Brand portfolio strategy and brand architecture: A comparative study

Purpose This study aims to develop dimensions and sub-items that explain hotel brand portfolio strategy (HBPS) and explore performance differences among HBPS groups in an effort to improve our knowledge about HBPS. A key ingredient in success for a hotel company is the successful building and management of a strong brand portfolio. Design/methodology/approach This study proposes four dimensions of HBPS: brand portfolio scope, intra-portfolio competition, brand portfolio location and brand portfolio element. By employing ten additional sub-items, the study evaluates the HBPS practices of hotel firms and tests performance differences. Findings The findings present current HBPS practices in the hotel industry and identify four groups pursuing similar HBPS. The results also suggest that operational performance differs according to a firm’s particular focus in HBPS. Research limitations/implications This study enriches our knowledge of HBPS by establishing dimensions and relevant measures and by suggesting the effect that HBPS has on performance. Future research might extend this study to examine the potential impacts of a business’s internal and external environments on the relationship between HBPS and its performance. Practical implications This study will aid executives in making important HBPS decisions such as whether to add a brand or how to reallocate resources among brands. This study also provides executives with a tool with which to monitor the relative position of their HBPS within the market. Originality/value This study is the first to establish dimensions and sub-items for understanding HBPS in the hotel industry. It also demonstrates a new approach to the analysis of competitive positioning and its relationship to performance.

Download Full-text

A dualistic view of brand portfolios: the company’s versus the customers’ view

Journal of Consumer Marketing ◽

10.1108/jcm-03-2017-2161 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 35 (3) ◽

pp. 264-276 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Per Åsberg

Keyword(s):

Future Research ◽

Structured Interviews ◽

Brand Architecture ◽

Economic Implications ◽

Content Type ◽

Brand Concept ◽

Brand Portfolio ◽

Brand Portfolios ◽

Practical Implications

Purpose Brand architecture and brand portfolios have been regarded as absolute entities to be analysed from the company’s perspective. The purpose of this study is to question such a uniform view by adding a perceptional dimension to the two concepts. Design/methodology/approach Semi-structured interviews with 58 marketing professionals and customers were used to explore ten propositions and map associations in the perceived brand portfolios, based on the brand concept map methodology. Findings The study reveals systematic differences between the collective view of company representatives, who name fewer brands associated through more sophisticated and highly connected brand systems and customers who include more partners and competitor brands in the portfolio, who also name more brands and connections in total. Research limitations/implications Implications of the results are analysed and future research is suggested to determine the generalizability of the findings and the economic implications of discrepant internal and external views of a brand architecture and brand portfolio. Practical implications Academics should relate to this dualism by compensating for the effects of the associative predisposition of employees versus customers when interpreting results of studies related to brand portfolios and brand architecture. Marketing practitioners must actively acknowledge and manage the role of partners and competitors as part of the company’s external brand portfolio. Originality/value This study is the first to problematize the unilateral interpretation of brand portfolios and brand architecture by introducing a dual view of these concepts based on internal (employees) and external (consumers) perceptions.

Download Full-text