101
8 Discussion
As seen in the findings, it might not be sufficient to only look into the three factors of the VCI in order to evaluate the strength or success of a corporate brand. Moreover, as a company’s identity conversation is directly influencing the coherence between the company’s culture and image it is suggested that one should consider the actual stakeholder image, and not just the suggested “us” by Hatch and Schultz (2008). In this section, the researchers will discuss suggestions for additional aspects to be considered for an evaluation of a corporate brand. First, the section will discuss the initial model and why an addition is seen necessary, and also how this can contribute to the existing theory. Lastly, a suggestion for a new and refined model is presented. This model is believed to be of value when investigating the success of a company's corporate brand and the brand’s attractiveness and position in the market.
102 of vision, culture, and image is, the stronger the organization and corporate brand. Furthermore, gaps between VCI in an organization are argued to indicate an underperforming corporate brand. If the VCI is aligned, it builds strategic assets in terms of a strong corporate reputation and organizational behavior (Hatch & Schultz, 2008). However, Burke (2015) argues that one cannot determine one’s strategic assets before talking to stakeholders. As a corporate brand is seen as one of the strongest strategic assets to have, the stakeholders and their market expectations should also be taken into consideration when determining the strength of a corporate brand. Thus, it can be argued that an external perspective should be included. Additionally, the findings in this paper argue that this model should be modified and that a new aspect regarding stakeholders’ market expectations should be added. Hatch and Schultz (2008) argue to obtain an understanding of how a company believed it is perceived and what expectations the stakeholders hold to the company, but it is not said that the bank should look into what is expected by the entire market, and one’s competitors. Based on the findings of this paper, it is argued to be important to understand stakeholders’ market expectations in order to evaluate a company’s corporate brand.
Hatch and Schultz (2008) have already shed light on how a corporate brand can be somewhat successful even though the VCI is not fully aligned. They have presented an example on Bang &
Olufsen and the company's main strength being their technical understanding of electrical products (Hatch and Schultz, 2008). This was also deeply embedded in the company’s culture and identity.
Even though this was seen as the strength of the company by its employees, customers thought the company’s strength was a clean and modern design, and the preference for the product was based on this, rather than on the technical understanding. Consequently, customers choose Bang & Olufsen’s products based on something else than what the company itself believed to be its strongest strategic asset. The products were still attractive for the customers but on different grounds than what the company believed. Moreover, the example of Bang & Olufsen shows that even though the company’s culture and vision were not aligned with stakeholders’ image, the company still had a strong corporate brand and thus, a strong position in the market. Hatch and Schultz (2008) argue that one way to replicate a misalignment in VCI is to look into stakeholders’ expectations of the focal corporate band.
In other words, for this example, the customers received what they expected from the company: a
103 clean and modern design. Even though this aspect differentiated from the culture and the believed strengths of the company, the corporate brand is seen as successful as it is attractive.
Several scholars have written about how one’s perception of a product or service can color the expectations held to it. Stakeholders’ expectations are pretrial beliefs about a particular product which serve as reference points for how product performance is judged (Olson and Dover 1979).
Furthermore, according to Parasurman, Zeithaml and Berry (1988), expectations are seen as needs or wants of customers, and what they believe a service provider should offer, rather than would offer (Parasuraman, Zeithaml, and Berry 1988). Woodruff, Cadotte, and Jenkins (1983) also added that customers rely on standards that reflect what the actual brand should provide to meet expectations, but that these are constrained by the performance customers believe is possible based on experiences.
Due to this, it might look like an expectation of something can be colored by the image of it. For the case of this paper, the findings show that stakeholders’ image might color the expectations they have to the company, as stakeholders do not believe that the company can provide them with what they wanted. Furthermore, the beliefs about the company caused the bank to have a less successful corporate brand and a weakened position in the market. Henceforth, by looking at the expectations related to all players in the market, instead of to a particular brand or company, it allows for a consideration of real needs and wants from the stakeholders. Additionally, these overall expectations show better what the stakeholders actually want and need, and what a company should offer in order to reach a successful brand and a strong market position. For the case of Bang & Olufsen, it seems like the customers wanted a clean and modern design and this was what they believed the company could provide for them, and thus, the image was coherent with the presumed expectations and the corporate brand was seen as successful.
The findings of this thesis show that the stakeholders need to believe that a company can cover their expectations, in order for the brand to be attractive. In this specific case study, several stakeholders said that they wanted a modern and innovative bank and that they believed this particular bank to not be modern and innovative, and thus not attractive. Henceforth, it is argued that having attributes that are attractive and correlating with the stakeholders’ expectations is strengthening the company’s position in the market. Moreover, that a misalignment between a company’s image and stakeholders’
104 expectations can result in negative preferences for a company and thus, a weakened position in the market. As seen from the example of Bang & Olufsen and the findings of this paper, it seems evident that one aspect should be added to the VCI Alignment Model: Stakeholders’ market expectations.
Furthermore, as discovered in the findings: in order to fully understand if a corporate brand is successful and if a company is well-positioned in the market, it is necessary to evaluate to what extent the company’s services and products are correlated with stakeholders’ market expectations. As a result, the researchers have proposed a new and refined model on how to evaluate the success of a corporate brand. Consequently, introducing the Vision, Culture, Image, and Stakeholders’ Market Expectations (VCIME) Alignment Model, which will be further explained in the section below.