Ralph Stuyver (2006) Interactive Brand Identity Design

Master Dissertation

Interactive Brand Identity Design
Towards a Cross-functional Design Process for Digital Brand Dialogues

Ralph Stuyver

May 2006
Master of Design Management
Nyenrode Business Universiteit/ INHOLLAND Graduate School

© 2006, Ralph Stuyver, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. All rights of this publication, including copyrights
and database rights, are reserved to the author. No part of this publication may be reproduced by any
means, or transmitted, or saved into a automated database, or translated into machine language, without
the prior written permission of the author, who can be contacted at: ralph@realaudience.nl

TOWARDS A PROCESS FOR INTERACTIVE BRAND IDENTITY DESIGN

« propaganda ends where dialogue begins »
McLuhan, M., Fiore, Q. and Agel, J. (1967).
The Medium is the Massage: An Inventory of Effects.
New York: Bantam Books, p.142.

© Ralph Stuyver 3


CONTENTS

FIGURES AND TABLES ............................................................................................................................................. 6
PREFACE .................................................................................................................................................................. 7
SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................................................ 8
STATEMENT OF ORIGINAL AUTHORSHIP................................................................................................................ 9
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS..........................................................................................................................................10
1. INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................................................11
1.1 Problem Field...................................................................................................................................11
1.2 Problem Statement..........................................................................................................................12
1.3 Research Approach .........................................................................................................................12
1.3.1 Research Questions ..............................................................................................................13
1.3.2 Literature Review ..................................................................................................................13
1.3.3 Primary Research ..................................................................................................................13
1.4 Purpose, Objectives and Delimitations ..........................................................................................14
1.5 Thesis Outline .................................................................................................................................14
1.6 Definitions .......................................................................................................................................15
1.7 Conclusions .....................................................................................................................................15
2. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND ......................................................................................................................16
2.1 Trends and Changes .......................................................................................................................16
2.1.1 Globalisation, market saturation and product commoditisation .......................................16
2.1.2 Monologue & dialogue communication ...............................................................................16
2.1.3 Active, informed and networked users................................................................................17
2.1.4 Individualisation, customisation and personalisation.........................................................17
2.1.5 Multi-channeling users .........................................................................................................18
2.1.6 User-centric brand experiences ...........................................................................................18
2.1.7 Co-creation of values............................................................................................................19
2.1.8 The future of brands ............................................................................................................19
2.1.9 Trends: Conclusions .............................................................................................................19
2.2 Offline Brand Identity Expression...................................................................................................21
2.2.1 Identity Schools.....................................................................................................................21
2.2.2 Identity structures ................................................................................................................22
2.2.3 Identity, Image and Reputation............................................................................................24
2.2.4 Touchpoints ..........................................................................................................................25
2.2.5 Offline BIE: Conclusions .......................................................................................................27
2.3 Online Brand Identity Expression ...................................................................................................28
2.3.1 Communication.....................................................................................................................28
2.3.2 Interaction .............................................................................................................................29
2.3.3 Three Levels of Value Interaction.........................................................................................31
2.3.4 Key Brand Interaction aspects, work definition...................................................................31
2.3.5 Online BIE: Conclusions........................................................................................................33
2.4 Brand Design Processes..................................................................................................................34
2.4.1 Birkigt and Stadler (1986) ....................................................................................................34
2.4.2 Aaker (1996) .........................................................................................................................35
2.4.3 Stuart (1999) .........................................................................................................................36
2.4.4 Balmer & Grey (2003) ...........................................................................................................37
2.4.5 Van Erp (2004a) ....................................................................................................................38
2.4.6 Andrews (2004).....................................................................................................................39
2.4.7 Manning (2005).....................................................................................................................40
2.4.8 Existing brand design processes: Conclusions ...................................................................41
2.5 Design Management .......................................................................................................................42
2.5.1 Design process as strategic resource ..................................................................................42
2.5.2 Managing the webdesign process........................................................................................43
2.5.3 User experience webdesign .................................................................................................45
2.5.4 Design management: Conclusions ......................................................................................47

© Ralph Stuyver 4


2.6 Literature review: Conclusions .......................................................................................................48
3. FRAMEWORK: THE IBID PROCESS ................................................................................................................50
3.1 IBID: Goals and Delimitation...........................................................................................................50
3.2 IBID Process: Explained...................................................................................................................51
3.2.1 Brand Identity phase - explained .........................................................................................53
3.2.2 Brand Identity Manifestations phase – explained................................................................57
3.2.3 Interactionpoints phase – explained....................................................................................60
3.2.4 Quadrants II, III and IV – explained......................................................................................61
3.2.5 Three Cycles of Value Interaction ........................................................................................63
3.3 IBID Process: Conclusions...............................................................................................................64
4. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY .........................................................................................................................65
4.1 Problem Definition & Research Questions .....................................................................................65
4.2 Research Approach .........................................................................................................................66
4.3 Data collection procedures.............................................................................................................66
4.3.1 Participants ...........................................................................................................................66
4.3.2 Materials................................................................................................................................69
4.3.3 Procedure ..............................................................................................................................69
4.4 Data Analysis Procedures ...............................................................................................................70
4.4.1 Processing the data ..............................................................................................................70
4.5 Research Methodology: Conclusions .............................................................................................71
5. PRIMARY RESEARCH: ANALYSIS AND RESULTS ...........................................................................................72
5.1 Quantitative Research .....................................................................................................................72
5.1.1 Topic 1: The IBID process in general ...................................................................................72
5.1.2 Topic 2: Reactions on Statements........................................................................................73
5.1.3 Topic 3: IBID relevance for brand Types..............................................................................74
5.1.4 Topic 4: IBID relevance for brand Phases and Stakeholders...............................................75
5.1.5 Topic 5: IBID relevance for business Functions and Groups ..............................................75
5.2 Qualitative Research .......................................................................................................................76
5.2.1 Extra Topics ..........................................................................................................................76
5.3 Quantitative & Qualitative combined .............................................................................................77
5.4 Primary Research: Conclusions ......................................................................................................79
6. THESIS CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................................................................81
6.1 Introduction.....................................................................................................................................81
6.2 Conclusions .....................................................................................................................................81
6.2.1 Conclusions from the literature review ...............................................................................81
6.2.2 Conclusions from the proposed IBID process .....................................................................82
6.2.3 Conclusions from the Primary Research..............................................................................82
6.3 General discussion ..........................................................................................................................83
6.3.1 Limitations & improvements ................................................................................................83
6.3.2 Theoretical Implications .......................................................................................................83
6.3.3 Practical Implications............................................................................................................83
6.4 Further research ..............................................................................................................................84
7. REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................................85
8. APPENDICES .................................................................................................................................................90
8.1 Referenced Brand identity design processes .................................................................................90
8.1.1 Boer (2003) ...........................................................................................................................90
8.1.2 Corporate Identity Framework (Brandt et all., 2003) ..........................................................91
8.1.3 Brand Identity Prism and Pyramid (Kapferer, 1995)............................................................91
8.2 Primary Research.............................................................................................................................92
8.2.1 Questionnaire........................................................................................................................92
8.2.2 Quantitative research variables..........................................................................................102
8.2.3 Descriptive statistics...........................................................................................................103
8.2.4 Questionnaire Explanation-sheet .......................................................................................104
8.2.5 Open Interview FAQ-sheet ..................................................................................................105

