This technical note provides an introduction to corporate branding, including a brief history, a discussion of differences between corporate and product branding, and some strategic implications for how corporate branding is used. Excerpt UVA-BC-0203 Corporate Branding The biggest hurdle in understanding corporate branding is to see the ways in which it is a separate phenomenon from product branding while at the same time sharing some of the attributes associated with product brands. Simply stated, a working definition might be whether stakeholders tend to relate to a company more in terms of its individual products or services or more in terms of the company as a complete entity. Some argue that the trend is toward the latter. The history of brands is fascinating and relatively short when considering how much a role they play in today's society. Not too long ago purchasing soap meant having a piece of soap sliced off from a long bar. Lever Brothers created Lifebuoy soap in 1895 and went on to become Unilever. Lever brothers also coined the term “BO,” which its soap was meant to address although the phenomenon was most likely present before 1895. Also in 1865, in a story that uncannily foreshadows the invention of 3M's Post-It Notes, a soap maker at Proctor and Gamble added too much air to his soap mixture and Ivory became the soap that would not sink. A famous New Yorker cartoon in the 1920s showed a group of harried executives gazing anxiously into an empty pool. The caption says, “The day Ivory Soap sank at Proctor and Gamble.” This suggests a wry take early in the century on the notion of brand promise. The power of corporate branding can be seen in Andy Grove's remarkable branding of a computer chip, creating enormous value where there was none before, with the slogan “intel inside” becoming more important than the plastic box it adorned. Like General Mills, Proctor and Gamble went on to become one of the most famous corporations known for the strength of its products. Cheerios: “The Breakfast of Champions” and Ivory Soap have become brands that hold more meaning for consumers than the corporate entity. Steve Page, CFO of United Technologies, said in the Wall Street Journal, “You cannot buy a UTC.” You can, or at least the government or a building contractor can, buy Sirkorsky helicopters, Carrier central air conditioning, Pratt and Whitney jet engines, Otis elevators, or Chubb insurance. Investors can buy UTX on the New York Stock Exchange. This led to a highly creative corporate advertising campaign called “blue momentum” carefully targeted at investors who had the most stake in the corporation as a whole. Take one of United Technologies' competitors, General Electric: It is fair to say that general perceptions of the company run along the lines of a well-managed and successful conglomerate (until recently headed by a celebrity CEO) and less toward an immediate association with light bulbs or refrigerators. Admired Companies . . .
本技术说明提供了企业品牌的介绍，包括简要的历史，企业和产品品牌之间的差异的讨论，以及如何使用企业品牌的一些战略含义。企业品牌在理解企业品牌的过程中，最大的障碍是要看到它是一个独立于产品品牌的现象，同时又具有与产品品牌相关的一些属性。简单地说，一个可行的定义可能是，利益相关者倾向于更多地根据其个人产品或服务与公司联系，还是更多地根据公司作为一个完整的实体。一些人认为趋势是后者。考虑到品牌在当今社会中所扮演的角色，品牌的历史是迷人的，但相对较短。不久以前，买肥皂意味着要从一根长棒子上切下一块肥皂。利弗兄弟于1895年创造了救生圈肥皂，后来成为联合利华。Lever兄弟还创造了“BO”这个词，他们的肥皂就是为了解决这个问题，尽管这种现象很可能在1895年之前就存在了。同样是在1865年，一个故事不可思议地预示着3M便利贴的发明，宝洁公司的一个肥皂制造商在他的肥皂混合物中加入了太多的空气，象牙变成了不会下沉的肥皂。20世纪20年代，《纽约客》(New Yorker)刊登了一幅著名的漫画，描绘了一群烦恼的高管焦虑地凝视着一个空水池。标题写着"象牙肥皂在宝洁公司沉没的那天"这表明本世纪初对品牌承诺概念的一种讽刺。安迪•格鲁夫(Andy Grove)为一款电脑芯片打造的卓越品牌，体现了企业品牌的力量，创造了前所未有的巨大价值，“内部英特尔”(intel inside)的口号变得比它装饰的塑料盒更重要。像通用磨坊一样，宝洁公司也以其产品的强度而闻名，成为最著名的公司之一。Cheerios:“冠军的早餐”和象牙肥皂已经成为对消费者来说比公司实体更有意义的品牌。联合技术公司(United Technologies)首席财务官史蒂夫•佩奇(Steve Page)在《华尔街日报》(Wall Street Journal)上表示:“你买不到联合技术公司。”你可以，或者至少政府或建筑承包商可以购买西科斯基直升机、开利中央空调、普拉特和惠特尼喷气发动机、奥的斯电梯或丘布保险。投资者可以在纽约证券交易所购买UTX。这导致了一场极具创意的公司广告活动，名为“蓝色势头”，精心瞄准了在整个公司中持有最多股份的投资者。以联合技术公司的竞争对手通用电气(General Electric)为例:公平地说，人们普遍认为通用电气是一家管理良好、成功的企业集团(直到最近还由一位名人担任首席执行官)，而不是直接与灯泡或冰箱联系在一起。受人尊敬的公司……
