Rebranding of
stereotypical food brands
How Nordic consumers perceive the product
rebranding and its impact on brand equity
MASTER THESIS WITHIN: BusinessAdministration
NUMBER OF CREDITS: 15 ECTS
Master Thesis in Business Administration
Title: Rebranding of stereotypical food brands – How Nordic consumers perceive the product
rebranding and its impact on brand equity
Authors: Jesse Hannelius & Joel Pettersson Tutor: Adele Berndt
Date: 2021-05-24
Key terms: Product rebranding, food brands, stereotypes, brand equity, perceived rebranding,
consumer, Nordics
Abstract
Background and Purpose: The process of rebranding requires a lot of consideration and analysis
in order to be successful. In 2020, a rebranding movement of stereotypical brands began in the USA, and the effects also transpired to the Nordics, leading to multiple brands in the food industry initiating a rapid rebranding process. However, due to its complex nature and the balancing act between different stakeholders, it raised the question whether rebranding was necessary from a business perspective. The purpose of this study is to investigate how consumers perceive the rebranding's of stereotypical brands, whether they regard it as a necessary move for the companies, and how it affected brand equity.
Method: In order to successfully achieve our purpose, a qualitative research design was
implemented through an interpretivist and exploratory research design. Data collection was conducted through ten semi-structured interviews and analyzed through a thematic analysis enabling us to expand a presented framework.
Conclusion: Our research identified the rebranding of stereotypical brands as a highly complex
process, where the consumers perceive rebranding in various ways and where brand equity is impacted in multiple ways. Rebranding affects brand awareness, brand associations and brand
loyalty. In addition, we identified that on many occasions, the negative effects of rebranding on brand equity are stronger than the positive effects. We also observed that although acknowledging the potential issues with stereotypical brands, consumers might not care about it in the end. Overall, we argue that listening to one’s own consumers and extensively analyzing the pros and cons of rebranding is the optimal approach for companies to successfully rebrand.
Preface
This master’s thesis was written in the spring of 2021 at Jönköping University as a final project of our studies in International Marketing. It has been a long, exciting and fun journey filled with multiple obstacles to overcome. To overcome these obstacles, we have received support in the best possible way from several inspiring people and we would like to take this opportunity to thank them properly.
First of all, we would like to thank our brilliant supervisor, Adele Berndt. Thank you for your guidance during this long and challenging journey. Your advice and support has been invaluable for us and for the results of this research. You have encouraged us to critical thinking and aided us in overcoming obstacles in the writing process.
We would also like to thank the students in our seminar group, taking the time to read our study repeatedly to then provide valuable feedback, which has enabled our work to continue and hopefully ensuring a high-quality report. We appreciate your transparency and constructive criticism.
Furthermore, we want to thank the interview participants who were ready to sacrifice their valuable time by taking part in our study, contributing to interesting and novel insights on our chosen topic. Without you, this would not have been possible.
Last but not least we would like to thank Café Rio and Café taste of Beirut, for providing us with marvelous sandwiches and delicious coffee whenever needed. It has proven to be valuable nourishment during the academic work, when the long days turned into nights.
1. INTRODUCTION ... 7
1.1PROBLEMATIZATION ... 9
1.2PURPOSE &RESEARCH QUESTIONS ... 10
1.3DELIMITATIONS ... 10 1.4CONTRIBUTION ... 11 1.5KEY WORDS ... 11 2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ... 12 2.1CORPORATE REBRANDING ... 12 2.2PRODUCT REBRANDING ... 15 2.3STEREOTYPICAL BRANDS ... 17 2.4BRAND EQUITY ... 17 2.4.1 Brand Awareness ... 19 2.4.2 Brand Association ... 20 2.4.3 Brand loyalty ... 21 2.4.4 Perceived quality ... 22 2.5BRAND PERCEPTION ... 22 2.6PROPOSED FRAMEWORK ... 23 3.METHOD ... 24 3.1RESEARCH PHILOSOPHY ... 24 3.2RESEARCH DESIGN ... 25 3.3RESEARCH APPROACH ... 26 3.4LITERATURE REVIEW ... 26
3.5PRIMARY DATA COLLECTION ... 27
3.5.1 Qualitative Interview ... 27 3.5.2 Chosen companies ... 28 3.5.3 Interview guide ... 31 3.5.4 Selection of participants ... 32 3.5.6 Transcriptions ... 34 3.6.DATA ANALYSIS ... 35 3.7.ETHICS ... 38 3.8RESEARCH QUALITY ... 39
4. FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS ... 41
4.1AWARENESS ... 41
4.1.1 Brand awareness ... 41
4.1.2 Awareness of stereotypical factors ... 42
4.1.3 Awareness of reasons for rebranding ... 45
4.1.4 Rebranding awareness ... 48 4.2ASSOCIATIONS ... 50 4.2.1 Corporate associations ... 50 4.2.2 Product associations ... 54 4.2.3 Package associations ... 56 4.2.4 Emotions ... 57
4.2.5 Visual and verbal cues ... 59
4.3LOYALTY ... 61
4.3.3. Attitudes ... 67 4.4ELABORATED FRAMEWORK ... 71 5. CONCLUSION ... 73 5.1CONCLUSION ... 73 5.2THEORETICAL IMPLICATIONS ... 76 5.3MANAGERIAL IMPLICATIONS ... 77
5.4LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH ... 78
6. REFERENCE LIST ... 80
APPENDIX ... 90
APPENDIX A–REACTIONS TO REBRANDING ON SOCIAL MEDIA. ... 90
APPENDIX B-INTERVIEW GUIDE ... 92
APPENDIX C–SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE ... 96
APPENDIX D-PARTICIPANT INFORMATION SHEET ... 98
1.
Introduction
This chapter aims at introducing the topic the authors focus on. The chapter starts with an introduction to rebranding, continuing with problematizing the issue, followed by a presentation of the purpose and research questions, ending with delimitations and the contribution of this study.
Throughout history, several questionable rebrandings within big companies have taken place, such as Pepsi, GAP and Tropicana, costing the companies a lot in financial resources (Hardy, 2013). However, rebranding is a part of an organizations' evolution over time, consisting of multiple tools and techniques that enable new brand perceptions, such as changing a brand’s name, symbol, slogan, logo or anything that could be considered as a steppingstone towards building and maintaining brand equity (Muzellec & Lambkin, 2006). One reason for rebranding, are incentives to portray a changed core business by fitting the brand with a more adequate name or logo, matching the core businesses and what the company offers to its customers. Some examples of such a rebranding are Starbucks, formerly known as Starbucks Coffee, Apple, formerly known as Apple Computers, and Tesla, formerly known as Tesla Motors. What these companies all have in common, is a move from a product-specific name to a name enabling one to offer a broader product range under one umbrella (Hafner, 2019). Rebranding is also relevant when the ownership structure of a company changes due to mergers and acquisitions, when the corporate strategy changes or when changes can be observed in the external environment (Muzellec & Lambkin, 2006).