© Ralph Stuyver 5


FIGURES AND TABLES

Figure 1. Conceptual Research Model .................................................................................................................12
Figure 2. Thesis outline and Chapters ................................................................................................................14
Figure 3. Multi channel user paths ......................................................................................................................18
Figure 4. Towards user-centric experiences .......................................................................................................19
Figure 5. Monolithic identity structure (after van den Bosch, 2005) .................................................................22
Figure 6. Two different Endorsed identity structures (after van den Bosch, 2005) ..........................................23
Figure 7. Branded identity structure (after van den Bosch, 2005) .....................................................................23
Figure 8. Framework for brand identity structures.............................................................................................23
Figure 9. Stakeholders weights for corporate/product brands..........................................................................24
Figure 10. Image, Reputation and Interaction ....................................................................................................25
Figure 11. Brand Touchpoint Wheel ....................................................................................................................26
Figure 12. Points of Interaction: Company-think vs. Consumer-think...............................................................27
Figure 13. Monologue communication................................................................................................................28
Figure 14. Dialogue communication ...................................................................................................................28
Figure 15. Websites as dynamic centers of brand building ...............................................................................30
Figure 16. Three Levels of Value Interaction.......................................................................................................31
Figure 17. Corporate Identity and Image ............................................................................................................34
Figure 18. Brand Identity Planning Model (Aaker, 1996)....................................................................................35
Figure 19. Corporate Identity Management process (Stuart, 1999) ..................................................................36
Figure 20. Corporate Identity & Communication (Balmer & Grey, 2003) ..........................................................37
Figure 21. Firm personality based products .......................................................................................................38
Figure 22. Product-User personality match.........................................................................................................38
Figure 23. User Experience (Andrews, 2004)......................................................................................................39
Figure 24. Consumer Web Brand Experience (based on Manning, 2005) .........................................................40
Figure 25. Business Concept Innovation .............................................................................................................42
Figure 26. User experience webdesign process .................................................................................................43
Figure 27. Business functions concerned with the brand ..................................................................................44
Figure 28. Progression of Economic Value..........................................................................................................46
Figure 29. Conceptual Research Model ...............................................................................................................48
Figure 30. Interactive Brand Identity Design (IBID) process ...............................................................................51
Figure 31. Brand Identity phase...........................................................................................................................53
Figure 32. Brand Identity Manifestations phase .................................................................................................57
Figure 33. Brand Identity Interactionpoints phase..............................................................................................60
Figure 34 User Identity phase ..............................................................................................................................61
Figure 35. Three Cycles of Brand Value Interaction............................................................................................63
Figure 36. Means and StdErr of general IBID characteristics..............................................................................72
Figure 37. Means and Std Err. of reactions on Statements ................................................................................73
Figure 38. Analysis of relevance for brand Types...............................................................................................74
Figure 39. Analysis of brand Stakeholders..........................................................................................................75
Figure 40. Analysis of branding Phases ..............................................................................................................75
Figure 41. Analysis of brand Groups...................................................................................................................76
Figure 42. Analysis of brand business Functions ...............................................................................................76
Figure 43. IBID Implications & further research..................................................................................................84
Figure 44. Possible causal interactions between interaction aspects................................................................84
Figure 45. Brand Design Process (Boer, 2003)....................................................................................................90
Figure 46. Corporate Identity Strategic Framework (based on Brandt et all., 2003) ........................................91

Table 1. Online channels and phases..................................................................................................................18
Table 2. Eight Key Changes .................................................................................................................................20
Table 3. Naming issues: Corporate Brand and Product Brand ...........................................................................24
Table 4. Eight Key Changes .................................................................................................................................49
Table 5. Key Interactive Brand aspects................................................................................................................49
Table 6. Existing Brand Design Processes...........................................................................................................49
Table 7. Eighteen Questions on five Topics, and 46 variables ........................................................................102
Table 8. Additional information (57 variables in total).....................................................................................102
Table 9. Descriptive Statistics ............................................................................................................................103

© Ralph Stuyver 6


PREFACE

This thesis forms the final assignment for the Master of Design Management (MDM) at Nyenrode Business
Universiteit/INHOLLAND Graduate School, the Netherlands. The MDM programme focuses on the power of
design in the business management context, from strategic design to tactic design and operational design.

A brand is a strong contributor to business performance and 96 percent of all senior executives rate brand
building as vital to their firms future success (Davis & Dunn, 2002). Successful brand performance also
depends upon the critical interactions stakeholders have with the brand values (Davis & Dunn, 2002).

Design affects all aspects of brand performance, since “design penetrates all of the assets that make brand
value: mission, promise, positioning, expression, notoriety and quality” (Borja de Mozota, 2003, p.113).
Design also creates “differentiation through brand identity development, building brand equity and brand
architecture”(ibid.). Furthermore, design is “the only business discipline that has the process of idea
development at the core of its education program and practise” (Powell, 1998).

This thesis analyses existing design processes for online brand identity design, and shows that none of
them is apt to meet the new demands of the interactive Age. A new process is clearly needed, and here
proposed and evaluated. This new design process will be applicable for both corporate brands and product
brands, and is specifically aimed at the field of interactive brand design, such as website design.

© Ralph Stuyver 7


SUMMARY

The brand is a key asset for most contemporary companies, and the process of designing, communicating
and managing the brand identity is important for a strong brand image and reputation. Most companies
have strong offline brand communication, but when it comes to online brand communication, e.g. through
their websites, they often loose sight (Letts, 2003). A recent Forrester report (Manning, 2005) found only 15
percent of all researched top US companies successfully delivering an online brand experience, yet most
decision makers rated ‘building the brand’ of near critical importance for their websites.

This thesis therefor focuses on why this big gap might exist between aim and reality of interactive brand
expression, and it researches and suggest design management solutions for improvement. Just like human
relationships, the brand-user relationship can be complex, subtle and highly individual. Two-way
communication (true personal dialogue) is an important aspect of interactive brand communication. The
process of interactive brand identity design was identified as an potential area of improvement within the
field of strategic design management (Cooper & Press, 1995).

Theoretical backgrounds were explored in the literature in order to gain insight in the process of interactive
brand identity design. Models for offline and online brand identity expression, brand design processes,
specific characteristics of interactive media, and main future trends were explored.

On the basis of this literature research, a new process is proposed that facilitates an open brand-user
dialogue, facilitates cross-functional communication, and allows for multiple levels of interactive brand
experience.

The here proposed Interactive Brand Identity Design process (IBID process) is then evaluated by means of a
quantitative research (questionnaire, Lickert scale scoring, statistical analysis) and qualitative research
method (open-ended expert interviews). The experts opinions about the IBID process were analysed about
the relevance for different brand types, phases, stakeholders, brand groups and business functions.

The results of this mixed-method research suggests that the proposed IBID process is clear and detailed,
and that it can be most relevant for customer driven, corporate or product/service brands, especially in the
retainment phase, where customers and brands share a personal dialogue trough their websites. This new
IBID process seems furthermore most relevant for brand designers and brand owners especially in
marketing, branding, communication and design functions.

It is therefor concluded that the IBID process could in principle help brand designers to narrow the gap
between offline and online brand expression, and improve the interactive brand identity experience. Future
research can focus on exact implementation of the proposed IBID process, e.g. guidelines and
implementations for specific interactive brand identity design practises.

