacksfor
bothco‐brandingpartners.However,Miller(2010)andLindstrom23(2002)statedthat90%ofco‐
brandingcasesfail–whichfactorsMiller(2010)orLindstrom(2002)analysedtoarrivetothis600
conclusionisunknownbythisthesis’author.
Howlongcollaborationscancontinueisaquestionthatconcernstomany.Thedrawbacks
mentionedabove,butmainlythelossofexclusivity,maytriggertheendofthetrendofco‐branding.
Thatdoesnotmeanthatco‐brandingwillendperse,butthatthecollaborationswillgradually
diminish.Thebestthingthatmarketerscandoistomonitorconsumerbehaviourtodetectpossible
605
23http://www.clickz.com/clickz/column/1716654/brand‐brand‐success‐part
Purpose+aim(needs+wants)
Limited‐edition
Cleardescription/product
Figure5.TacticalGuidelines
BA.MMC.–BACHELORTHESISSUPERVISOR–SARAHAMIDALWAN
STUDENTNUMBER301114TOTALCHARACTERS(WITHOUTSPACES):54.247
26OF38
changesinattitudetowardsco‐branding,andtoobservehowthesecollaborationsarejudgeddayby
day(Kondej,2011).
Themodelforsuccessfulco‐brandingproposedinthischapterconstitutesmerelyastartingpointfor
anyco‐brandingstrategy.Itisamodeltogothroughbeforechoosingtheco‐brandingpartnerand
product.Afterwards,afullIntegratedMarketingCommunication(IMC)studywillbenecessaryusing610
PRESTCOM,SWOT,andRABOSTICinordertoanalyseallthemarketfactorsandenvironment,to
understandthecompany’sposition,andtodevelopthemainanalysis,respectively(Pickton&
Broderick,2005).
4.CASEANALYSIS
ThepurposeofthischapteristoanalyseH&M’sco‐brandingcaseswithHelmig’setal.(2008)model
fromchapter3(Fig.4)inordertodevelopahypothesisaboutwhatdefinesasuccessful
collaborationinfashionco‐branding.
Thischapterwillfirst,brieflyanalysethehistoryH&M.Second,analyseH&M’srelevantco‐branding
casesincomparisonwithHelmig’setal.(2008)complementedmodelfromchapter3(Fig.4)inorder620
todefinetheelementsthatcreatesuccessfulcollaborationsinreal‐life.Andthird,concludewiththe
findingsfromchapter4.2.
Notefromtheauthor:FulldataofallH&M’sco‐brandingcasescanfoundattheEuromonitorreport
regardingH&Mcollaborations(SeeAppendix3).
4.1.HISTORYOFH&M
H&MHennes&MauritzAB(operatingasH&M24)isaSwedishfast‐fashionretail‐clothingcompany
foundedin1947.Ithasover2,000storesin43countriesandemploysmorethan90,000people.Itis
thefourthlargestapparelcompanyjustbehindNike,AdidasandInditex(1st,2ndand3rd)(See
Appendix3).630
630
24http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H%26M
BA.MMC.–BACHELORTHESISSUPERVISOR–SARAHAMIDALWAN
STUDENTNUMBER301114TOTALCHARACTERS(WITHOUTSPACES):54.247
27OF38
H&M’stargetaudienceisyoungwomen,fashion‐conscious,andusuallyonabudget,betweenthe
agesof15to34.H&M’smissionstatementcombinesperfectlytheirtargetaudience’sdesires:
“fashionandqualityatthebestprice”.
Euromonitor’sauthorshavedevelopedaSWOTanalysisaboutH&M’ssituationin2011(See
Appendix3):
Strengths Weaknesses
• Fastfashiontrend.
• Strongbrandimage.
• Revenuegrowth.
• Widespreadgeographicpresence.
• Excessivedependenceonthirdparty
vendorsforsupplyofmerchandise.
Opportunities Threats
• Growthonretailapparelindustry.
• Growthononlineshopping.
• GrowthonplussizemarketinUSandUK.
• ExpansionofCOSstores.
• Planningofluxurylinelaunch:“&Other
Stories”25.
• ExpansioninkeymarketsofAsia.
• Intensecompetition.
• RisinglabourcostsinAsiapressuring
margins.