When brands pursue a rebranding strategy, the process is complex and requires extensive internal and external analysis in order not to harm the perception of the original brand. There are multiple mistakes that can be made when implementing a rebranding, such as inabilities to form a connection between the original brand and the new brand (Merrilees & Miller, 2008; Miller et al., 2014), leading to confusion among customers (Kaikati & Kaikati, 2003; Collange & Bonache, 2015).
Although rebranding is perceived as a natural part of many organizations, a changed pattern on the rebranding front could be observed last year. At the end of May of 2020, discussions regarding racism in the USA flared up, leading to heated debates against racism. American corporations were not excluded from the public’s demand on change, resulting in multiple companies changing their stereotypical names and logos (McEvoy, 2020). Among these companies were the NFL team Washington Redskins, Aunt Jemima’s syrup and pancakes, Eskimo Pie ice cream and Uncle Ben’s (Ward & Wiley, 2020). Although these companies mainly rebranded themselves due to the internal situation in the USA, the effects transcended across the Atlantic Ocean to Europe and the Nordics.
In addition to the rebranding of international brands such as Uncle Ben’s, affecting the brand in the Nordics, Finland and Sweden were affected by national brands rapidly making statements of changing their brands or reconsidering their old brand’s perceptions associated with their logos and names. In Finland, this was mainly observed in the food industry. The ice cream producer Pingviini, changed their famous product from Eskimo to “Pingviini Puikko”, translated into Penguin Stick. According to the company, they wanted to follow the global movement transcended from the USA and respect the native people of Greenland and Canada (Yle, 2020a). Another example was the dairy manufacturer Valio and their Turkish yoghurt, with a depiction of a Turkish man wearing a stereotypical hat. Valio decided to re-design the logo and remove the hat (Yle, 2020b). A third example was Fazer’s Geisha chocolate, which was perceived by some as stereotypical. Fazer responded to these claims and stated that they would re-evaluate the name of the brand. To this date, no information regarding the brand name has been published by Fazer (Erma, 2020).
The Swedish market was neither unaffected by the events in the USA, impacting multiple industries. Affected by the statement by the American football team Washington Redskins rebranding themselves, led to the hockey team Frölunda Indians deciding to change their name and logotype displaying a stereotypical image of a native American. This led to discussions and dissatisfied fans, indicating that rebranding can raise a lot of emotions and engagement among people (Abrahamsson et al., 2020). Additionally, the Swedish food industry was affected as well, resulting in negative attention for Triumf Glass and their ice cream “Sitting Bull” displaying a
native American (Gustafsson, 2020). The company stated that they might either change the name or appearance of the packaging or stop selling it entirely (Ronge, 2020). However, Triumf Glass has not yet taken any actions, despite previous promises, resulting in the product remaining the same (TT Nyhetsbyrån, 2020).
1.1 Problematization
Although stereotypical brands are perceived as a big issue in the USA, we argue that the situation might be different in other parts of the world. The rebranding occurring in the USA was highly pressured by the public and their demand for change. Furthermore, the media in the USA was quick to act on this topic, writing articles about “racist brands” in the USA, for example CNN talking about “racist mascots” (Alcorn, 2020) or Forbes talking about “racist names and packaging” (McEvoy, 2020). However, similar public nor media discourse was observed regarding the Nordic brands, but still lead to multiple companies rebranding or considering rebranding. In some cases, it appeared like a few persons reaching out to the companies on social media, questioning their stereotypical brands, was enough for the companies to make public statements regarding rebranding (Kajuutti, 2020). Additonally, it is interesting to observe that this rebranding movement was mainly impacting the food industry, providing multiple cases of rebranding that can be investigated and analyzed.
Some might regard rebranding of stereotypical brands as a quick fix to potential public criticism. However, due to the complexity and the potential dangers such as the weakening of customer brand perceptions associated with the rebranding process, it is important to take the customers' views into account. Without careful analysis of the customer’s perceptions and opinions, rebranding can lead to a weaker brand (Muzellec, 2003; Kaikati & Kaikati, 2003; Collange & Bonache, 2015, Todor, 2014). Although the rebranding of Nordic brands to match the American standards was fed by the public discourse, there is no indication that it was neither necessary nor successful for companies. The success of these rebranding initiatives can further be questioned when observing how people reacted to the announcements by the companies regarding rebranding for example on social media (See Appendix A)
Politics and stereotypes aside, from a marketing perspective, these rebranding initiatives can also be questioned. In many cases, the original brand name and logo has been a part of the consumers life for decades, earning a strong position in the consumers mindset and most likely a strong brand awareness among Nordic consumers. Therefore, a rebranding as such can have the potential of impacting the brand value negatively as well as alienating some consumers. This is particularly interesting in the case of rebranding campaigns happening in 2020, which many seemed to be of an ad-hoc character purely done in accordance with the policies in USA.
1.2 Purpose & Research Questions
The purpose of this study is to investigate how consumers perceive the occurred and considered rebranding's of stereotypical brands, whether they regard it as a necessary move for the companies to take, and how it affects brand equity. By both assessing rebranded companies in Finland and Sweden, we will achieve a broader perspective on whether national brands are required to follow an “international standard”, or should the brands mainly analyze the local markets where they currently exist and the consumers opinions on these markets, leading to the following research questions:
How is brand equity among consumers affected by the rebranding or potential rebranding? How does the consumer perceive the rebranding initiatives by companies within the food industry?
1.3 Delimitations
Since we want to assess the contemporary movement in rebranding, we will limit ourselves to rebranded companies or companies that considered rebranding during 2020, caused by the aftermath of what happened in the USA. A further limitation is to only focus on the Finnish and Swedish markets. Connected to this, since rebranding has mostly impacted brands in the food industry, we will therefore limit ourselves to only focusing on this industry. This will also enable a more thorough analysis on this particular industry and leave room for further investigation of
other industries in the future. We are also aware of the potential that this topic can be considered as controversial by some readers. We therefore want to disclose that the aim of this research is to purely focus on a marketing aspect, excluding politics from the discussion.
1.4 Contribution
The contribution of this study can be essential for companies that lie in between decisions whether to rebrand themselves regarding stereotypical images, names and assumptions. Or to what degree companies should instead analyze local markets to see if the potential rebranding is worth it in terms of what it can cost economically but also in terms of brand equity.
1.5 Key words
Stereotypes: “Oversimplified and generalized set of beliefs about the characteristics of a social
group” (Greenwald & Banaji, 1995, p. 13)
Stereotypical brand: A brand that incorporates stereotypical factors of e.g., ethnicities and
genders (Avery, 2012; Merskin, 2001; Åkestam, 2018).
Brand equity: A range of brand assets and liabilities linked to a brand, its name and symbol
(Aaker, 1991).
Rebranding: Either corporate or product related, where a change in name, logo or slogan is
done in order to differentiate a brand from competitors or where a new identity requires a change of the brand elements (Muzellec et al., 2003; Kaikati & Kaikati, 2003).