© Ralph Stuyver 8


STATEMENT OF ORIGINAL AUTHORSHIP

I hereby certify that this thesis is my original work, created specifically for the purpose of obtaining a
Masters of Design Management title. At no times this thesis has been reproduced from any person or legal
entity without the proper acknowledgements, nor have I committed plagiarism to my knowledge. I further
state that I have personally carried out the research and investigations and finally achieved at what you are
about to read. However, if any of the referenced authors feel that they have been incorrectly paraphrased or
interpreted, please contact me at the below mentioned address.

All figures and tables have been created specifically for this thesis, with the exception of the cover image,
for which a written permission is granted by the owner: materialise-mgx.com, Belgium.

Furthermore I want to state that most authors mentioned here are included for their specific line of thought,
and at no place I want to restrict those authors to only one singular place in my IBID process. In fact, most
of the authors have significant contributions to many different areas in my field of interest.

Amsterdam, 25 June 2006

Ralph Stuyver,
ralph@realaudience.nl

© Ralph Stuyver 9


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This thesis could not have been written without all of the help and support of many friends, colleges,
experts and other dear people. I like to thank Marco Bevolo, design director at Philips Design and my thesis
supervisor. Marco critically challenged my ideas, thoughts and findings, and gave access to relevant people
and information. But above all he supported me in his own personal style, and I hope we can continue our
lively (lunch)discussions about brands, cultures, innovations, inventions, interactions and the good food.

Thanks to Nyenrode Business Universiteit and all of the people (previously) working for INHOLLAND
Graduate School. A very special thanks goes out to Jos van der Zwaal, Rik Riezenbosch, Schelte Beltman and
Aart Goud for setting up, providing high quality content, coordinating and trying to manage this dynamic
MDM programme. A special thanks also goes to the inspirational main lectors Ralf Beuker, Marco Bevolo,
Frans Joziasse, Rob van Gullik and Jos van der Zwaal. And a very warm thank you goes to Marije Duijf and
Barbara Vlot for providing and solving the many important daily MDM issues.

A big thanks also goes to all the people I spoke to, interviewed, had lively discussions with, that provided
me information, visions, experiences, business cases, helped me, motivated me, challenged me and truly
inspired me: Jurgen Baart (Clockwork), Eugene Bay (VBAT), Joke van Beek (University of Utrecht), Gert Hans
Berghuis (Fabrique), Edo van Dijk (Eden), Jeroen van Erp (Fabrique), Eileen van Essen (Identitydoctor), Tirso
Frances (dietwee), Monique Fransen (Eden), Paul Gardien (Philips Design), Marlon Heckman (Clockwork), Rik
Heijmen (Satama/Oer), Willem Kars (Metrostation), Dingeman Kuilman (Premsela), Michiel Lammertink
(dietwee), Sophia Lancia (Lancia Automobili), Joost van Liemt (.bone), John Lippinkhof (Design Platform
Eindhoven), Erwin van Lun (Mensmerk), Monique Mulder (Mattmo), Frederik Nijsingh (Mattmo), Paul van
Ravestein (Mattmo), Rik Riezenbosch (BrandGenetics), Mitch Roedoe (Qi), Matthijs Tammes (Mattmo), Koen
Verhagen (.bone), Piet Westendorp (Delft University of Technology), Elma Wolschrijn (Eden), Jos van der
Zwaal (TakePart); my Master of Design Management cohort 3 colleagues and soul-mates: Erik Roscam
Abbing, Verena Baumhögger, Marc van Bokhoven, Katja Claessens, Barbera Evers, Kees de Vos, Madeline
Maingay, and my other dear MDM colleges: Alfred Jansen, Ada van Dijk, Joris Funcke, Rob Mulder and Edwin
Rooseman. And above all, I want to thank Ilse Verstijnen, just, for everything.

© Ralph Stuyver 10


1. INTRODUCTION

Today, the critical first contact users have with a brand is usually via it’s website. Their positive online
experience affects their brand image and attitude in every context, including those offline (Bradford, 2004).
Moreover, competitive brands are only one mouseclick away, even for loyal customers. Meanwhile there is a
clear shift in media strategy and budgets from above-the-line mass communication towards integrated
online dialogues. So, how will brands embrace this new reality, and what will be the added value of
interactive brand design?

Brand- and trend analysts see that future users want much more interactivity with the brand, across
different channels, at times they desire. Future users demand a shorter, quicker and more direct brand
interaction. Business decision makers regard ‘the way firms interact with customers’ as the area of greatest
change between now and 2010 (Franklin, 2005). This greatly impacts their business strategy and brand-,
communication- and design- strategies. While most traditional media were designed for the specific aim of
one-way mass communication (monologue media) and hence provided poor means for feedback, the
internet and other digital media were intentionally designed for two-way communication (dialogue media)
and interaction.

So the question is: how can today’s companies better express their brand identity online? What aspects will
enhance the online brand identity, how to integrate it with the offline brand identity, and how to cross-
functionally design it? Does the process of interactive brand development fundamentally differ from offline
brand development, or is online ‘just another brand channel’? And what can be the design implications for
brand identity owners and brand design agencies in creating, expressing and managing interactive brands?

While ample literature shows the contribution of design to offline brand identity expression, there is little
written about its specific contribution to interactive brand identity expression. Early research indicates that
creating an effective interactive brand expression “is far more complex than the application of line-
extension methods” and “what is needed is a new interactive brand development process” (Mauro, 2001).

This thesis tries to find answers to the above questions, and the main problem appears to be that most
firms have an articulated offline brand identity, but most of them under-express their brand identity online.

A theoretical framework for Interactive Brand Identity Design (IBID) will be developed, based on the
literature review combined with ideas of main brand identity practitioners and researchers. This framework
will then be tested on a number of Dutch offline and online brand identity design practitioners by means of
questionnaires and interviews, and its usefulness for online brand identity designers will be evaluated.

1.1 PROBLEM FIELD
Current research shows that today most brands have an articulated offline brand identity expression, yet
most firms under-articulate their brand identity online (Letts, 2003). Forrester recently reported that only 15
percent of the researched US global brands scored good on online brand expression, yet most decision
makers rated ‘building the brand’ of near critical importance for their websites (Manning, 2005).

© Ralph Stuyver 11


Research also shows that the way consumers experience the online brand strongly influences their brand
image and purchasing behaviour (Bradford, 2004). While trend research shows that online channels will gain
importance (as compared to TV and radio); the way future firms interact and create value with customers
will be crucial (Prahalad & Ramaswamy, 2004; Franklin, 2005); design will play a strong role in the
differentiation of brands and products; and the way firms handle ICT is critical for their future success (van
Dijk, 2004; Franklin, 2005). If design can positively affect interactive brand expression, then why is there
still such a big gap between the aim and the reality of interactive brand identity expression?

1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT
To summarise the above described problems, one could state that firms have an articulated offline brand
identity expression (C, see Figure 1), yet most of them under-articulate their brand identity online (D), while
most consumers today interact with the online brand on a near daily basis. Or, more compactly written:

“There is an unwanted gap between the offline and the online brand identity expression”

1.3 RESEARCH APPROACH
This research aims to narrow this gap between offline and online brand identity expression, by researching
why it exists, what the difference is between offline and online brand identity expression (BàC ∩ BàD in
Figure 1), how online brand identity could be designed (B), what strategic design resources (A) possibly
hamper an articulated online brand identity expression (D), and what the result could be for the users (E).