• WeakconsumerspendinginUSand
Europe.
• Riskofforeignexchangefluctuations.
Since2004,H&M’skeystrategyhasbeenitspartnership/co‐brandingwithluxuryfashiondesigners.
NowadaysthesecollaborationsshapeapartofH&M’sbrandequity.640
ThisthesishaschosentoanalyseandcontrastH&M’scollaborationswithHelmig’setal.(2008)
model,notonlybecausetheirannualreportsarepublicbut,becausethesecollaborationshavebeen
asignificantachievementinthefashionindustry.
644
25http://www.vogue.co.uk/news/2012/03/27/hm‐to‐launch‐own‐luxury‐label
BA.MMC.–BACHELORTHESISSUPERVISOR–SARAHAMIDALWAN
STUDENTNUMBER301114TOTALCHARACTERS(WITHOUTSPACES):54.247
28OF38
4.2.H&M’sCO‐BRANDINGCASESANALYSISANDDISCUSSION
SomeofH&M’sdifferentdesignercollaborationsaregoingtobeanalysedincontrastwithHelmig’s
etal.(2008)complementedmodelforco‐brandingsuccess(Fig.4).AlldatafromH&M
collaborationscanbefoundinEuromonitor’sreport(SeeAppendix3).
ThefirstH&McollaborationwaswithluxuryfashiondesignerKarlLagerfeldanditwasannouncedin
June2004forbeinglaterlaunchedinNovember.FinanciallyspeakingitwasH&M’smostsuccessful650
collaboration,untilMarni,witha24%increaseinorganicmonthlysalesincludingVATcompared
withthepreviousyear(Y‐O‐Y).
Ontheonehand,thisthesisauthorbelievesthatthetacticalaspectsofthiscollectionwere
thoroughlystudiedbeforehand.So,fromthetacticalpointofview(Fig.5),first,thecollection’s
purposewastwofold.Ontheonehand,H&Mwantedtoincreaseitssalesandpopularity.Onthe
otherhand,thecollaborationwastheperfectpracticeexerciseforKarlLagerfeldtolaunchhisown
masstigecollection26later.Second,thecollectionwasalimitededition,asallH&Mcollaborations
are,sotheauraofexclusivitywaspreserved.Third,itwasclearthatthiscollaborationwasKarl
Lagerfeld’sownseparatefromChanel,andthatdesigningafastfashioncollectionwithH&M’s
resourceswasanexerciseofdesignforLagerfeld.Inotherwords,itwasclearfromthebeginning660
thatthiscollectionwasnotaluxurycollectionbutacollectionthatbroughttheluxuryfashion
designstothemassfashionmarket.Lagerfeldwasadmiredforhisempathywiththeconsumerwhile
H&Mwascherishedformakingavailableluxurytonormalpeople.Asaconsequence,bothbrands
raisedtheirequityontheeyesoftheconsumer.
Ontheotherhand,thecharacteristicsforsuccess(Fig.4)ofthiscollectionwereallcovered.First,
bothbrands’awarenesswashigh–however,KarlLagerfeld’sawarenesswashigherin2004because
H&Mwasnotaswidespreadworldwideasitisnowin2012.Second,theperceivedqualityofKarl
Lagerfeldbrandwashigh,asaresult,ithadpositiveeffectsinenhancingamoderatequality
constituentbrandlikeH&M.Third,bothbrandshadalreadyhighbrandequity,butthiscollaboration
wastranslatedintoahigherperceivedequityofH&M’sbrand.Fourth,thisco‐brandingformwas670
fairlynew,especiallybetweenluxuryfashiondesignersandfastfashionbrands,thusthisconstituted
aninnovativeproductdifferentfromendorsements.Fifth,forbothbrandsitwasawin‐winsituation.
672
26http://www.brandchannel.com/home/post/2012/01/25/Karl‐Net‐a‐Porter‐Launch‐012512.aspx
BA.MMC.–BACHELORTHESISSUPERVISOR–SARAHAMIDALWAN
STUDENTNUMBER301114TOTALCHARACTERS(WITHOUTSPACES):54.247
29OF38
Sixth,theadvertisingofthecollaborationwashighprofile.Billboardads,atwo‐minuteTV
commercial,andanonlinepreviewreleaseatH&M’swebpagecreatedfreepresscoverageand
expectationaroundthecollaboration.Asaresult,longqueuesofpeoplewerewaitingatthestores’
doorsforthein‐storelaunch.Seventh,itwasclearthattheproductwasamassfashionproduction
andthatitwasnotaChanelitem,asKarlhimselfdeclared,hewantedtomakeready‐to‐wear
clothestomakethe“inexpensivedesirable”.