{"title":"Corporate Branding","authors":"James Rubin","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.907778","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.907778","url":null,"abstract":"This technical note provides an introduction to corporate branding, including a brief history, a discussion of differences between corporate and product branding, and some strategic implications for how corporate branding is used. Excerpt UVA-BC-0203 Corporate Branding The biggest hurdle in understanding corporate branding is to see the ways in which it is a separate phenomenon from product branding while at the same time sharing some of the attributes associated with product brands. Simply stated, a working definition might be whether stakeholders tend to relate to a company more in terms of its individual products or services or more in terms of the company as a complete entity. Some argue that the trend is toward the latter. The history of brands is fascinating and relatively short when considering how much a role they play in today's society. Not too long ago purchasing soap meant having a piece of soap sliced off from a long bar. Lever Brothers created Lifebuoy soap in 1895 and went on to become Unilever. Lever brothers also coined the term “BO,” which its soap was meant to address although the phenomenon was most likely present before 1895. Also in 1865, in a story that uncannily foreshadows the invention of 3M's Post-It Notes, a soap maker at Proctor and Gamble added too much air to his soap mixture and Ivory became the soap that would not sink. A famous New Yorker cartoon in the 1920s showed a group of harried executives gazing anxiously into an empty pool. The caption says, “The day Ivory Soap sank at Proctor and Gamble.” This suggests a wry take early in the century on the notion of brand promise. The power of corporate branding can be seen in Andy Grove's remarkable branding of a computer chip, creating enormous value where there was none before, with the slogan “intel inside” becoming more important than the plastic box it adorned. Like General Mills, Proctor and Gamble went on to become one of the most famous corporations known for the strength of its products. Cheerios: “The Breakfast of Champions” and Ivory Soap have become brands that hold more meaning for consumers than the corporate entity. Steve Page, CFO of United Technologies, said in the Wall Street Journal, “You cannot buy a UTC.” You can, or at least the government or a building contractor can, buy Sirkorsky helicopters, Carrier central air conditioning, Pratt and Whitney jet engines, Otis elevators, or Chubb insurance. Investors can buy UTX on the New York Stock Exchange. This led to a highly creative corporate advertising campaign called “blue momentum” carefully targeted at investors who had the most stake in the corporation as a whole. Take one of United Technologies' competitors, General Electric: It is fair to say that general perceptions of the company run along the lines of a well-managed and successful conglomerate (until recently headed by a celebrity CEO) and less toward an immediate association with light bulbs or refrigerators. Admired Companies . . .","PeriodicalId":124895,"journal":{"name":"EduRN: Entrepreneurship Research & Policy Education (ERPN) (Topic)","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116920021","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：