Figure 1. Conceptual Research Model

BRAND IDENTITY BRAND IDENTITY BRAND IDENTITY
DESIGN FACTORS EXPRESSION (BIE) EXPERIENCE
PHASES
Design
OFFLINE

Assets
OFFLINE
BIE
A C aspects
CHANNELS

Firm Strategic B DESIGN User
Strategy Resources PROCESS E Experience

D ONLINE
BIE
ONLINE

aspects
Design
Competencies

ENVRONMENTAL FACTORS (F)

Based on Hamel’s (2002) business model, internal design factors will be researched, i.e. design processes
as strategic resources (AB, in Figure 1), as well as external factors, e.g. changes in user behaviour (E), the
environment, media, communication and technologies (F). The research specifically focuses on online brand
identity expression through websites (D), with brand identity designers (agencies) as primary stakeholders.

© Ralph Stuyver 12


1.3.1 Research Questions
Based on the above described problem statement and research approach, a first set of research questions
were formulated about Brand Identity Expression (BIE):

RQ1: “Why is there a big gap between online and offline brand identity expression?”

RQ2: “How can this gap be reduced?”

The literature review indicated that possible answers on the first two research questions could be found in a
new process for Interactive Brand Identity Design (IBID), since most existing identity design processes were
still mainly one-way communication processes, based on monologue, mass-media channels. Therefor, this
thesis will propose a new process, which could reduce the gap between online and offline brand identity
expression. The primary research will specifically focus on the following research questions:

RQ3: Is the proposed IBID process clear and detailed enough? (content)

RQ4: Is the proposed IBID process relevant for brands, users and brand phases? (context)

RQ5: Is the proposed IBID process relevant for brand identity designers? (target group)

RQ6: Does the proposed IBID process enable cross-functional communication (function)

RQ7: Can the proposed IBID process be used in practice? (applicability)

1.3.2 Literature Review
In order to find possible answers to the first two research questions, the literature review will focus on:
• External changes in consumer behaviour, the business environment, technological, sociological trends
and changes in media characteristics (subsection 2.1)
• Offline brand identity properties, where main identity principles are described (subsection 2.2)
• Online brand identity properties, where unique website characteristics are described (subsection 2.3)
• Existing brand identity processes, where processes and ideas for brand identity design by main authors
will be compared and evaluated (subsection 2.4)
• Design factors, where mainly design processes as strategic resources are reviewed (subsection 2.5)

The literature review will focus on brand identity expression through websites, and how processes for brand
identity expression could contribute specifically to interactive brand identity design. The conclusions of the
literature review lead to the proposal of a new design process, which is the focus of the primary research.

1.3.3 Primary Research
Since the literature review reveals that there is a lack of apt design processes for interactive brand identity
design, this thesis proposes a new interactive brand identity design (IBID) process, which will be the focus of
the primary research. This IBID process will be evaluated by a structured questionnaire (quantitative) and
open interviews (qualitative) with brand identity design experts from Dutch design agencies. Research

© Ralph Stuyver 13


questions 3, 4 and 5 will be answered by the IBID process and its evaluation in the primary research.

1.4 PURPOSE, OBJECTIVES AND DELIMITATIONS
The research aims to find answers as to why companies under-articulate themselves through online media
(websites) while usually fully expressing their brand identity offline, and to find better ways to express a
brand identity through interactive media. In order to achieve these objectives, a new IBID process is
proposed and evaluated by experts: brand identity design agencies. The primary research focuses on brand
identity design agencies, so the proposed IBID process is not intended for direct use beyond this scope.

The research also tries to apply the theoretical (from literature) and practical (from interviews) knowledge to
the practise of interactive brand identity design for webdesign agencies. The IBID process is specifically
researched with respect to it usefulness in daily brand identity design practise. The reader is referred to
Chapter 5 for comments and restrictions regarding this issue as provided by the interviewees.

1.5 THESIS OUTLINE
This first Chapter introduced the thesis, and described the problem field, the problem statement, the
research approach and research questions. It also provided the objectives and delimitations (see Figure 2).

Figure 2. Thesis outline and Chapters

RESEARCH CONTEXT CHAPTER 1

PROBLEM DEFINITION & RESEARCH QUESTIONS CHAPTER 1

RQ 3 RQ 4 RQ 5 RQ 6 RQ 7
2 RQ 1 RQ 2
METHODOLOGY 4

2 LITERATURE REVIEW PRIMARY RESEARCH 5

3 FRAMEWORK: IBID PROCESS ANALYSIS & RESULTS 5

THESIS CONCLUSIONS CHAPTER 6

THESIS RECOMMENDATIONS CHAPTER 6

The second Chapter contains a literature review based on the first two research questions, and concludes
that a new design process might answer the first two research questions. In the third Chapter such a design
process will be described, which will form the main subject of the primary research. In the fourth Chapter
the research methodology is described for finding answers on research questions 3 until 7. In Chapter five,
the results are analysed and presented. In final Chapter six, the conclusions for the research on questions 3
until 7are provided, in combination with research questions 1 and 2, and recommendations are given.

© Ralph Stuyver 14


1.6 DEFINITIONS
Most definitions of terms will be given in the following chapters. However, some general terms need to be
defined beforehand, because these terms are not explicitly explained in the thesis:

• Firm: the organisation as the origin and responsible for creation and/or delivery of products and values.
• Products: all of the physical and digital objects, environments and services, the firm offers to the users.
• Users: any legal entity, group or individual that can affect or is affected by the firm
• Values: all of the firms principles and qualities that are manifest to the users, and all of the users
principles and qualities that are manifest to the firm.

The choice for the term ‘user’ instead of e.g. ‘stakeholder’ is made in order to underline the active role that
most of today’s stakeholders have with the firm.

1.7 CONCLUSIONS
In this first chapter an introduction was given about the thesis research, the problem field, problem
statement, research questions and research approach. It described the scope of the research, its aims, the
structure of this thesis, and it provided key definitions that are not given elsewhere in the thesis.

Next chapter two will present a literature research of the first two research questions: RQ1 “Why is there a
big gap between online and offline brand identity expression?” and RQ2 “How can this gap be reduced?”.
Chapter 2 will also give a theoretical background and work definitions of the main elements of the research.

© Ralph Stuyver 15


2. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

This Chapter will describe the most relevant literature and authors for this thesis, regarding:
• Trends and changes (external factors; section 2.1)
• Offline brand identity aspects (section 2.2)
• Online brand identity aspects (section 2.3)
• Existing brand design processes (section2.4)
• Design management & processes (section 2.5)

The theoretical background forms the basis for this thesis, and Chapter 2 will summarise and conclude on
the findings in section 2.6. Based on these conclusions, a new process for Interactive Brand Identity Design
(IBID) will be proposed in the next Chapter 3, which forms the subject of the primary research.

2.1 TRENDS AND CHANGES

2.1.1 Globalisation, market saturation and product commoditisation
Because of the globalisation, the number of newly entering brands in combination with the already high
number of locally existing brands, has lead to an overcrowded market of products and services (Kapferer,
2001). However, this has not lead to an increased quality (Prahalad & Ramaswamy, 2004). Furthermore,
traditional product features and attributes are no longer sufficient to differentiate the firm or meet the new
needs (Andrews, 2004).The blurring of national boundaries therefor has fuelled product commoditisation,
and market saturation (Rijkenberg, 2005).