Eighth,thedegreeofcomplementarinessregardinganattributeoftheco‐brandedproductwashigh,
asbothbrandsarefashionbrandssobothseemedcompatiblefromtheconsumers’pointofview–680
butnotforsomecriticsthough.Thefitbetweenbothbrandswentfurther.AsKarlLagerfeld
expressedpreviously,hisdesiretomakefashionforthemassesfittedperfectlyH&M’smission,
vision,andvalues.However,afterthecollaborationended,KarlLagerfeldcriticisedH&Mformaking
alimitededitioncollection,implyingthathisdesignswerenotaccessibleforthemajorityofpeople.
Inaddition,thecollaborationhadalsoahighfitinvolvingperson‐specificvariables.Theassociation
ofKarlLagerfeldwithChanelresultedinacollectionthatanyyounggirlwouldlovetohave–since
theywouldlovetohaveanythingfromChanel27(seechapter2).Thetargetaudiencefit,product
involvementandbrandorientationwashigh,thusthesuccessoftheco‐branding.
H&MandKarlLagerfeld’scollaborationhadallthefactorsnecessaryforsuccessandtheydid
success.Additionally,thecollaboration’snoveltywasanadvantageinordertoattractinnovative690
consumersandearlyadopters(Solomonetal.,2002).
AfterKarlLagerfeld’scollaborationmanyhavecomeafter,whicharelistedbychronologicalorder:
697
27http://www.forbes.com/2008/03/25/brand‐luxury‐desirable‐forbeslife‐cx_nr_0325style_slide_3.html?thisSpeed=20000
BA.MMC.–BACHELORTHESISSUPERVISOR–SARAHAMIDALWAN
STUDENTNUMBER301114TOTALCHARACTERS(WITHOUTSPACES):54.247
30OF38
ApartfromKarlLagerfeldcollaboration,themostsuccessfulofallH&M’scollaborationshasbeen
Marni’scollection,witha26%increaseinorganicmonthlysalesincludingVAT(Y‐O‐Y)anda16%700
increaseofmonthlysalesincomparableunits(L‐F‐L)comparedwiththepreviousyear.
Marni’scaseisanexampleofthegreatinfluenceofconsumerbehaviourinmarketstrategies.Itis
notclearifH&Mknewbeforehandhowsuccessfulthiscollaborationwouldbe,evenwhenitwas
lackingmanyofthecharacteristicsdescribedaboveforsuccessfulcollaborations(Fig.4).Consumer
behaviourcansurpriseeventhebestexpertsinmarketing.
IfwecompareMarni’scasewithHelmig’setal.(2008)model,someabsencesofdifferent
characteristicscanbenoticed.Ontheonehand,Marniisarelativelyyoungfashionbrand–bornin
1994.Itsbrand’sawarenesswithinH&M’stargetaudiencecouldbeconsideredlow,asMarniis
knownmorewithinolderconsumersandbourgeoisgirlswithatendencyforfurandluxury28.
However,thislowawarenesswithinH&M’sgeneralpublicmayhavebeenthestrengthofits710
success.
711
28http://www.style.com/fashionshows/designerdirectory/MARNI/seasons/
2004KarlLagerfeld
StellaMcCartney Viktor&Rolf RobertoCavalli
Marimekko CommedesGarçons
MatthewWilliamson JimmyChoo
SoniaRykiel Lanvin Versace2012Marni
Figure6.H&M'scollaborationschart
BA.MMC.–BACHELORTHESISSUPERVISOR–SARAHAMIDALWAN
STUDENTNUMBER301114TOTALCHARACTERS(WITHOUTSPACES):54.247
31OF38
H&M’sandMarni’scollaborationmayhaveachievedtoattractthechicbourgeoisgirlsthatafterthe
recessionneededtosavemoneybutstillwantedtodresschicandwithqualitygarments–asMarni’s
collectionforH&Mwasentirelycomposedbysilk,cottonandleathergarments.Ontheotherhand,
thebrandfitbetweenH&MandMarniwasnotashighasthefitwithothercollaborations.Although
Marni’scollaborationforH&Mwaslackingbothofthefactorsmentionedintheaboveparagraphs,
thecollaborationwasthemostsuccessfulofallpreviouscollaborations(SeeAppendix3).
