Brand orientation

How does an organization’s approach to branding affect its ability to build and protect brand value, or risk trademark degeneration? This question underpins the concept of brand orientation, examining how brands gain or lose distinctiveness and the importance of a multidisciplinary approach to brand management.

In my doctoral thesis (1997) I argued for a new corporate approach (mindset) towards brands: brand orientation. The aim was to examine how an organization’s approach to brands can (1) ideally, help to build and protect brands as strategic resources or (2) in the worst case, result in loss of distinctiveness and trademark degeneration (a brand that has lost its distinctiveness may become a common word forming part of the language). In the worst-case scenario, the corporation loses its exclusive right (ownership) to the trademark, which thereafter is free for all to use. What happens in the process where values and meaning are created was one of the intriguing questions of my thesis. Words such as dynamite, windsurfer, vespa, insulin, and gramophone are examples of successful brands which have eventually degenerated. Today, leading brands such as Google, iPod, and Rollerblade are sometimes used to describe a type of products or services, which can be a sign of loss of distinctiveness.

Words such as dynamite, windsurfer, vespa, insulin, and gramophone are examples of successful brands which have eventually degenerated.