Competition between brands has changed too. Especially recently in Europe a global opening of boundaries
of people, goods and labour increased the rivalry between brands (Fombrun & van Riel, 2003) and new
competitors come from complete different market segments or even industries (Buschman & Schavemaker,
2004). The media are also changing. Most western consumers have been overloaded by TV, radio and
printed ads (Fombrun & van Riel, 2003). As a result, some media became less effective and “advertising has
hit a brick wall” (Lindstrom, 2005, p.16). Kapferer concludes “Today we have 1001 product variations within
one product range, 1001 media channels and 1001 different types of consumers” (Adformatie 52, 2004).

2.1.2 Monologue & dialogue communication
The direction of communication has changed too. Modern communication facilities such as the internet and
mobile phones, made consumers no longer passive recipients of one-way targetting from companies.
Instead, monologue communication is supplemented by two-way communication. Or, as Prahalad &
Ramaswamy (2004, p.13) put it: “communication once flowed almost entirely from companies to
consumers. Now consumer feedback is beginning to overwhelm the voice of the company“. In their opinion
firms are not prepared for this feedback that needs a totally different kind of communication infrastructure.

Brandt (2003) contents that two-way communication will become the essence. He also stresses that this two-
way communication should be considered as a natural ongoing dialogue that is “characterised by equality

© Ralph Stuyver 16


and acceptation” of which “the expressions are authentic and recognisable from a shared value pattern”
(ibid., p.20). It is clear that monologue communication will grow towards a dialogue with people, which was
even underlined by the worldwide advertising agency Wieden + Kennedy (Vincent, 2002).

2.1.3 Active, informed and networked users
The content of the dialogue not just concerns feedback on existing products as stated above. From the end
of the 20th century, design agencies suddenly found people knocking on their doors asking to design new
products for them “telling them what they wanted and how much they wanted to pay for it” (van Erp, 2004).

And it is not just two-way communication between customers and companies. Customers communicate with
other customers too. Prahalad & Ramaswamy (2004, p.2) see a shift “in the role of the consumer –from
isolated to connected, from unaware to informed, from passive to active”. The internet has created a class
of almost perfectly informed citizens (Hamel, 2002). The drawback of unlimited information access is that it
makes it more difficult for them to distinguish between different firms qualities (Fombrun & van Riel, 2003).

In the Netherlands, most citizens have an internet connection at home (75%) or at work (91%), mostly via
broadband, and most citizens (92%) have one or more mobile phones (CBS, 2004). These connected,
informed and active citizens put high pressure on firms to be transparent and truthful towards their
stakeholders. "In an Internet-connected, media-saturated world, developing high negative visibility can
happen overnight -witness the Enron-Worldcom executive scandals" (Fombrun & van Riel, 2003, p.107).

Most brands were born during the era of incomplete and imperfect information and they used to be in
control of the mass media. But due to the internet, the power balance will shift from the brand to the
consumers, leading to the rise of consumer power in their transactions and relationships with brand on the
Web (Kapferer, 2001). The connected, informed and active users therefor increasingly control the dialogue.

2.1.4 Individualisation, customisation and personalisation
The western world consumer individualises and is in search for brands and products that can support his
own identity (Rijkenberg, 2005). Consumers increasingly dislike predefined lifestyles, and want to create
their own world by combining all sorts of styles and brands. Mass consumption will change from one
product for many towards one individual chooses from a plenitude of experiences (ibid.).

Three levels of personalisation were found. On a first level, users can individualise products and services by
selecting from a number of firm-defined options (e.g. choosing between different coloured products or
combinations). On a second level, customisation can take place as a support for an individual experience.
But often, this kind of customisation suits the firms supply chain rather than the users unique desires and
preferences (Prahalad & Ramaswamy, 2004) thereby regarding the user more as a 1:1 ‘marketing target’.
The third level will allow personalisation of interactions. Here, the user can engage in a meaningful brand
experience and create relevant personal brand values and stories together with the firm (co-creation).

Experience environments such as (flagship) stores, theme parks but certainly also websites, allow for such
personalisation. These environments allow individual users to interact with the environment, and support
individual users to change in relation to time and events (Prahalad & Ramaswamy, 2004). Designing such an
experience environment in which a multitude of different users can enjoy a truly personalised experience

© Ralph Stuyver 17


becomes therefor a complex, but important task. Personalisation is key to individual experiences, and it will
put the user at the heart of the value creation process, as will be explained further below.

2.1.5 Multi-channeling users
Users make increasingly use of multiple channels. Research shows that 80% of all Dutch consumers orient
across different channels before they buy, and 50% of all Dutch consumers are fully multi-channelled in
both the orientation- as well as the buying-process (MarketResponse, 2005). They use these multiple
channels to interact with the brand, and most Dutch citizens are connected to the internet. Some individual
multi-channel paths for orientation, buying and using, across offline and online channels and phases, are
shown in Figure 3, below:

Figure 3. Multi channel user paths

based on de Wilde (2004)

The relative importance of interactive media therefor will grow, which will put more emphasis on delivering
relevant brand experiences across a multitude of channels. Online channels can support all of the different
brand phases in many ways, as is shows in Table 1. Some online channels are more suitable for the earlier
phases, but websites in general can suit all phases of the branding process.

Table 1. Online channels and phases

online channels
E-mail marketing • • • • •
Database marketing • • • •
Online advertising • •
Mobile marketing • • • •
Search engin. optimalis. • •
Website(s) • • • • •

based on Kars (2003)

2.1.6 User-centric brand experiences
The active, informed, networked and multi-channeled users that require personalised value interactions,

© Ralph Stuyver 18


have their effects on how companies express their brands. The firm’s focus will need to shift from firm-
centric supply/demand, towards user-centric experiences: “the experience is the brand” (Prahalad &
Ramaswamy, 2004, p. 132). Future brands will evolve through personalised experiences and new user-firm
interactions, as is shown in Figure 4.

Figure 4. Towards user-centric experiences

FROM FIRM-CENTRIC SUPPLY/DEMAND

Suppliers Firm Channels
ERP, CRM, SCM
Consumer segments

TOWARDS USER-CENTRIC EXPERIENCES

Nodal
Firm
Nodal
Firm
Individual
Nodal
User
Firm
EXPERIENCE ENVIRONMENT USER COMMUNITIES

Based on Prahalad & Ramaswamy (2004, p.97)

2.1.7 Co-creation of values
Prahalad & Ramaswamy (2004) see the firm-user interaction as the locus of value creation, and individual
co-creation experience as the basis for value. Multiple channels will be the gateways to experiences, and the
firms infrastructure must support heterogeneous experience co-creation. Finally, according to Prahalad &
Ramaswamy, the firms core competence will be based on experience networks including user communities.

There has to be a clear focus on the co-creation of values of the firm with the user (Prahalad & Ramaswamy
2004; Bevolo, 2005). Value can be defined as a co-created experience for a specific user, at a specific point
in time, in a specific location, and in the context of a specific event. Increasingly complex patterns of firm-
user interactions will emerge at every point in the firm-user network (ibid.), as is summarised in Figure 4.