Inconclusion,evenifthetargetaudienceandbrandfitwerenotashighaswithother
collaborations,theco‐brandingcasebetweenMarniandH&Mattractednewconsumers–which
weresearchingforsubstitutesoftheirhabitualluxurybrands,amorematureconsumer.Proofof720
thatmaybethearticlesfoundindifferentnewspapers29,whichtargetaudienceusuallycomprisesan
olderandupscalepublic30.Inaddition,thesuccesscouldbealsoaccreditedtothecollectionquality
andperceivedprice‐valuerelationship.Forexample,JimmyChoowasoneofH&M’sworst
collaborationsintermsoffinancialfacts,allduetoconsumers’price‐valuerelationshipperception
anditshighprices–eventhoughJimmyChoocollectionhadarealhigherprice‐valueincomparison
withothercollaborations(SeeAppendix3).Inotherwords,consumersdidnotexpectthehighprices
ofJimmyChoo’scollectionwithH&M.Duetothis,theirperceptionoftheprice‐valuerelationship
waslowerhencethelowerqualityperceptionofthecollection,resultinginpoorsales.
AnotherfactorthatHelmig’setal.(2008)includedintheirmodelwasbrandawareness.Theystated
thatwell‐knownnationalbrands’productsresultingfromtheco‐brandingwithanotherbrandhave730
morepositiveevaluationsbyconsumers(p.364).However,theyeludedtoanalysemoredeeplythe
theorythatwaspreviouslypresentedbyVaidyanathanandAggarwal(2000)concerningbrands’
nationalidentity.
Countrieswherefashionishighlypromoted,withfashionweeksoryoungdesigners’associations31,
havereceivedpositivelyfashioncollaborationswithnationaldesigners(SeeAppendix3).
735
29http://nymag.com/daily/fashion/2012/02/see‐the‐complete‐marni‐for‐hm‐collection.html
30“(…)NewYorkMagazine’stargetaudienceofupscale(andwould‐beupscale)readers(…)”:
http://www.sampratt.com/sam/2010/06/new‐york‐magazine‐1998.html31http://www.youngbritishdesigners.com/index.php
BA.MMC.–BACHELORTHESISSUPERVISOR–SARAHAMIDALWAN
STUDENTNUMBER301114TOTALCHARACTERS(WITHOUTSPACES):54.247
32OF38
Forexample,collaborationsthatH&MhasmadewithdesignersfromUK32likeStellaMcCartneyand
MatthewWilliamson,ItalylikeRobertoCavalliandMarni,orFrancelikeLanvinhadallpositive
impactonsales–evenwhenmissingsomeofthecharacteristicsforsuccessfromHelmig’setal.
(2008)model(SeeAppendix3).
Finally,asseeninchapter2,whenbuyingclothesconsumersexpectdesign.“Atributeto740
Marimekko”wastheonlycollaborationthatH&Mdesigned,whileMarimekkocontributedwiththe
prints.Therefore,itisnotstrangethatthecollaborationwastheleastsuccessful.
4.3.CONCLUSION
H&Mhashadalonglistofcollaborations,onesmoresuccessfulthanothers.Afterhavingapplied
Helmig’setal.(2008)modifiedmodeltosomeofH&M’scasessomesignificantfindingscanbe
identified.Ontheonehand,itisnoticeablethatifmostofthefactorsthatcharacterisesuccessful
collaborations(Fig.4)arecovered,itcouldleadtosuccess.Ontheotherhand,itwasdiscoveredthat
somecollaborationsfailedbecauseH&Mmisjudgedconsumers’predilections–forexampleinthe
caseofMarimekko.Consumersarewillingtopaytheextrapricefordesignandquality.Ifa750
collaborationismissingoneorbothofthesefeatures,theco‐brandingcasemostlikelywillfail.