Brand awareness: The consumers’ capability to identify or recognize a brand (Rossiter & Percy,
1987).
Brand association: Refers to the meaning of the brand for the consumer, and these associations
can come from a wide range of sources and vary regarding their favorability, strength and uniqueness (Keller, 1993).
2. Theoretical Framework
In this chapter a literature review will take place, discussing impactful research that serve as a basis for this thesis. We will start with presenting the research within rebranding, both from a corporate- and product related perspective. Followed up by a review on literature in brand equity, divided into three subtopics: brand awareness, brand associations and brand loyalty ending with a review of brand perception. The chapter will conclude with a proposed framework, illustrating how the theoretical aspects are relevant for this paper.
2.1 Corporate rebranding
Corporate rebranding has received attention over the past two decades (Muzellec et al., 2003; Stuart & Muzellec, 2004; Daly & Moloney, 2004; Merrilees, 2005; Gotsi & Andriopolous, 2007), with some often-occurring themes that will be discussed in this section of the thesis.
Research on the topic began in the early 21st century, when Muzellec et al. (2003) observed that
there is a lack of academic research into corporate rebranding, although being a popular topic in business literature. The authors described the process of corporate rebranding as a model consisting of four stages “repositioning, renaming, redesigning, relaunching (communicating the new brand), each of which must be carefully undertaken by the organization.” (Muzellec et al., 2003 p. 34). Seeing corporate rebranding as a sequential model, Daly and Moloney (2004), created a framework for rebranding through name change, starting with an analysis of what to maintain in a brand and what to neutralize, moving on to planning the rebranding to external and internal stakeholders as well as a final evaluation of the success of the rebranding (Daly & Moloney, 2004). A similar framework was created by Merrilees (2005), who proposed that rebranding consists of three parts, visioning how the rebranded brand should look, making sure that all stakeholders are committed to change and ensuring that communication of the rebranded identity will happen efficiently to all stakeholders (Merrilees, 2005).
Merrilees and Miller (2008) identified six principles that companies have to take into account when rebranding. These principles are to maintain the corporate image of the past and balance it with the rebranded identity, maintain peripheral ques of the old brand, shift from an old segment for the brand to one fitting the revised identity, invest in internal rebranding, integrate all elements of the marketing mix and finally, invest in promoting the rebranded brand to stakeholders (Merrilees & Miller, 2008). Miller et al. (2014) identified six factors functioned as enablers for successful rebranding. These included strong leadership, connecting the old values with the new ones, internal as well as external coordination and communication and an integration of marketing activities (Miller et al., 2014).
Gotsi and Andriopolous (2007) highlighted pitfalls in rebranding. The authors presented four typical issues that need to be taken into account. The first pitfall was the creation of a gap between the original brand equity, leading to disconnections. The second pitfall discussed how companies are unable to evaluate which stakeholder group is the most important when considering a rebranding. The third pitfall was having an emphasis on brand names, logos or slogans but not investing enough in making the employees engaged in the rebranded image. The final pitfall was how multiple clashing internal identities might affect how the rebranding is perceived by employees (Gotsi & Andriopolous, 2007).
Muzellec and Lambkin (2006) identified that both a reflection of a new identity and/or the creation of a new image for the brand, is executed through internal and external processes. The internal aspect requires employees to embrace the change with open arms in order to aid the external stakeholders to accept the changed identity (Muzellec & Lambkin, 2006). Internal and external struggles have also been researched by Lee (2013). The author presented three tensions that might occur while rebranding. The first one being a struggle of balancing the new image with the old identity, in other words, what are things that should be included or excluded in the new image. The second tension occurs when trying to balance different stakeholders views of rebranding for example employees vs. customers. Similarly, situations occur where external stakeholders are enraged by rebranding and do not perceive it as an important thing to do. The final tension occurs
success of rebranding is heavily impacted by the commitment of companies to understand and balance the opinions and preferences of different stakeholder groups, those being both internal and external (Aspara et al., 2014; Tarnovskaya & Biedenbach, 2018).
Muzellec and Lambkin (2008) illustrated a connection between the image of a corporate brand and its product brands and that these two entities affect the perception of each other in both good and bad. The authors aimed at separating these two from each other through corporate rebranding, where the product branding only affects the consumers while the corporate branding affects other stakeholders such as the general public, and media. For the consumer aspect, the product brands aim at separating associations towards the corporate brand (Muzellec & Lambkin, 2008). A successful rebranding will portray an improved organization for the stakeholders, however, the rebranding needs to reflect the changed values in an organization and will not succeed if values and image are not aligned (Stuart & Muzellec, 2004). Adding to this, the authors divided rebranding initiatives into two separate categories, revolutionary and evolutionary. Revolutionary rebranding occurs when multiple elements get rebranded simultaneously such as names, logos and slogans while evolutionary rebranding focuses on more subtle rebranding of elements happening over time (Stuart & Muzellec, 2004).
This chapter has aimed at discussing the most impactful research within corporate rebranding, in order to provide the reader with knowledge of the major themes within the field. From the literature presented, some conclusions can be drawn concerning corporate rebranding. First, research highlights the importance of balancing a rebranded corporate identity with the old one. Secondly, there needs to be an efficient implementation and common understanding of the rebranding process throughout the whole organization. Thirdly, a balancing act needs to be performed between stakeholders in order to fully succeed in corporate rebranding.
2.2 Product rebranding
In addition to corporate rebranding, some research on individual product rebranding’s has been conducted (Kaikati & Kaikati, 2003; Collange & Bonache, 2015; Subhadip & Soumya, 2015; Marques et al., 2020).
Collange and Bonache (2015) investigated how product rebranding is perceived by the consumers and what affects both the negative and positive perceptions of rebranding. The authors identified that rebranding of product brands is faced by consumers with reservation, where either negative or neutral opinions of rebranded products were identified among a majority of consumers post-rebranding. Furthermore, consumers face rebranding with surprise when not understanding why the product is rebranded, react negatively in forms of anger and sadness to change as well as negative attitudes towards the brand. A factor mitigating the negative effects caused by change, is trust towards the company (Collange & Bonache, 2015). The risks of alienating customers were already presented by Kaikati & Kaikati (2003). The authors described how a rebranding should not be done just in order to follow the crowd, instead, an analysis of one’s own customers and their thoughts need to be taken into consideration. Otherwise, a loss of money and a loss of customers can be the end result. This is particularly true in the food industry where national brands follow the trends set out by international conglomerates (Kaikati & Kaikati, 2003). Rebranding can appear as an ideal way to change the image but can also lead to the exact opposite. If not researched and motivated thoroughly, customers will feel lost (Todor, 2014).
Subhadip and Soumya (2015) studied how rebranding affects brand equity. The consumer might perceive the rebranding of a well-known brand negatively. The negative impacts of rebranding were affecting awareness, associations and perceived quality. However, loyalty towards the brand remained the same post-rebranding (Subhadip & Soumya, 2015). When comparing the brand equity before rebranding with brand equity post-rebranding, in some instances the brand equity remains the same. This was the outcome of the study by Marques et al. (2020), investigating how store brands were perceived in terms of brand equity after rebranding. Although not impacting
brand equity drastically, the rebranded brand was still associated with its previous image pre-rebranding (Marques et al., 2020).