2.1.8 The future of brands
In the future, firms will allow the brand to be transformed by users, while brands transform users lives too
(de los Reyes, 2002). Identities will move in a more dynamic direction, towards constant evolution and away
from the five-year cycle (Kraft; in: Cheston, 2001). Brands will emphasise individual fulfilment of personal
values and aspirations (Bevolo & Brand, 2003). Firms will build brands through personalised experiences
and new interactions together with user communities, instead of the firm-centric staging (Prahalad &
Ramaswamy, 2004) or pre-packaged user-experiences (Andrews, 2004). Future brands will evolve to
complex interactions between the firm, people, culture and technology (Bevolo & Brand, 2003).

2.1.9 Trends: Conclusions
The business context of most western firms shows high levels of instability and change. Due to the
globalisation, modern communication means and other factors, there will be 1001 product variations within
one category resulting in a market saturation and product commoditisation; there will be 1001 media

© Ralph Stuyver 19


channels resulting in media saturation and lowered effectiveness; and there will be 1001 different types of
consumers (Kapferer, in: Adformatie 52, 2004).

Monologue communication (from firm to consumers) will be enhanced by dialogue communication (between
firms and users), across multiple channels. Users changed from isolated to connected, from unaware to
informed and from passive to active, putting high pressure on firms to be transparent and truthful. The
internet created a class of almost perfectly informed citizens and the power balance shifts from the brand to
the user. Rijkenberg (2005, p.112) concludes “the consumer = the brand = the firm”; and Prahalad &
Ramaswamy 2004, p.135) conclude the “firm = competitor = partner = collaborator = investor = consumer”,
and Brandt et all. (2003, p.19) state that in a future approach “the sender will not be central, but the values
shared with consumers and relations”.

As western society individualises (level 1) and mass consumption moves towards individual choice of many
experiences, customisation (level 2) will support the individual brand experiences. But to allow users to
engage in a meaningful brand experience, the next level (3) will be the personalisation of interactions with
the experience environment. The firms focus will have to shift from firm-centric supply/demand towards
consistent user-centered experiences. The firm-user interaction will be the locus of the value creation
process, and individual experiences will be the basis for value. Future brands will evolve from interactions
between the firm, people, culture and technology, across multiple places in the firm-user network.

All of the above information can be summarised in Eight Key Changes, see Table 2. In the next section we
will specifically focus on offline brand identity expression.

Table 2. Eight Key Changes
THE ENVIRONMENT CHANGES (F)
1. Globalisation, Market saturation and Product Commoditisation
2. Monologue and Dialogue Communication

THE USERS CHANGE (E)
3. Active, Informed and Networked users
4. Power-balance shifts from brand to user
5. Individualisation, Customisation and Personalisation
6. Multi-channeling users
7. User-centered Experiences
8. Value Co-creation

© Ralph Stuyver 20


2.2 OFFLINE BRAND IDENTITY EXPRESSION
There are many definitions of a brand. From very compact definitions as “an idea people live by” (Grant,
2002) or “a product/service + aura” (Ellwood, 2000, p.11), to the more elaborate:
“incorporation of a combination of promises made to customers, based on the multiple experiences
over time, delivered with a consistently high level of quality and value, that are perceived to be
unparalleled relative to the competition, ultimately resulting in deep, trust-based relationships,
which garners great amounts of loyalty and profits over time” (Davis & Dunn, 2002, p.15).

Kotler (2000, p. 396) defined a brand as: “the name, associated with one or more items in the product line,
that is used to identify the source of origin or character of the item(s)”. The American Marketing Association
defines a brand as: “a name, term, sign, symbol or design, or a combination of them, intended to identify
the goods and services (Guzmán, 2005, p. 404).

Many authors describe their process of brand identity design. The most relevant ones for this thesis will be
discussed in section 2.4. Most of these processes share some elements, but many differ on parts too, also
depending on the authors view or ‘school’. At least three main schools were identified, which all have
different definitions of a brand and brand identity. These will be described in subsection 2.2.1. Brands cover
a wide spectrum from brand identity structures, through corporate brands and product brand, to brand
width and depth, for a wide group of stakeholders. These are described in subsection 2.2.2. The perceived
brand identity by stakeholders – the image and reputation – are described in subsection 2.2.3. Brand
identity is experienced at the touchpoints, as will be described in subsection 2.2.4. Final conclusions about
the key aspects of offline brand identity expression (Offline BIE) will be given in subsection 2.2.5.

2.2.1 Identity Schools
Three main identity visions or ‘schools’ exist, mostly independent of each other (van Riel, 2003; van den
Bosch 2005; Borja de Mozota, 2003), emphasising different aspects of corporate identity: 1) the design
school, 2) the organisational school and 3) the communication school. These will be outlined below.

1. The design school has the longest tradition in corporate identity, and mainly concerns authors and
practitioners in the field of design. One of the earliest was Ollins (1978), who defined corporate identity as
“the totality of the way the organisation presents itself”, expressed in “the names, symbols, logos, colours
and rites of passage which the organisation uses to distinguish itself, its brands and its constituent
companies”. Authors of this school usually emphasised the visual expression and the symbolic qualities of
the corporate identity. They also developed strategic choices for an identity structure (see section 2.2.2)..

2. The organisational school emphasises the organisational culture and changes the firm undergoes, and its
implications on the corporate identity. Practitioners of this school are typically found internally in the firms
organisation management functions and externally in change management and organisation consultancies.
A widely used definition of corporate identity from the organisational school can be found by Birkigt and
Stadler (1986; in: van Riel, 2003, p.42): “the planned and operational self-expression of a company, both
internal and external, based on an agreed company philosophy”. This school added four new insights to the
earlier design school (van Riel, 2003, p. 37):
• Corporate identity involves more than visual and symbolic qualities alone. Birkigt & Stadler (1986) gave a
corporate-identity mix of symbolic, communicative and behavioural aspects, with a central personality.

© Ralph Stuyver 21


• Corporate identity can be seen in many different ways dependant on the value (dimensions) that have
been chosen to be most typical for the organisations identity.
• There are five types of identity: the actual-, communicated-, conceived-, ideal- and desired corporate
identity. This school added strategies for bridging the gap between the actual-, desired- and conceived.
• Research methods for quantitative measurements of the corporate identity, next to –or in addition to –
the already existing qualitative research methods.

3. The communication school
This school was usually propagated by communication consultants and marketing- or advertising experts,
emphasising the communication needed to express the chosen identity towards all internal- and external
stakeholders. In the firm, this expertise is usually found in the PR-, marketing-communication and
corporate-communication functions. A typical definition from the communication school can be found in
Franzen & van der Berg (2001, in: Boer, 2003, p. 27): “Brand identity is the unique set of physical, social and
mental components of a brand, being authentic, differentiating, central, sustainable and salient”.

According to van Riel (2002, p. 38) the communication school developed and implemented a ‘sustainable
corporate story’ and other ‘content driven messages’, and its contribution to the above schools is:
• A clear process of execution of the corporate identity programme.
• The translation of the chosen corporate identity aspects into paid publicity (advertisements) and unpaid
publicity (public relations and public affairs).
• A focus on the ‘red thread’ in the overall approach to the identity programme, integrating the symbolic,
communicative and behaviour identity aspects, trying to bridge personnel activities and communication.

In current research and practise, these three ‘schools’ somewhat overlap or flow into each other, and actual
‘schools’ are not found in reality either, they are spread over many business functions within the firm and
its external agencies. But it is to the firms interest that all functions work together towards one integrated
brand identity design, expression and experience. The take home message from this section is that a
shared identity design process should be appreciated by design, organisation and communication schools.