Oneofthemostimportantfactorsisthetargetaudienceandtheirexpectations,whicharealso
relatedwiththefourP’softhemarketingmix(Pickton&Broderick,2005).Forexample,inH&M’s
caseitwasdiscoveredthatitisimportanttopricetheco‐brandingcollectionaccordinglyconsumers’
expectations.Ifthecollection’spricerangedoesnotreflectconsumers’anticipations,theconsumer
willperceivealowerprice‐valueforthecollection–reflectingtheninbadreviewsandnegativesales.
Inconclusion,itisveryimportantatforehandtounderstandwhatdoesthetargetaudienceexpect
fromacollaboration.Afterwards,companiesshouldmakeastudyoftheirpossibleco‐branding
partnerswiththemodelsinchapter3(Fig.2&4).Then,theyshouldstudythemarketsituationwith
theIMCmodelmentionedpreviously.Andfinally,theyshouldcarefullycreatethe4P’softhe760
marketingmixtakingintoconsiderationagaintheirtargetaudienceandwhattheyexpectfromeach
oftheP’sinthemodel.
762
32http://whatsgoingonatconran.wordpress.com/2012/04/05/patriotism‐and‐british‐design/
BA.MMC.–BACHELORTHESISSUPERVISOR–SARAHAMIDALWAN
STUDENTNUMBER301114TOTALCHARACTERS(WITHOUTSPACES):54.247
33OF38
5.CONCLUSION
Inmarketingtherehasalwaysbeenaneedtounderstandconsumerbehaviourinordertopredict
thesuccessofproducts,brandsorstrategies.Inthatregarditwasconsiderednecessaryto
understandandclarifyconsumerbehaviouranditsinfluenceonco‐brandingtrendsinorderto
answertheproblemstatement:Whatdefinesasuccessfulcollaborationinfashionco‐branding?
Foraco‐brandingstrategytobesuccessfulforafashioncompanyitmustpossessalloratleastsome
ofthecharacteristicsforsuccessfulcollaborations–analysedanddiscussedinchapter3(Fig.2&4).770
InthecaseofH&M,someofthemostsuccessfulcollaborationsdidhavealltheingredients
mentionedinthemodifiedmodelforsuccessfulco‐brandingfromHelmigetal.(2008)(Fig.4).
However,somedidnothavealltheingredientsandwerestillconsideredsuccessful–evenoneof
themwasthemostsuccessfulcollaborationuptothemoment.Whatmadethesecollaborations
moresuccessfulwasmainlytheknowledgeoftheirpotentialtargetaudiences’underlyingdesires–
inadditiontofactorsliketheconsumers’positiveimpressionsofthecollection’sprice‐value
relationship,thefeelingofexclusivity,andtheproperadvertisements.Moreover,afterMarimekko’s
failedco‐brandingcollection,H&Mdidlearnthattheformulathatattractsconsumerstowardsfast
fashionbrands–design,trends,andprice–shouldalsoapplytoitsco‐brandingcollections.
Financialsuccess,brandequity,accessingnewconsumermarkets,reachingnewconsumer780
segments,andmediacoverageareusuallythemainmotivesforco‐brandingstrategies.However,a
companymaysacrificeoneofthesefeaturestofavourtheotherswhentheybelievethatthe
presenceofonewillpositivelyinfluencetheothers,resultinginanoverallsuccessintheend.For
example,abrandcoveringanichemarketwithaco‐brandingcollectionmaynotconsiderstrong
month‐over‐monthearningsgrowthasimportantasmoderategrowth–iftheco‐brandingstrategy
savesmoneyinmediacoverageandtherebystrengthensitsbrandequity,factorsthatmight
possiblyresultinyear‐over‐yearearningsgrowth.
Thisthesishashelpedtoelucidatesomepreliminaryfactorsthateverybrandstrategistneedsto
considerbeforedecidingtoimplementaco‐brandingstrategy.Thefirstdrawofaconceptual
frameworkforco‐brandingwassuggestedthroughtherefinementofHelmig’setal.(2008)model,790
andtheanalysisofH&M’sco‐brandingcasesinordertodevelopsuccessfulco‐brandingstrategies.