When performing a literature review on product rebranding, we realized that there is major underrepresentation in research. This was also something that some of the authors within product rebranding concluded (Collange & Bonache, 2015; Subhadip & Soumya, 2015; Marques et al., 2020). Based on the four articles within product rebranding, two themes have been discussed, consumers reaction to rebranding and some research on the impact of rebranding on brand equity. Suffice to say, this is a research area requiring extensive additional research in order to draw strong conclusions.
Table 1 - Summary of rebranding literature
Authors Major themes Findings
Muzellec et al., 2003 Stages of rebranding Rebranding consists of four stages: repositioning, renaming, redesigning and relaunching.
Daly & Moloney, 2004 Stages of rebranding through name change
What to maintain/neutralize in a brand, plan
rebranding to internal/external stakeholders, evaluate rebranding
Merrilees, 2005 Stages of rebranding Visioning rebranding, stakeholder commitment, communicate rebranded identity.
Merrilees & Miller,
2008 Considerations when rebranding Maintain/balance old identity with new, maintain peripheral ques, shift to new segment, internal rebranding, integrate to marketing, communicate to stakeholders.
Miller et al., 2014 Success of rebranding Leadership, maintain ques, internal/external communication, communication & integration of marketing.
Gotsi & Andriopolous, 2007
Pitfalls in rebranding Gap between old and new brand equity, evaluation of stakeholder groups, employee's engagement in rebranding
Muzellec & Lambkin,
2006 External & internal stakeholders Internal stakeholders need to embrace change, external stakeholders need to accept new identity. Lee, 2013 Pitfalls in rebranding What to maintain/neutralize in new identity, which
stakeholder group to prioritize, misalignment of marketing campaigns
Muzellec & Lambkin,
2008 Separation of corporate & product image Consumer’s view of corporate and product brand different Stuart & Muzellec, 2004 Scale of rebranding Evolutionary vs. revolutionary rebranding Collange & Bonache,
2015 Positive & negative perceptions of rebranding
Rebranding faced with reservation; consumers react negatively when not understanding reason for rebranding.
Kaikati & Kaikati, 2003 Necessity of rebranding Necessity of rebranding should be based upon one’s own customers perceptions.
Todor, 2014 Process of rebranding Rebranding requires extensive research to make successful.
Subhadip & Soumya,
2015 Rebranding and brand equity Rebranding perceived with reservation. Loyalty mitigates negative perceptions of rebranding. Marques et al., 2020 Rebranding and brand
equity Rebranding does not affect brand equity; associations remain to old image.
2.3 Stereotypical brands
Stereotypes can be characterized by “oversimplified and generalized set of beliefs about the characteristics of a social group” (Greenwald & Banaji, 1995, p. 13). A prominent aspect of the stereotyping process is the allocation of group characteristics to a certain individual of that group, based only on the group membership (Kolbl et al., 2019). The concept of stereotypes can therefore be applied to several social groups such as ethnicities, genders, nationalities or professions (Fiske et al., 2002). However, research has shown that stereotypical associations do not only apply to people, but also to brands (Kolbl et al., 2019). Brand stereotypes illustrates the consumers’ beliefs regarding brands as intentional agents (Kervyn et al., 2012), and these beliefs can assist consumers perceptions (e.g., brand evaluation) intentions, (e.g., purchase intentions) and actual behavior (e.g., brand possession). Consumers tends therefore to establish relationships with brands, similarly to how they do with people (Escalas & Bettman, 2003; Fournier, 1998). Stereotypes can be observed in brands via e.g. ethnicity and gender (Avery, 2012; Merskin, 2001; Åkestam, 2018).
2.4 Brand equity
The concept of brand equity is considered as one of the most important topics in terms of marketing theory and practice, therefore is it a widely studied subject (Leone et al., 2006; Christodoulides & Chernatony, 2010). This has subsequently led to several definitions having been proposed to explain brand equity (Oh et al., 2020), where two of the most used definitions on brand equity are by Aaker (1991) and Keller (1993). The definition of brand equity according to Aaker (1991) is “a set of brand assets and liabilities linked to a brand, its name and symbol, that add to or subtract from the value provided by a product or service to a firm and/or to that firm’s customers” (p. 27), whereas Keller (1993) define it as “the differential effect of brand knowledge on consumer response to the marketing of the brand” (p. 8). However, several other authors have contributed
with definitions to explain brand equity (see Table 2), highlighting diverse perspectives of this term.
Table 2 - Definitions of brand equity
Authors Definition
Farquhar (1989) “We define brand equity as the ‘added value’ with which a given brand endows a product”
Aaker (1991) “A set of brand assets and liabilities linked to a brand, its name and symbol, that add to or subtract from the value provided by a product or service to a firm and/or to that firm’s customers”
Srivastava and Shocker
(1991) ”A set of associations and behaviors on the part of a brand's consumers, channel members and parent corporation that enables a brand to earn greater volume or greater margins than it could without the brand name and, in addition, provides a strong, sustainable and differential advantage”
Keller (1993) “The differential effect of brand knowledge on consumer response to the marketing of the brand”
Keller (2002) “The set of associations and behaviors on the part of the brand’s customers . . . that permits the brand to earn greater volume or greater margins than it could without the brand name”
Ailawadi et al. (2003) “Brand equity is defined as the marketing effects or outcomes that accrue to a product with its brand name compared with those that would accrue if the same product did not have a brand name”
The importance of brand equity can be explained with it being a key marketing asset (Davis, 2000; Ambler, 2003), an important intangible benefit to a firm (Leone et al., 2006) and acting as a competitive advantage while also driving brand wealth (Yoo et al., 2000). Therefore, the work of building a strong brand is highly connected with building brand equity (Keller, 2008). A strong brand equity could therefore lead to a greater consumer preference, brand choice behavior and brand purchase intentions (Cobb-Walgren et al., 1995; Freling et al., 2011; Romaniuk and Nenycz-Thiel, 2013). Despite the lack of a definitive definition of brand equity (Christodoulides & Chernatony, 2010), the realization of the importance of a brand as an intangible asset, has led to various models with shared premises about brand equity: The strength of a brand belongs to the mind of the consumers and all the impressions, experiences and feelings that they have gathered over time in relation to the brand; you can see brand equity as an addition of value towards the product in terms of words, thoughts and actions conducted by consumers (Leone et al., 2006).
Many studies show that brand equity does not stand alone, it consists of a number of dimensions which Aaker (1991) explains as brand awareness, brand associations, perceived quality and brand loyalty. Keller (1993) on the other hand has a different conceptualization regarding brand equity, which focuses on brand knowledge containing two components which are brand awareness (recall and recognition) and brand image (a mix of strength, favorability and uniqueness of brand associations). Additionally, Yoo et al. (2000) proposed that the most obvious options of the dimensions are perceived quality, brand loyalty and brand awareness/brand associations, where the last ones are bundled together into one dimension. Considering these takes on brand equity dimensions, this study will focus on reoccurring ones such as brand awareness, brand associations, perceived quality and brand loyalty.