2.2.2 Identity structures
A brand identity is usually closely related to the way the firm is structured in a parent company, daughter
companies and different units (or companies) active in different industries, categories or segments.
According to Ollins (1989; 2002) the identity of most companies can be divided into three main identity
structures: 1. monolithic identity, 2. endorsed identity, and 3. branded identity structures:
• Monolithic identity: Everything the firm does has one name, one style and character, each subsidiary
supports the other. People primary think of the firm, and secondary of its products or services (Figure 5).

Figure 5. Monolithic identity structure (after van den Bosch, 2005)

© Ralph Stuyver 22


• Endorsed identity: Several activities take place under a common name, and the parent company allows
subsidiaries to operate under their own names. The parent endorses its subsidiaries with the corporate
visual style (Figure 6, left example) or only by an added corporate name (Figure 6, right example).

BLOGGO
BLOGGO

BROWNS SMITHS JONES CLARKS
Engineering Chemicals aerospace plastics
Engineering Chemicals Aerospace Plastics part of BLOGGO part of BLOGGO part of BLOGGO part of BLOGGO

Figure 6. Two different Endorsed identity structures (after van den Bosch, 2005)

• Branded identity: The parent company works with several ‘child’ identities, visually unrelated to each
other and to the parent. Some companies separate their corporate identity from the brand identities they
own. Those brands have names, identities, reputations and personalities of their own (Figure 7).

BLOGGO

Engineering Chemicals aerospace plastics

Figure 7. Branded identity structure (after van den Bosch, 2005)

Boer (2003, p.102) added two extra levels in between (see Figure 8):
• Semi-monolithic identity: Restricted uniformity with the parent identity, like Canon or Philips.
• Multi-branded identity: Combination of two (or more) parent identities, like Sony-Ericsson.

Figure 8. Framework for brand identity structures

Siemens Philips Hi, Sony- Motorola
by KPN Ericsson
Monolithic Semi-monolithic Endorsed Multi-branded Single-branded

Based on Boer (2003, p.103)

The width of a brand is defined by the number of product categories the brand is connected to. The depth
of a brand defines the amount of variants within one category (Boer, 2003, p. 98). Some brands are very
wide, but not very deep. Other brands can be very small, yet deep. Kapferer (1992) differentiates between
range-brands (width) and line-brands (depth).

The above framework for brand identity structures (Figure 8) facilitates comparing different brand identities.
Its two extremes, the corporate brand on the left and the product brand on the right, interact with their
stakeholders in different ways (Kapferer, 1995). Usually corporate brands address a broader audience (more

© Ralph Stuyver 23


stakeholders) than product brands (Cheston, 2001). Kapferer (1995) made an stakeholder analysis for the
corporate brand ICI and its product brand Tactel of the relative weights for all stakeholders, see Figure 9:

Figure 9. Stakeholders weights for corporate/product brands

CORPORATE BRAND

PRODUCT BRAND
share- financial gouvern schools local interest press/ suppliers personnel partnerscustomers
holders market ment community groups media

Based on Kapferer (1995, p.222)

There appears to be some confusion between Dutch authors about naming both extremes of the brand
identity structures, and some terms for both extremes are listed in Table 3. Many Dutch authors name
‘corporate identity’ and ‘brand’ as two opposing extremes. This can lead to confusion. The division in
‘corporate identity’ and ‘brand’ could originate from different views between different schools (Bos, 2002).
But today, the peaceful co-existence between the two schools is perceived to be to the benefit of the client
(Bos, 2002). For clarity reasons, this thesis uses ‘corporate brand’ to indicate the left side of the brand
identity framework of Figure 8, and ‘product brand’ at the right side. And when the brand identity is
concerned, the thesis uses ‘corporate brand identity’ (left side) and ‘product brand identity” (right side).

Table 3. Naming issues: Corporate Brand and Product Brand

Corporate Brand is also called: Product Brand is also called:
THE IDENTITY THE BRAND
Corporate Identity Brand Identity
Corporate brand Product brand
Organisation Identity Brand

2.2.3 Identity, Image and Reputation
Where Identity describes the authentic constituents of the brand that make it identifiable, unique and
coherent, the image could be described as the way users imagine a certain product, brand, political figure
or country. Image results from users decoding all signals that the brand sends through its products,
services and communications (Kapferer, 1996). Image was historically based on communicating the product
brand image, and was later also used for the corporate brand image (van Riel, 2003).

Users can have different images of different elements of the brand: the product, the business (unit), the
corporation (company), branch or country of origin (see Figure 10). The image is formed by all individual
associations as received over time, primarily based on 1) the users direct personal experiences with the
brands touchpoints (van Riel, 2003). However, people generally do not experience all different brand
touchpoints, and people are personally involved with a limited number of touchpoints only. Therefor, the
information received stems also from 2) friends and colleagues, and 3) paid information (advertising) and
unpaid information (PR). These strongly influence the users image too. But today, product associations are
more strongly influenced by other information than product advertising (van Riel, 2003).

© Ralph Stuyver 24


Figure 10. Image, Reputation and Interaction

REPUTATION AS INTERACTION BETWEEN BRAND - USER CHARCTERISTICS

INTERACTION

INGREDIENT

PRODUCT INDIVIDUAL
USERS
BUSINESS

CORPORATE

BRANCH

COUNTRY OF ORIGIN

Based on van Riel (2003, p.90, p.111) and Kapferer (2002)

Reputation, according to van Riel (2003), is the users overall evaluation of all of the different images and
perceptions as compared to competitors. Reputation results from all interactions between the
characteristics of the brand, and the characteristics of the individual user (van Riel, 2003). This reputation
can be measured e.g. by the Reputation Quotient™ (Harris Interactive/RI), that measures how users see the:
• Social image – How socially en environmentally responsible is the brand?
• Emotional Image – How does the brand appeal to users, makes them feel? Do users admire it?
• Product Image – High quality, innovative, value for money products and services
• Leadership Image – What is the brands vision of the future, market opportunities and leadership?
• Financial Image – What is the brands financial performance? What is its growth?
• Workplace Image – Does the firm supply a well-managed, good place to work ?

The image/reputation can be adjusted in two ways: either by changing its constituents (product-, business-,
corporate, etc.) or by changing the user communication, in order to change the users beliefs, ideas, feelings
and impressions (van Riel, 2003, p.111). Furthermore, image consists of two distinct parts (Kapferer, 1992):
• Reflection – Not the target buyer, but how users can use the brand to convey their own identity
• Self Image – The users own internal mirror, the users inner relationship with the brand

Based on the above, in combination with the conclusion that the power balance shifts from the brand to the
user (see subsection 2.1.3), we conclude that both images contain how the brand sees itself and its users,
and how the users see themselves and their brands. We envision four image types:
1) Brand SelfImage: how the brand sees itself
2) Users Reflection: how users like to see the brand and identify with it
3) Users SelfImage: how users like to see themselves,
4) Brand Reflection: how the brand likes to see the users and identify with them.

2.2.4 Touchpoints
Davis & Longoria (2003) state that every brand has between 30 and 100 touchpoints, which can be defined
as “all of the different ways the brand interacts with, and makes impressions on, customers, employees and
all other stakeholders” (Davis & Dunn, 2002, p.58). Every time a stakeholder interacts with the brand, an
impression of the brand will result, whether the firm wants it or not (ibid.). Actively influencing the design
of each brand touchpoint can strengthen the brand, give a higher degree of customer satisfaction, higher
loyalty, better reputation, higher levels of profitability and a firmer grip of the brands destiny.