BA.MMC.–BACHELORTHESISSUPERVISOR–SARAHAMIDALWAN
STUDENTNUMBER301114TOTALCHARACTERS(WITHOUTSPACES):54.247
34OF38
Asseeninchapter3/section3.3,therearecertaindrawbacksthatmightdamagebrandequity.This
thesishasaccomplishedtodrawapaththatmaypreventthesedamages.Eventhoughthereareno
fixedrules,thestepsrecommendedtofollowarefirstly,athoroughexaminationofthepotentialco‐
brandingpartners,followedbytheexaminationoftheownbrand’squalities,aswellasdetermining
theobjectivesoftheco‐branding,andfinallyknowingthetargetaudienceneedsandexpectations.
Co‐brandingcanthereforebebothalucrativeandenrichingbusinessstrategy,butitcanalsoresult
indamagingeffectsforthereputationofthebrand.
Inconclusion,forsuccessfulco‐brandingstrategiescompaniesdonotneedtofulfilallthe
characteristicspresentedinthisthesis’model.Asstatedpreviously,companiescansacrificeoneor800
someobjectivesandcharacteristicsforsuccessfulco‐branding(Fig.2&4)andstillbesuccessful.
Thereisnotonlyoneformulaforsuccess,manyfactorsthathavebeenelucidatedthroughoutthis
thesisneedtobeconsidered.
6.FUTURERESEARCH
Fashionco‐brandingcollectionshavebeenprovedtobesuccessfuldifferentiatingstrategiesinthe
increasingcompetitivefashionretailmarket.However,furtherresearchmustbedoneregardingco‐
brandingrisksanddrawbacks.
Ontheonehand,oneofthemostsignificantrisksinco‐brandingcasesisthelossofthenovelty.
Whatmadeco‐brandingspecialisitsauraofreachableexclusiveness.Ifco‐brandingbecomesa810
commonstrategy,itsexclusivenessmaydeclineandconsequentlyitssuccess.Furtherresearch
shouldbefocusedonconsumerbehaviourinordertofindpossiblesolutionstopreventthedecline
ofthenovelty.
Ontheotherhand,companiesshouldtakeintoconsiderationtherecentshiftsinconsumer
behaviouroccurredinLatinAmerica,EasternEuropeandpartlyinUS,towardsaqualityand
masstigetrend.Eventhoughthereasonsfortheseshiftsinconsumerbehaviouraremainly
attributedtoraisingincomes,itisknownthatconsumerbehaviourdoesnotonlychangebecauseof
financialfactorsbutalsobecauseofsocialfactors.Althoughvaluesandbeliefsaremainlyfixedtraits
amongpeople,theystillchangeslowlyovertime.Thesechangesmightberelatedtosomeextendto
BA.MMC.–BACHELORTHESISSUPERVISOR–SARAHAMIDALWAN
STUDENTNUMBER301114TOTALCHARACTERS(WITHOUTSPACES):54.247
35OF38
socialmarketing–associalmarketingaimsforchangeinbehaviours(KotlerandLee,2008).Thus,820
furtherresearchtakingintoconsiderationthemainaimsofsocialmarketingcampaignsandthe
consequentchangeinpeople’sbehaviourscouldhelpbrandstoadaptco‐brandingcasestothenew
consumervalues.Forexample,somebrandshavestartedtocollaboratewithsocialcampaignsor
NGOscreatingproductsasaresultofco‐brandingorcollaborations.Anotherexampleofconsumers’
shiftinvaluesistherecentcampaignofH&Mandtheirconsciouscollection.Eventhoughitisnota
co‐brandingcase,ithasstillsomecharacteristicsthatfallintothepreviousmodelforsuccessfulco‐
branding,anditcreatesbrandequitybycommittingwithethicalfashionsconsciousconsumers
(Okonkwo,2007;p.239).
Finally,themotivesandoutcomesofco‐brandingshouldbestudiedfurther.Sometimescompanies
embraceco‐brandingwithoutaclearstudyofitsgoalsandriskstherefore,whenco‐brandingfails830
theymightbemoredamagedthanothercompaniesthatdidnotembraceinco‐brandingstrategies.