Earlier research has shown that there are two major perspectives of brand equity, consisting of a financial perspective (FBBE) (Farquhar et al., 1991; Simon & Sullivan 1993; Haigh, 1999), and a consumer-based perspective (CBBE) (Aaker, 1991; Keller, 1993). FBBE concentrates on the financial value of brand equity with the use of metrics such as cash flows, cost savings, sales and prices and is often defined as firm-based brand equity (FBBE) (Christodoulides & Chernatony, 2010; Farquhar, 1989; Kamakura and Russell, 1993; Swait et al., 1993). The financial value of brand equity however is the result of consumer response to a brand name, whereas the latter perspective is known as the driving force of gaining market shares and profitability from the brand, based on the perception of the market or CBBE (Christodoulides & Chernatony, 2010). Because of the consumer approach conducted in this study, this will be the focus and used in relation to the rebranding initiatives of the four chosen companies.
2.4.1 Brand Awareness
The concept of brand awareness incorporates a consumers’ capability to recognize or recall a brand, its symbol or name (Aaker, 1991), but also act as a first stage in the buyer’s readiness to establish a brand preference and get one step closer towards the point of purchase (Ross & Harradine, 2004). Brand awareness consists of brand recognition and brand recall (Keller, 1993).
Brand recognition assumes earlier exposure to the brand, and when provided a cue, the consumer
should be able to properly identify the brand from their memory. An average consumer can recognize a lot of brands but only recall a few, therefore brand recognition is the lowest level of brand awareness, based on aided recall (Holden, 1993; Laurent et al., 1995; Mariotti, 1999). Brand recognition is most applicable when it comes to decision-making in terms of choosing a particular brand at the point of purchase (Radder & Huang, 2008).
The next level of brand awareness is brand recall and counts on unaided recall (Holden, 1993; Laurent et al., 1995; Mariotti, 1999). It is connected to the consumers’ capability of collecting a specific brand from their memory with the help of an appropriate cue (Ross and Harradine, 2004). Because the consumer is not provided with the brand name leads to that brand recall implies a stronger position of the brand in the consumers memory and therefore is the top-of-mind brand in unaided recall, considered the greatest level of brand awareness (Laurent et al., 1995; Mariotti, 1999)
2.4.2 Brand Association
Brand association refers to any kind of brand knowledge connected to a brand in the mind of the consumer which can be considered as the comprehensive brand equity in the consumer’s mind (Huang & Sarigöllü, 2012). Any information that passes by brand association is related to the brand name in a consumers recall, and acts as a reflection of the brands image (Keller, 1993; Romaniuk & Sharp, 2003) If the product reaches a high point of brand association, it is more likely to be remembered by the consumer and lead to loyalty towards the brand (Sasmita & Suki, 2015). Brand association consists of several ideas, episodes and facts which in turn forms a stable network of brand knowledge. The associations are considered stronger when they are based upon a large number of experiences or exposures of communication, rather than a handful (Aaker, 1991; Alba & Hutchinson, 1987) According to Yoo et al. (2000), brand associations results in higher brand awareness which has positive connections towards brand equity. This since they can act as an indication of quality and commitment which helps the consumer consider the specific brand at the point of purchase, leading to a positive behavior for the brand (Yoo et al., 2000). However, since
brand associations are linked to the mind of the consumer, associations can be both positive and negative towards the brand (Emari et al., 2012).
Connected to brand associations, and essential for our approach, is the importance of packaging design and how it is perceived by consumers. One part of the visual component is the consumers’ perception being affected by color, where the color is reflecting the expected product taste/features by consumer (Labrecque & Milne, 2012; Mead & Richerson, 2018). Additionally, studies show how consumers perceptions and evaluations differ when it comes to visual components versus textual components of package design, based upon psychological behavior of the brain, where for example words are being recalled when on the right side of the package while illustrations on the left (Rettie & Brewer, 2000). Visual elements are also dependent on the subjective interpretation by consumers and an evaluation of visuals is done to assess products (Casparus & Machiels, 2016). Visual and textual elements also affect the individual consumers views regarding a product as well as impacts the evaluation of a brand/product (Krishna et al., 2017).
2.4.3 Brand loyalty
Brand loyalty is often referred to as a consumer’s commitment towards a brand, service or product (Iglesias et al., 2019; Yoo et al., 2000). Oliver (1997) defines brand loyalty as “a deeply held commitment to rebuy or repatronize a preferred product or service consistently in the future, despite situational influences and marketing efforts having the potential to cause switching behavior” (p.392). In relation to this, loyal consumers are more likely to present favorable responses to a brand, more than the non-loyal or switching consumers (Grover & Srinivasan, 1992). Brand loyalty also depends on the consumers’ perception of the brand which makes both tangible and intangible assets important. These variables can come to be crucial when it comes to whether they want to be loyal towards the brand or not, or if it is just a matter of certain product features that the consumer is looking for (Liu et al., 2017).
2.4.4 Perceived quality
Brand equity is also affected by the perceived quality regarding a product. Perceived quality is characterized by the consumers own perception of the improved quality attributes a product offers in comparison to other products (Aaker, 1996). An important feature of perceived quality is that it is concerning the subjective perceptions by individual consumers, not an objective comparison of products (Zeithaml, 1988). Perceived quality also affects the loyalty towards a brand, when perceived quality increases, so does the loyalty (Pappu et al., 2005). Perceived quality is also often connected to higher incentives to pay more for a product in comparison to alternatives (Netemeyer et al., 2004; Yoo et al., 2000).
2.5 Brand perception
Based on our literature review, brand perceptions in its essence are not properly defined with a unilateral definition. Therefore, we rely on the definition given by Qualtrics “Brand perception is what customers believe a product or service represents, not what the company owning the brand says it does.” (Qualtrics, n.d.). With that said, studies regarding brand perception have been performed throughout the years. Since there is a lack of overlapping themes within brand perception, the literature we present is solely collected to aid our research.
Brand perceptions can be affected by both intrinsic and extrinsic cues. Espejel et al. (2007), investigated how food brands perceived quality is affected by intrinsic attributes such as color and appearance, and extrinsic attributes such as the perceived brand and the image of the product. Their findings suggest that intrinsic quality attributes may affect the perception of satisfaction and loyalty (Espejel et al., 2007). Continuing with the food theme, Huang and Wan (2019) identified how both intrinsic and extrinsic product cues affected the perceptions of the brands and evaluation of purchase behavior. Following the theme of intrinsic perception building, Favier et al. (2019), identified that the simplicity vs. complexity of the design of champagne bottles affect different brand perception elements. Simplistic was perceived as modern, authentic, successful as complex design was perceived as feminine, sophisticated, joyfulness and seniority among other traits (Favier et al., 2019).