© Ralph Stuyver 25


Figure 11. Brand Touchpoint Wheel

Loyalty Advertising
Programs Viral mkt

Newsletter UserBlogs DirectMail
& Billing eLetter iAdvertising PR
PR
E-
CE My Pages U
N S eGames
eMail E SearchEO Blogs

E
FAQ

I
R
Customer Updates MyAccount Coupons&

EX
PE
Service eMail Incentives

PE
USE EX

RIENCE
PERSONAL Downloads
Manuals Communities MyCoupons
BRAND
live
Webcam EXPERIENCE
Product/ MyPrice Deals &
Service VoIP MyShop Promotions
Use Chat Messager
SMS Product Sponsored
Profile Configuration Content
C

E
matching
PU N
R SelfService
CHA RIE
S E E X P E Quick3D
Product/
Salesperson Peer rating Pano360 Service
eShop Assortment

P-O-P Purchase
Displays Environment

Based on Davis & Longoria (2003) and Davis & Dunn (2002)

Based on Davis & Dunn (2002), above Figure 11 shows some offline touchpoints (in blue), and we added a
number of online touchpoints (in white). We envision that from the outer side towards the inner side, the
relevance of the experience increases as the level of personalisation and interactions increases. This will be
explained in more detail in subsection 2.5.3, on page 45. Davis & Dunn (2002) name two phases ‘pre-
purchase experience ’ and ‘post-purchase experience’. We prefer a more user centered approach so we’d
rather name these the ‘pre-use experience’ and ‘use-experience’ phases.

Determining the relative importance of each touchpoint is usually a task for a strategic- and brand/
marketing manager of the firm rather than for a webdesign manager. However, since webdesign managers –
within a firm or in an external webdesign agency –are most familiar with the existence and possibilities of
these new interactive touchpoints, the choice of touchpoints and the incorporation of the brand vision,
positioning, identity, design, development, testing and tracking, should preferable be a joint effort.

Prahalad & Ramaswamy (2004, pp. 37-40) urge firms to understand the difference between ‘company think’
and ‘consumer think’ in order to be successful in the 21st century, see Figure 12. Many firms were misled by
company think and cluttered the market with feature rich but experience poor products. This mismatch
between company think and consumer think specifically arises at the touchpoints, or ‘Points of Interaction’ ,
“where choice is exercised and the consumer interacts with the firm to co-create an experience” (ibid.).

It is crucial for firms to deliver consistent and professional interactions with all stakeholders at all times,
across all points of interaction (Davis & Dunn, 2002), and to deliver a constant quality of experiences
(Prahalad & Ramaswamy, 2004). Success in operationalising the brand strongly depends on controlling
these critical interactions that brands have with all stakeholders (Davis & Dunn, 2002).

© Ralph Stuyver 26


Figure 12. Points of Interaction: Company-think vs. Consumer-think.

Company Think Consumer Think
Desires
R&D The co-creation of value exposes the disconnect
between company-think and consumer-think Life stage
Logistics at points of consumer- company interaction
Technology
Distribution Socialisation
platforms Hopes

Word-of-mouth Family
Systems Call centers
integration Points of Needs Lifestyle
CRM Channels Channels
ERP Sales Interaction
Manufacturing Expectations Workstyle
Customer service
Communities Aspirations
Procurement
Marketing Education
Engineering
Privacy

Prahalad & Ramaswamy (2004, p. 38).

2.2.5 Offline BIE: Conclusions
There are many definitions of a brand, strongly depending on the ‘school’ or view towards the brand. Three
main schools were identified: the design school, the organisational school and the communication school.
In order to overcome an apparently Dutch confusion of terms, we prefer to use the terms ‘corporate brand’
and ‘product brand’, as the two extremes of the brand identity structures.

Although the design process for corporate brands or product brands is quite different (Cheston, 2001), and
the diversity of stakeholders with which the two brand structures communicate differs too (Kapferer, 1999;
Ind, 1997), all brand structures do have in common that they interact with various stakeholders. Websites,
and other forms of interactive communication, can be regarded interactive touchpoints or interactionpoints.

Choosing and optimising the different offline and online brand touchpoints should be an integrated effort
of the firms strategic- and brand/marketing manager and the (web) design manager. For successful brands
of the future, in order to maintain a consistent quality of experiences, it is crucial to design, deliver and
manage consistent interactions with all stakeholders at all times, across all points of interaction. Success in
expressing the brand identity depends on controlling these critical interactionpoints.

Next section 2.3 focuses on online brand identity expression (online BIE), where interaction plays a key role.

© Ralph Stuyver 27


2.3 ONLINE BRAND IDENTITY EXPRESSION
It is remarkable to see how many books are written on brand, identity and communication, yet very few
handle the specific subject of interactive brand identity for websites. Brand identity as a communication
process will be described in sub-section 2.3.1. In sub-section 2.3.2 interactivity will be described, along with
other unique properties of interactive brand identity. Three levels of interaction were found and described in
subsection 2.3.3. The results of both subsections 2.3.2 and 2.3.3 were then combined into five key
interactive brand identity aspects in subsection 2.3.4, and a preliminary definition of interaction is given.
Subsection 2.3.5 concludes with the main findings about online brand identity aspects (online BIE).

2.3.1 Communication
Communication can be divided into monologue communication (mainly one-way, see Figure 13) and
dialogue communication (mainly two-way, see Figure 14).

Figure 13. Monologue communication
channels

SENDER message RECEIVER
(firm) (user)

no/poor feedback

Most mass media today, like TV, radio and print, were not designed for feedback between the sender and
the receiver (van Lun, 2005, p. 21). This lack of feedback was regarded unfortunate, but inevitable (ibid.).
Later attempts used some feedback means, like teletext, telephone or SMS, were still very poor in quality.
Furthermore, the receivers identity was usually unknown (TV, radio) and feedback was cumbersome.

Together with an increasing number of communication channels and advertisements, this resulted in an
overflow of one-way communication (Lindstrom, 2005), media clutter (Cristol & Sealey, 2002), making most
consumers anonymous. TV ads became dramatically less effective (Levi, 2005; Lindstrom, 2005; Ritson,
2003) and the viewed time per channel decimated (Booz, 2003; Forrester, 2005). In short: the monologue
mass media were less and less effective in reaching people and triggering their attention (Bevolo, 2005).

Figure 14. Dialogue communication
channels

Rich, pers.
SENDER message RECEIVER

ID = known ID = known
Message history Message history
channels

Rich, pers.
RECEIVER feedback SENDER

Interactive media like the internet however, were intentionally designed for a dialogue (see Figure 14).
Furthermore, internet is the only mass-communication medium that allows full interactivity (Ries & Ries,

© Ralph Stuyver 28

Ralph Stuyver (2006) Interactive Brand Identity Design

Ralph Stuyver (2006) Interactive Brand Identity Design

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados

Mais procurados (17)

Destaque

Destaque (12)

Semelhante a Ralph Stuyver (2006) Interactive Brand Identity Design

Semelhante a Ralph Stuyver (2006) Interactive Brand Identity Design (20)

Mais de realaudience

Mais de realaudience (9)

Último

Último (20)

Ralph Stuyver (2006) Interactive Brand Identity Design