Increased competition in the consumer goods marketplace has resulted in too many brands chasing too few consumers. In an attempt to ease pressure on margins, and both brand and product range profitability, marketers would be well advised to reinspect their policies towards brand naming and the attendant costs associated with those policies. Is it really necessary for each new product to be individually named? If it is, then what are the strategic and financial implications of this decision? Why is it that the practice in some companies is to resort to a string of unrelated brand names whereas the practice elsewhere is to use an umbrella family name, with or without, a brand name as a suffix? The answers to such questions are by no means obvious and closer inspection of the issues relating to naming policy fails to yield any consensus let alone a definitive approach. This article seeks to depict the alternative naming strategies engaged by marketers and to focus on those considerations that would favour a family name in preference to an individualised brand name. The article concludes with recommendations that are drawn from current literature and the experience of marketers with a view to determining those circumstances that may influence the formulation of a more appropriate naming policy.
Field of Research
150503 Marketing Management (incl Strategy and Customer Relations)
Socio Economic Objective
970115 Expanding Knowledge in Commerce, Management, Tourism and Services
Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that permission has been obtained for items included in DRO. If you believe that your rights have been infringed by this repository, please contact firstname.lastname@example.org.