Brand perception connected to CSR initiatives have been studied to a certain extent. Huber et al. (2011) researched consumers perceptions of CSR initiatives. The authors suggest that stronger initiatives regarding corporate social performance (CSP) is perceived positively by consumers which leads to a stronger relationship. This is partly due to an increase in social awareness among consumers (Huber et al., 2011). However, although social awareness among companies is appreciated by customers, an issue might rise regarding ethical views. For purely ethical perceptions, Brunk and DeBoer’s (2015) paper identified that consumers might not react to morally questionable behavior by companies. Occasionally, the perceived ethicality was only critically reviewed when consumers were asked about evaluating the company's ethical behavior.
2.6 Proposed framework
Derived from the literature review, we propose a framework serving as a basis for our research. The framework suggests that product rebranding affects brand awareness, brand associations and brand loyalty, which in the end leads to changes in overall brand equity and by that, changes in how consumers perceive a brand post-rebranding. Following the approach by scholars within product rebranding (Collange & Bonache, 2015; Subhadip & Soumya, 2015; Marques et al., 2020), due to the lack of existing literature on product rebranding, our research will be influenced by the corporate rebranding literature.
3.Method
This chapter presents the method that this study is based upon. First, the research philosophy will be discussed, continuing with the research design, research approach, literature review, data collection, data analysis, ethical considerations and ending with a discussion regarding the research quality.
3.1 Research philosophy
Before presenting what eventually will be the data collection, our philosophical approach will be explained as “the basic belief system or worldview that guides the investigator, not only in choices of method but in ontologically and epistemologically fundamental ways” (Guba & Lincoln 1994, p. 105). The fact that the researcher's beliefs and values can have a significant influence on the research process (Greenbank, 2003), makes it important to address. Not only will the awareness of our philosophical standpoint contribute to a higher quality of research, but also helps the researchers to recognize what kind of research design that is the most suitable and what is not (Easterby-Smith et al., 2015).
There are mainly three views of research philosophies, each of them contributing something unique and important to the table. These views being ontology, epistemology and axiology. Ontology refers to the nature of reality and how it shapes the view of the research object, epistemology is about knowledge and how it is approached and elaborated, and axiology covers the values and ethics within the research process. These views take different shapes depending on which research philosophy is adopted (Saunders et al., 2019). Regarding this study, the researchers agree upon that the reality is a product of the human mind and that knowledge is personal and experiential (Cunliffe, 2011), which has led to this study incorporating a subjective viewpoint. Therefore, out of the two main philosophies in marketing research, positivism and interpretivism (Malhotra et al., 2017), the research philosophy adopted by this study is interpretivism.
The interpretivist approach sees reality from a subjective point of view, which is evolving over time and is affected by the social environment. The researcher is also engaged in terms of interacting with the participant which can lead to biased outcomes based on the researchers’ values and use of a certain language. These aspects are something that must be taken into consideration thoroughly during the research. The researcher's interactivity with the participant can even reach a personal level, which can lead communication taking a different shape depending on the specific participant (Malhotra et al., 2017). To summarize, this paradigm focuses on human beings’ different social realities and how they perceive respective phenomenon’s (Saunders et al., 2019), which is the case of our study, where we are entangling people’s thoughts and feelings regarding the companies’ rebrandings and potential rebrandings. Therefore, our study incorporates a subjectivist ontology and interpretivist epistemology with a main goal of exploring different meanings, interpretations and perceptions of the subject area (Cunliffe, 2011).
3.2 Research Design
As a steppingstone from our research philosophy, a suitable research design needs to be selected enabling us to answer the research questions in the best possible way. Since this study will dig into what can be seen as a controversial topic regarding stereotypes in combination with rebranding, it can benefit of an exploratory study due to the nature of explanation of thoughts about a particular problem e.g., when you are uncertain about the exact nature of the problem (Saunders et al., 2007). The concept of rebranding, especially product rebranding, and the effect that it has on brand equity from a consumer perspective have yet to this day gone under the radar for many researchers, which is shown in the literature review. This means that there is limited knowledge for us to attain and makes an exploratory research design applicable (Malhotra et al., 2017; Saunders et al., 2007).
Usually, an exploratory research design relates to qualitative methods (Malhotra et al., 2017). A qualitative research tends to achieve a deeper understanding of the studied phenomenon, analyze certain experiences and develop a meaning (Kapoulas & Mitic, 2012), which suits this study better than the more numerical nature of the quantitative method where focus lies on finding patterns and generalize results from a wider population (Saunders et al., 2007).
3.3 Research approach
There are mainly two types of research approaches, being deductive and inductive. The deductive approach is based on the development of a theory and a hypothesis which is tested, while the inductive approach is about developing theory, based on the result of the data analysis (Saunders et al., 2007). Due to the interpretivist, exploratory and qualitative nature of this study, an inductive approach is considered the optimal approach to answer the research questions. This since there is a limited or no theoretical framework existing in the rebranding literature, leading to the researchers using their creativity to come up with a framework. The inductive approach is also related to participants being aided in explaining and discussing the nature of the subject in a certain context (Malhotra et al., 2017), which is the case of the researchers conducting in-depth questioning and probing the participants, in order to get as elaborated and profound answers as possible. The inductive approach takes the form of a qualitative research where the focus lies on exploring and understanding the essence that certain individuals ascribe to the problem presented (Creswell, 2009). Some important aspects that emphasize an inductive approach, and therefore our study, is that the collection of data is qualitative in the form of in-depth interviews, the researchers are a part of the research process as interviewers and there are less concerns regarding generalization because of the smaller sample of participants (Saunders et al., 2007).
3.4 Literature review
The work was initiated with a brainstorming session between the authors. This was helpful in terms of sorting out ideas of interest, analyzing the suggestions and deciding which take on the subject appealed the most (Moody, 1988). When the topic of interest was established, another session of brainstorming was conducted in order to come up with the most suitable key words on the chosen topic (Saunders et al., 2007). These key words were then used to find sources on the chosen subject area, mainly in reputable databases such as Scopus and Business Source Premier. Extensive utilization of citation indexes has been used in order to find sources that have been cited numerous times before by other authors (Saunders et al., 2007), this since the researchers consider a high cited source to be a more influential, impactful and trustful.
The work proceeded with a systematic literature review to find as much information as possible on the certain topics and provide an almost complete list of all the published and unpublished studies found associated with the specific subject area (Cronin et al., 2008). Since the limited amount of literature regarding rebranding, we were able to incorporate a majority of the most influential work within the field to our paper. These studies were entered carefully into an Excel file so that the researchers could obtain, read, and evaluate all the sources simultaneously. The researchers further conducted a traditional literature review where a body of the literature were summarized to then draw conclusions about the specific topic. This strategy enabled that readers could get an extensive background regarding the current knowledge, showing the importance of new research while also establishing a research gap (Cronin et al., 2008). This type of literature review was explicitly useful in the case of brand equity, a topic that is widely studied. By presenting the most cited and well-established sources, provided us with a summarized yet comprehensive view of the topic.
