Byung Chul Shine, Jongwon Park, and Robert S. Wyer Jr.
Executive Summary
Marketers frequently introduce new products under existing brand names. The evaluations of these "brand extensions" often depend on a brand's physical, conceptual, or contextual similarity to the parent brand. However, additional considerations arise when marketers introduce multiple extensions of a brand in close temporal proximity. In this case, the extensions can sometimes have synergistic effects on evaluations of one another independently of their similarity to the parent, leading both to be evaluated more favorably than they would if each were considered in isolation. Three experiments reported in this article provide evidence for this synergy effect and identify boundary conditions and reasons for the effect.
Experiment 1 demonstrates that the simultaneous introduction of two brand extensions can have a positive influence on their evaluations independently of parent–extension similarity. That is, participants evaluated extensions more favorably if they were complementary (e.g., a digital camera and a digital photo printer) and promoted together than if they were introduced in isolation. Furthermore, this synergy effect was evident even though extensions differed considerably from the parent brand category. For example, participants evaluated extensions complementary extensions (e.g., snowboards and snowboard boots) more favorably than single extensions (e.g., snowboards alone) even when the target manufacturer was Xerox.
The authors considered two alternatives ways the synergy effect might come into play. First, the attribute-accessibility hypothesis posits that the exposure to two complementary products in close temporal proximity may stimulate recipients to imagine how the products might be used in combination and the benefits derived from this use. In turn, this cognitive activity may call attention to benefits that might not have been thought about if the products had been presented in isolation. As a result, the extensions might be evaluated more favorably than they otherwise would. Note that if this hypothesis were correct, the two products under consideration need not be brand extensions at all, as long as one of the products is salient at the time the other considered. Second, the set-completion hypothesis applies only when products are extensions of the same parent brand. That is, multiple extensions from a given company activate thoughts about the desirability of having several related products from this same firm. In this case, consumers may find it more psychologically pleasing to possess a set of products that are used in a particular life domain if these products come from the same manufacturer. This perception could also increase the attractiveness of complementary extensions relative to ones that are in different product domains.
The authors test these two possibilities in Experiment 2, which manipulated whether two complementary products were introduced by the same manufacturer or by different manufacturers. The results provided support for the set-completion hypothesis. That is, the synergy effect was restricted to conditions in which the same manufacturer introduced the extensions; it did not occur when the extensions were advertised as a unit but were associated with different manufacturers. Furthermore, participants evaluated complementary extensions from the same manufacturer more favorably than comparable extensions from different manufacturers, suggesting that a related set of products from a single manufacturer were viewed as inherently appealing.
Experiment 3 provides further support for the set-completion hypothesis. An implicit assumption of the set-completion hypothesis is that synergy effects result from the intrinsic appeal of having a set of complementary products of the same brand, independently of any undesirable features that the individual extensions might have. If this is so, the effects should be particularly evident among consumers with an a priori disposition to base their decisions on positive features of choice alternatives (a promotion focus) rather than negative ones (a prevention focus). Indeed, this was the case. That is, synergy effects were evident only when people were promotion focused, (i.e., when they were disposed to focus their attention on positive consequences of having the extension products they were considering). Furthermore, this disposition can be either chronic or situationally induced. In either case, however, inducing participants to focus on negative consequences of a decision appears to override this disposition. Consequently, synergy effects were not apparent.
The evidence that complementary product extensions can have a substantial impact on evaluations of one another, even when they are outside the range of apparent expertise of the company that manufactures them, is of managerial importance. Companies that plan to enter into a new product market may want to consider launching a set of complementary extension products simultaneously to obtain the synergy effect, especially when the new product category is dissimilar to the parent brand.
Biography
Byung Chul Shin is President of the Bridge Laboratory Inc. and a research associate at Korea University Business School, Seoul. He has obtained an MBA and a PhD from Korea University Business School. His research interest is in brand management, advertising strategy, and customer relationship management. He conducts a wide range of marketing consulting and teaches consumer behavior, marketing strategy, brand management, and advertising strategy.
Jongwon Park is Professor of Marketing and Director of Center for Marketing Research at Korea University Business School, Seoul. He has a PhD from the University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign and previously was a marketing faculty member at the University of British Columbia. His research interest is in the information processing underlying consumer judgments and choices, brand management, and behavioral decision theory. Dr. Park's publications appear in leading journals, including Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Psychology, Journal of Marketing Research, and Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.
Robert S. Wyer Jr. is Professor Emeritus of Psychology at the University of Illinois and is currently Visiting Professor of Marketing at Hong Kong University of Science and Technology. Dr. Wyer's research interests focus on various aspects of information processing including the comprehension of information, its representation in memory, and its use in making judgments and decisions.
Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. XLIV, No. 4, November 2007
View Table of Contents.