Co-Branding as a brand strategy. An analysis from the resource-based view

Table of Contents

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 RELEVANCE AND TOPICALITY

1.2 PROBLEM SET

1.3 RESEARCH OBJECTIVE

1.4 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

2 CONCEPTUAL BACKGROUND

2.1 THE RESOURCE-BASED VIEW

2.1.1 Emergence and relevance of the resource-based view

2.1.2 Underlying assumptions

2.1.3 Key concepts

2.1.4 Resources and their competitive advantage generating potential

2.1.5 Criticism and confutation

2.2 THE BRAND SPHERE

2.2.1 Definitions of the brand

2.2.2 Functions of the brand

2.2.3 Brand equity

2.2.4 Brand identity and brand image

2.2.5 Basic brand strategies

2.2.6 Brand alliances and co-branding

3 ALTERNATIVES TO OVERCOME ORGANISATIONAL GAPS

3.1 RESOURCE GAPS AND VALUE MAXIMIZATION

3.1.1 Resources as sources of sustained competitive advantage

3.1.2 Filling general resource gaps to allow for value maximization

3.2 THE ROLE OF THE BRAND WITHIN THE RESOURCE SYSTEM

3.2.1 Products and brands as result of resource interaction

3.2.2 The brand as a source of sustained competitive advantage

3.2.2.1 The brand as sustainable resource

3.2.2.2 The brand as a source of competitive advantage

3.3 BRAND GAPS AND VALUE MAXIMIZATION

3.3.1 The existence of brand gaps

3.3.2 General alternatives to fill brand gaps

3.3.3 Co-branding as an alternative to fill brand gaps

4 CO-BRANDING AS A VALUE-MAXIMIZING BRAND STRATEGY

4.1 FORMS OF CO-BRANDING

4.1.1 Levels of co-branding partnerships

4.1.2 Co-branding strategies according to key objectives

4.2 CO-BRANDING BENEFITS

4.2.1 General co-branding benefits

4.2.1.1 Direct consumer benefits

4.2.1.2 Direct organisational benefits

4.2.1.3 Spillover benefits for consumers

4.2.1.4 Spillover benefits for organisations

4.2.2 Particular ingredient branding benefits

4.2.2.1 The distinct supplier and manufacturer relation

4.2.2.2 Supplier-sided benefits

4.2.2.3 Manufacturer-sided benefits

4.3 CO-BRANDING SUCCESS FACTORS

4.3.1 Key success factors

4.3.1.1 Brand equity

4.3.1.2 Product fit

4.3.1.3 Brand fit

4.3.2 Additional success factors

4.3.2.1 Brand name dominance and others

4.3.2.2 Particular success factors for ingredient branding

4.3.2.3 Market-based success factors

4.4 RISKS AND DRAWBACKS

4.4.1 Collaborative risks

4.4.2 Direct risks

4.4.3 Spillover risks

5 PRACTICAL DEDUCTION

5.1 IMPLICATIONS FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS

5.1.1 Detecting brand gaps

5.1.2 Selecting a partner brand

5.1.3 Operational implementation

6 CONCLUSION

Objectives and Themes

The primary objective of this thesis is to evaluate co-branding as a strategic brand instrument capable of maximizing organizational value by filling existing brand gaps. Drawing on the Resource-Based View (RBV), the work examines the brand as a key organizational resource and analyzes the mechanics, benefits, success factors, and inherent risks of co-branding partnerships in a structured, analytical manner.

• Analysis of the brand as a source of competitive advantage using the Resource-Based View.
• Evaluation of alternatives to overcome organizational and brand gaps.
• Comprehensive assessment of co-branding benefits, including direct and spillover effects.
• Investigation of key success factors like brand equity, product fit, and brand fit.
• Derivation of practical implementation guidelines for co-branding partnerships.

Auszug aus dem Buch

Summary of Chapters

1 INTRODUCTION: This chapter defines the relevance of co-branding, identifies the problem set regarding brand gaps and organizational value, and outlines the research methodology.

2 CONCEPTUAL BACKGROUND: This section provides the theoretical framework by exploring the Resource-Based View (RBV) and defining the brand sphere, including brand identity and equity.

3 ALTERNATIVES TO OVERCOME ORGANISATIONAL GAPS: This chapter discusses resource gaps, the role of the brand as a resource, and evaluates strategies for filling these gaps, identifying co-branding as a viable alternative.

4 CO-BRANDING AS A VALUE-MAXIMIZING BRAND STRATEGY: This section analyzes forms of co-branding, details the benefits for both consumers and organizations, and examines critical success factors and potential risks.

5 PRACTICAL DEDUCTION: The final content chapter derives practical implications for the implementation process, focusing on brand gap detection, partner selection, and operational execution.

6 CONCLUSION: This chapter synthesizes the main findings and discusses the strategic importance of co-branding as a tool for value maximization.

Keywords

Co-branding, Resource-Based View (RBV), Brand Equity, Brand Strategy, Value Maximization, Brand Alliances, Ingredient Branding, Competitive Advantage, Brand Fit, Product Fit, Brand Gap, Brand Management, Spillover Effects, Organizational Resources, Strategic Management.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the core focus of this research?

The work investigates co-branding as a strategic marketing tool to maximize organizational value by bridging existing gaps in an organization's resource and brand portfolio.

What primary framework is used for the analysis?

The thesis utilizes the Resource-Based View (RBV) of the firm as the core theoretical framework to understand how organizations can leverage brand alliances for competitive advantage.

What is the central research objective?

The objective is to evaluate how co-branding acts as a solution to fill organisational brand gaps, while identifying the benefits, success factors, and risks associated with these partnerships.

Which methodology was applied?

The author conducted an analytical investigation supported by empirical data gathered through five expert interviews with industry and academic representatives.

What is the main topic of the main body chapters?

The main body focuses on defining the conceptual background (RBV and branding), analyzing the necessity of bridging brand gaps, evaluating the specific benefits and risks of co-branding, and providing a practical guide for implementation.

Which keywords best describe this work?

Key terms include Co-branding, Resource-Based View, Brand Equity, Strategic Alliances, Value Maximization, and Ingredient Branding.

How does the author define a "brand gap"?

A brand gap is defined as a limitation to value maximization that results from the existence or non-existence of distinct brand associations, hindering an organization from successfully extending its reach.

What is the significance of the "House of Resources" figure?

It visually demonstrates the mutual reliance between a company's underlying tangible/intangible resources and the brand, showing that the brand acts as a symbol for competencies to achieve value maximization.

Why is "brand fit" considered unique to co-branding?

Unlike standard brand extensions, co-branding involves two independent brands. Brand fit is crucial here because it measures the similarity and complementarity between these distinct brand identities.