3.5 Primary data collection
Since the exploratory character of this study, where the authors aim at understanding the issue on a deeper level, qualitative research is a valid approach for this paper (Blumberg et al., 2005). Additionally, since this papers aim is to understand why the consumers have certain opinions and attitudes, qualitative interviews are deemed as an optimal approach to figure this out (Saunders et al., 2007).
3.5.1 Qualitative Interview
There are three types of interviews, structured, semi-structured and unstructured interviews. Structured interviews are inflexible, where quantifiable data is the outcome. On the contrary, unstructured interviews lack a pre-arranged interview guide, where the informant can express themselves freely regarding a pre-determined theme (Saunders et al., 2007). The approach taken by this paper consists of semi-structured interviews. Semi-structured interviews enable the authors to have a pre-formed interview guide, consisting of questions and themes that will be of focus during the interview. Simultaneously, it offers flexibility during the interview, where the order of
2007). We deem this the optimal approach since the opinions of each informant might differ to a large degree, giving us the flexibility to reach the best level of understanding. We argue that each informant might have different relationships towards the brands, meaning that the interview might put more effort on a particular brand that the informant consumes on a regular basis, leading to deeper insights. We also deem it ineffective to conduct unstructured interviews, since our proposed framework requires specific information on certain topics. In addition, semi-structured interviews offer the possibility to perform probing, meaning that more elaborated answers can be collected. Furthermore, probing gives us the opportunity to use open-ended questions, giving the informants liberty in answering the questions as well as an opportunity to aid the respondent in understanding the questions (Bryman & Bell, 2011).
3.5.2 Chosen companies
Since the purpose of this paper is to understand how the rebranding/potential rebranding of food brands is perceived by the consumers, we needed to limit ourselves to the specific industry. In addition, our purpose was to mainly focus on the effects of rebranding that occurred due to the global rebranding movement happening in 2020, which is why we further limited ourselves to include companies that either rebranded or considered a rebranding in the wake of 2020. Therefore, a judgmental sampling was conducted, allowing the researchers to select cases best suitable to answer the research questions (Saunders et al., 2007), which is based on the researchers judgement. We acknowledge, that due to the subjective nature of the human judgement, it can be seen as a subject of researcher bias (Frey, 2018). Based on this, we identified four companies that will be used in our research.
Eskimo, Pingviini
Pingviini has been a well-established ice-cream manufacturer on the Finnish market since 1960, nowadays owned by Nestlé. The specific product this paper focuses on is the Eskimo stick, nowadays known as “Pingviini Puikko”, being available for Finnish consumers since 1968 (Pingviini, n.d.). The company offers a broad variety of ice creams that are available in most stores in Finland.
In 2020 a rebranding campaign took place, where the stereotypical name Eskimo was replaced with the name Puikko. One can clearly see that otherwise there are similarities between the two packages, using the same font and the same layout with some minor changes taking place.
Turkish yoghurt, Valio
Valio has operated in Finland since 1905. It is the leading dairy producer on the Finnish market with net sales of 1,7 billion euros (Valio, n.d. a). The company also conducts exports mainly for industries although some export of consumer products also occurs (Valio, n.d. b). Valio’s products are well known in both Finland and Sweden, where their products are in every grocery store. The specific product we are looking at is their Turkish yoghurt. Although there are no figures backing this claim, the product is well-known and can be found in most of the Finnish grocery stores.
In 2020 a rebranding campaign took place, where the Turkish man with the stereotypical fez was removed. As can be seen, the color scheme of the products is similar as well as the font used for the text, but the man itself has disappeared.
Geisha, Fazer
Fazer is well-known, with yearly net sales of over 1 billion euros. Not only is the company known by their confectionary, but also for bakery products like bread. Although primarily based on the Finnish market, Sweden and the Baltics are major export markets for the company (Fazer Group, 2020). The company is well over a century old, being established in 1891 (Fazer Group, n.d. a), making it a prominent part of consumers lives across multiple generations. Their chocolate product Geisha is just as well-known as Fazer itself, having been available for consumers since the 1960’s (Fazer Group, n.d. b).In 2020, the company discussed a rebranding regarding the stereotypical name Geisha, however nothing has been changed to this date and the name remains the same.
Sitting Bull, Triumf Glass
Triumf Glass is a family-owned ice cream manufacturer acting on the Swedish market since 1946, producing over 17,5 million liters of ice cream each year (Triumf Glass, n.d. a). Regarding the Sitting Bull ice cream, the company considers it as a classic among their assortment (Triumf Glass,
n.d. b). In 2020, discussions regarding using the native American chief Sitting Bull on the packaging as well as in the name, was raised. However, to this date, no changes have been made.
3.5.3 Interview guide
In order to achieve the maximum benefit from the interviews, an interview guide was created, acting as a foundation for our interviews. The interviews followed a standardized open-ended interview technique, where the primary questions were phrased similarly to all participants but formed in a way that would increase the odds of getting elaborate answers (Gall et al., 2003). In addition, these types of questions give us as researchers the opportunity to ask additional questions via probing (Turner, 2010). The questions that we present to the participants (see Appendix B), are all based on the theoretical framework presented in the end of the literature review, connected to our research questions. One thing to keep in mind, is the fact that the nature of standardized open-ended questions can increase the difficulties of coding and interpreting similar themes among different participants (Turner, 2010). Although acknowledging this challenge, we have carefully assessed the interview questions in a way that would reach a sufficient level of complexity in answers, aiding us in the coding and data analysis process. We also acknowledge the fact that probing might interfere with the coding process, therefore we have discussed beforehand what types of probing questions can be used in order to follow a similar pattern.
Our research questions, together with the proposed framework, guided us in how to structure the interview. In the first part, we focused on brand awareness. We start of by showing blurred pictures of both the original products as well as the rebranded products. The purpose of keeping the logos or names blurred was to see whether the consumers recognized the products and whether the
recognition was towards the old product or the rebranded one (in the instances where rebranding already took place).
The next step was to show the original and rebranded products and ask questions regarding their associations towards these products, followed up by questions regarding brand loyalty. We also wanted to understand whether or not the participants at this stage had an idea why these rebrandings occurred, to see if they acknowledged the stereotypical themes regarding the brands. We concluded by presenting the background of these rebranding initiatives in 2020 and asked questions regarding how they perceived the necessity of these rebranding initiatives and whether their attitudes towards the products or companies changed after hearing the background. The reason for not disclosing the story behind the rebranding's earlier, was to avoid biasness in answers. We speculated that by explaining the story as an introduction and describing that some products were perceived as even racist, the participants would perhaps reshape their answers to appear more politically correct and support each decision taken by the brands, so called social desirability bias (Nederhof, 1985).