Therefore,furtherresearchofco‐brandingrisksshouldbedone,notonlytoavoidco‐brandingfails
butalsotowarncompaniesofpossiblenegativeoutcomes.Thereareothermanystrategiesthatcan
befollowedinordertoreinforceabrand’sequity.Forexample,Inditexdoesnotembraceco‐
brandingandin2011hada9%ofglobalretailgrowth–incomparisonwiththe7%ofH&M.
840
BA.MMC.–BACHELORTHESISSUPERVISOR–SARAHAMIDALWAN
STUDENTNUMBER301114TOTALCHARACTERS(WITHOUTSPACES):54.247
36OF38
7.BIBLIOGRAPHY
Aaker,D.A.(2010).Buildingstrongbrands:DavidA.Aaker.London:Simon&Schuster.
Andal‐Ancion,A.,Coyle,C.,&French,L.(2010).Reactingtoconsumertrends,reachingnew850
markets,andmitigatingrisksinatougheconomicenvironment.TheLicensingJournal(January
2010).
Dell'Era,C.,&Verganti,R.(2010).CollaborativeStrategiesinDesign‐intensiveIndustries:
KnowledgeDiversityandInnovation.LongRangePlanning,43,1,123‐141.
Chang,W.‐L.(2008).OnCob:Anontology‐basedknowledgesystemforsupportingposition
andclassificationofco‐brandingstrategy.Knowledge‐BasedSystems,21,498‐506.
Gass,R.H.,&Seiter,J.S.(2011).Persuasion,socialinfluence,andcompliancegaining.
Boston:Allyn&Bacon.
Geylani,T.,Inman,J.J.,&Hofstede,F.T.(2008).Imagereinforcementorimpairment:The
effectsofco‐brandingonattributeuncertainty.MarketingScience,27,4,730‐744.860
Greenwald,M.(2011).Thesecretsofsuccessfulco‐brands.INC.,[Online]Availableat:
<http://www.inc.com/michelle‐greenwald/innovative‐co‐branding‐and‐creative‐partnerships.html>
[Accessed1May2012].
Helmig,B.,Huber,J.‐A.,&Leeflang,PeterS.H.(2008).Co‐Branding:TheStateoftheArt.
VerlagsgruppeHandelsblattGmbH.
Keller,K.L.,Apéria,T.,&Georgson,M.(2012).Strategicbrandmanagement:AEuropean
perspective.Harlow,England:NewYork:FinancialTimes/PrenticeHall.
Kotler,P.,&Lee,N.(2008).Socialmarketing:Influencingbehaviorsforgood.LosAngeles:
SagePublications.
Lindstrom,M.(2002).Brand+Brand=Success?Part1.Clickz,[Online]Availableat:870
<http://www.clickz.com/clickz/column/1716654/brand‐brand‐success‐part>[Accessed1May2012].
BA.MMC.–BACHELORTHESISSUPERVISOR–SARAHAMIDALWAN
STUDENTNUMBER301114TOTALCHARACTERS(WITHOUTSPACES):54.247
37OF38
Okonkwo,U.(2007).Luxuryfashionbranding:Trends,tactics,techniques.Basingstoke:
PalgraveMacmillan.
Pickton,D.,&Broderick,A.(2005).Integratedmarketingcommunications.Harlow,England:
PrenticeHall/FinancialTimes.
Skinner,Q.(1986).Thereturnofgrandtheoryinthehumansciences.Cambridge:Cambridge
UniversityPress.
Solomon,M.R.,&Bamossy,G.J.(2002).Consumerbehaviour:AEuropeanperspective.
London:PrenticeHallEurope.
SooKyoung,A.,HaeJung,K.,&Judith,A.F.(2010).Fashioncollaborationorcollision?:880
Examiningthematch‐upeffectinco‐marketingalliances.JournalofFashionMarketingand
Management,14,1,6‐20.
Uggla,H.(2006).Thecorporatebrandassociationbase:Aconceptualmodelforthecreation
ofinclusivebrandarchitecture.EuropeanJournalofMarketing,40,785‐802.
Washburn,J.H.,Till,B.D.,&Priluck,R.(January01,2000).Co‐branding:brandequityand
trialeffects.JournalofConsumerMarketing,17,591‐604.
Yinyin,T.(2010).Consumerbehaviorcharacteristicsinfastfashion.MasterofFashion
ManagementBorås,Sweden.
890