are brand parodies harmful for the brand relationship?
TRANSCRIPT
ARE BRAND PARODIES HARMFUL FOR THE
BRAND RELATIONSHIP?
Géraldine MichelProfessor – Sorbonne Business School– France
Ouidade SabriAssociate Professor - Sorbonne Business School– France
Pierre-Yves LagroueAssociate Professor , Sorbonne Business School– France
Consumer Brand Relationship Colloquium – March 2011
Parody : phenomen increasing
Parody is a creative art that transforms a serious copyrighted
work by using irony, humor or satire (Bush, Bush & Boller,
1994; Johnson 1 Spilger 2000)
Brand parodies can be either positive or negative
Michel, Sabri, Lagroue CBR 2011
… At the same time
Maintaining or creating a good reputation for companies is a main challenge and in all sectors.
So the analysis of negative parody effects is especially important.
What changes in the brand perception ? What changes in the brand relationship ?
Michel, Sabri, Lagroue CBR 2011
Little previous research
Little literature about parody
Little conceptualization to analyze parody effects (Johnson and Spilger 2000; Bush, Bush, and Boller, 1994; Zinkhan,1994).
Few empirical results (Jean 2011; Ahluwalia, Burnkrant and Unhava, 2000).
Michel, Sabri, Lagroue CBR 2011
Research purposes
Analyse the impact of negative brand parody on brand
Analyse ad attention and brand recall Impact on brand relationship Impact on word-of-mouth
Michel, Sabri, Lagroue CBR 2011
The hypothesis ofnegative brand parody impact on brand
Brand commitment
Behavior toward Brand
Logo attitude
Attention
Brand Recall
Brand relationship
Brand Affect
Brand trust
Brand word-of-mouth
Brand Reputation
H1 +
H2 =
H4 +
H3c -
H3b -
H3a -
H5 -
Negative logo parody versus real
logo
Michel, Sabri, Lagroue CBR 2011
EXPERIMENT METHODOLOGY
Specific focus on negative parody of 2 brands : Evian (bottled mineral water) and Fnac (Cultural and technological product retailer)
4 groups (experimental and control groups * 2 brands)
Online questionnaire, exposure to the logo on blog page
Sample 172 respondents 53% men Age average : 31 years old
Michel, Sabri, Lagroue CBR 2011
Experimental groups / Control groups
Sink, natural tap water
Money, profit maker
Evian, natural spring water
Fnac, idea shaker
Michel, Sabri, Lagroue CBR 2011
Do you recognize what you see ?
In the experimental group 31% saw « evian » even though we showed « evier » logo.
In the experimental group 48% saw « fnac.com » even though we showed « fric.com » logo.
EVIAN FNAC
Michel, Sabri, Lagroue CBR 2011
Gestalt theory
ANOVA to compare experimental and control group
Real logo
Parodied logo
F P
Attention 3.36 3.73 3.25 .06
% Recall .83 .69 .10
Brand trust 3.80 3.76 .089 .76
Brand reputation 3.97 3.91 1.79 .67
Brand Affect 3.87 3.93 .153 .69
Word-of- Mouth 3.48 3.27 1.38 .22
Michel, Sabri, Lagroue CBR 2011
ANCOVA to test the commitment moderating role
Commitment * casF P
Brand trust 1.05 .40
Brand reputation .95 .47
Brand Affect 1.48 .18
Word-of- Mouth .77 .61
Brand commitment doesn’t moderate the logo parody effects
Michel, Sabri, Lagroue CBR 2011
ANOVA to compare the logo characteristic
Real logo
Parodied Logo
F P
Credibility 3.18 2.90 3.50 .00
Humor 2.39 3.65 44.58 .00
Parodied logo is perceived as less credible and more humorous than real logo
Michel, Sabri, Lagroue CBR 2011
Conclusion
Theoretical contributions No effect of negative logo parody on brand
relationship
Reasons why The parody claims are perceived to be less credible
than real brand claims but the credible content is important in convincing.
The brand awareness dismisses the impact of negative claims, now in this research Evian and Fnac Brands have a high awareness.Michel, Sabri, Lagroue CBR 2011
Conclusion
Managerial contributions Negative logo parody has no impact to the original
brand if not founded on specific issues(s) related to the brand
Logo parody could increase the brand visiblity even the parody could be perceived negative (ex: Logorama)
Michel, Sabri, Lagroue CBR 2011
Limitations and further research Survey on negative parody advertising (brand parody more explicite)
Survey on past or present brand issues (brand which showed some issues on the past)
Before and after brand parody exposure (with control group)
Michel, Sabri, Lagroue CBR 2011
Global results
Behavior towards Brand
Cognitive impact
Attention
Brand Recall
Brand relationship
Brand Affect
Brand trust
Brand word-of-mouth
Brand Reputation
H1 +
H2 =
H4
H3c
H3b
H3aNegative logo
parody / real brand logo
Brand commitment
H5
Michel, Sabri, Lagroue CBR 2011