3.5.4 Selection of participants
When selecting participants, it is crucially important to understand the different sampling techniques and how they will affect the results of our research. There are generally two categories of sampling techniques, which in turn are divided into multiple subdimensions. The two main categories are probability sampling and non-probability sampling. In probability sampling, the aim is to include a sample that is as randomized as possible, where sampling error is minimized. This differs from non-probability sampling, where a specific part of the population is preferred over the rest, since the authors presume that this sample will end up with better findings and fits better the authors research approach (Bryman & Bell, 2011).
For this paper, a non-probability sampling technique is deemed to be suitable. We believe that our research questions require informants to have a relatively good knowledge of the brands that this paper focuses on. Furthermore, supporting our requirement of a particular degree of knowledge
required by the informants, a purposive sampling technique was implemented, where one has the ability to choose informants that are capable of giving elaborated answers to the given research questions (Saunders et al., 2007). Since our purpose to some extent aims at understanding branding issues, how for example personal experiences affect their perceptions of rebranding, we believe that it is important that the informants have some pre-existing knowledge of the brands in question. Participants were not chosen based upon a specific age nor gender, we can only conclude that participants were characterized by mixed genders and ages. The possibility of informants knowing all brands being quite slim, we deemed it sufficient that the informants recognize three out of the four brands. We believe that knowing three out of four brands would still provide us with elaborate and useful data.
To find interviewees that would meet the criterion of recognizing three out of the four companies of this study, a survey questionnaire was designed and sent via Facebook groups, friends and family members. The questions were sorted by the product categories of chocolate brands, yoghurt brands and ice-cream brands where the person taking the survey was able to choose among seven brands in a particular category. If the persons recognized three out of four products of our study, we deemed them as a suitable interview candidate. At the end of the questionnaire, a question regarding if they would like to participate in an in-depth interview were asked, and if so, they would be contacted by the researchers (See Appendix C).
It is also important to acknowledge the number of participants enrolled in our study. There is relatively little information about how many interviews should be conducted in qualitative research. Based on this, we conducted 10 interviews, supported by the findings of Marshall et al. (2013), regarding the number of participants based on how different journals and different cultures validate a sufficient number of interviews. We also argue that this is when we reached saturation, being a moment when no new codes or themes were identified among the participants, resulting in high validity of our results (Fusch & Ness, 2015).
Table 3 - Interview participants
Participant Age Gender Interview length
P1 55 Female 57 min P2 57 Male 44 min P3 20 Female 46 min P4 25 Male 46 min P5 28 Male 42 min P6 24 Male 36 min P7 24 Male 41 min P8 25 Male 52min P9 26 Male 37 min P10 27 Female 37 min 3.5.6 Transcriptions
In qualitative interviews, it is important to transcribe the interviews in a precise manner. What this means, is that each comment will be written down precisely in the way the informant expressed it. Additionally, it is crucial to make a distinction between what the participants said and what the interviewer has said during the interview (Saunders et al., 2007). A good way to conduct transcriptions is by recording the interviews when they take place. Recording the interview has two positive effects, it will document the whole interview including tones used by the informants when expressing their opinions. In addition, it enables the interviewer to focus on asking additional questions and interpret answers, when he/she does not need to focus on making notes (Bryman & Bell, 2011).
We audio-recorded every interview and transcribed them afterwards. A downside of this process is time-consumption (Bryman & Bell, 2011), that will take place when transcribing each individual interview. The interviews were conducted both in Swedish and Finnish. The answers given in Finnish were then translated into English, to ensure a proper understanding by each author of the context of the answers. All quotes in this paper are directly translated to English.
3.6. Data analysis
In order to achieve reliable findings, a disclosure regarding data analysis is required. A challenge with qualitative studies is how to analyze the data collected and how to create results out of all the data gathered. The process of data analysis can result in confusion if not planned thoroughly due to the vast amount of information collected (Bryman & Bell, 2011). The non-standardized answers that are given by participants and expressed by words needs to be classified in order to analyze and present findings (Saunders et al., 2007). When choosing the most suitable data-analysis approach, two major analysis methods were primarily considered, grounded theory and thematic analysis. With that said, if grounded theory would have been chosen, a major dilemma, difficult to tackle would have been the question regarding previous theory. In grounded theory, the approach usually requires some level of distancing from previous literature by not relying on a pre-conceived framework (Saunders et al., 2007). With that said, there are ways to avoid this dilemma, by keeping a critical mindset towards one’s own analysis and the closeness to pre-existing theories, or by implementing a broader literary basis for one’s research by implementing multiple theoretical perspectives in a shallower way (Suddaby, 2006). Based on our research, we could argue for avoiding issues by having implemented theoretical perspectives from both rebranding and brand equity literature. However, our primary data collection is heavily influenced by a proposed framework, motivating our decision to implement a thematic analysis instead.
Thematic analysis enables researchers to identify the underlying themes identified in the vast amount of information gathered. A thematic analysis is difficult to distinguish as a distinct analysis method from other quantitative methods, instead, it can be seen as a method influenced by various qualitative methods (Attride-Stirling, 2001). Multiple authors argue that thematic analysis has a weak reputation among the more common qualitative methods (Attride-Stirling, 2001; Braun & Clarke, 2006; Vaisamoradi et al., 2013; Nowell et al., 2017). Although it’s weak reputation among its “rivals”, thematic analysis is widely used in social sciences (Braun & Calrke, 2006). Therefore, we argue that it is a suitable method for our research.
We conducted a thematic data analysis using the six steps introduced by Braun and Clarke (2006). In broader terms, thematic analysis is the process of identifying specific themes within the data collected. The thematic analysis and identification of themes can either be of inductive or theoretical nature, where the former themes are related to the interview answers rather than the questions asked during the interview, while the latter, theoretical thematic analysis, is to a larger extent identifying themes based on research questions and theoretical foundations (Braun & Clarke, 2006). We implement a theoretical thematic analysis, based upon our framework which is connected to our research questions. In addition, we aim at identifying semantic themes, meaning that the themes are identified from the data collected, differing from latent themes identified from underlying observations (Braun & Clarke, 2006).
The data analysis process itself consists of six steps. The first step is about getting familiar with the data collected, in other words, transcribing the interviews conducted and forming some initial thoughts on what can be identified (Braun & Clarke, 2006). In our case, each interview was transcribed immediately after its conduction in order to have a fresh memory of what the context is. After conducting the final interview, we had a brief discussion regarding overall findings that were identified during our interviews that multiple participants had discussed in similar manners.
The second step is coding the data. Codes can be individual words that the authors believe play a role in creating potential themes. One important feature to acknowledge in this step is that codes are supposed to be “raw” information, not requiring any deeper interpretation (Braun & Clarke, 2006). When the interviews were conducted, we went through each interview to identify words and phrases that could be categorized into specific codes.
The third step is theme identification. When coding is finished, a categorization of these codes to match themes is done. Themes can both consist of more specific underlying themes that are then merged into a more overlapping theme. Visualization of themes can enable a more efficient theme identification (Braun & Clarke, 2006). When codes had been identified and categorized, we proceeded with identifying similar codes that could be categorized into specific themes. In many
