Whether you are aware of it or not, consumers form relationships with your brand. This happens because as human beings we form relationships while simply living our lives. We need other people for everything we do or experience – in cooperation with other people we create, we enjoy the results together or other people are the reason for our activity. To such extent relationships are part of how we exist that we transfer that mechanism to unanimated objects such as brands.

If forming relationship with your brand underlies the process of its usage, it is quite important to understand what these relationships entail, what are their characteristics, e.g.: Is there emotion or they are based on simple exchange of benefits? Have consumers initiated them on their own or brand usage was somehow imposed? Are the interactions friendly or hostile? Do consumers consider them to be long-term or short-lived? Is there commitment on the part of the consumer? Who has the upper hand in the relations? Etc.

A brand forms different types of relationships with its consumers. Which types predominate? Ideally it is preferable that friendly, deep and emotional relationships predominate, in which consumer are committed to the brand and depend on it. These types of relations are difficult to end. But there are also relationships in the grey zone of indifference, in which brands are easily replaceable. They are the ones that usually predominate in a category. In our research of 5120 consumer-brand relationships 29% are emotional and friendly, 5% are hostile and 66% are functional with little emotion, some friendlier than others, all easy for the consumer to end.

The effective brand strategy depends on the type of relationship consumers have with the brand. In a long-term committed relationship e.g. consumers need surprises and variety and expect their loyalty to be rewarded. In a friendly and less emotionally vested relationship, with less commitment to the brand, the consumer uses other brands as well – the brand should be reliable and predictable, when the consumer returns to it. For consumers in a distanced, unemotional relationship with the brand you need to establish relevance and personal connection, to augment the brand experience with associations and images that link the brand to important life themes and objectives. In cases of hostility you need to offer immediate compensation and start to rebuild trust.

Understanding the type of interactions consumers have with your brand gives you the leverage to connect in the most effective and lasting manner.

Sylvia has not considered what attracted her to the restaurant on the corner. She would drop by when she felt heavy hearted or when she wanted to celebrate a small victory. She would go to take a quick bite or meet with friends. It was not just the comfort and the food. Nor the polite service. With its inexplicable attraction the restaurant on the corner withstood the changes and constant appearance of new places in the area.

It was not a matter of habit either. Sylvia loved the variety and was not so loyal to other places she visited. There was something in this restaurant which made it fit, as if it were saying to her “you are where you need to be”.

When you sense an impulse in the surrounding world, similar to the inner forces that, consciously or not, define your thoughts, feelings and actions, the attraction is instantaneous. The brand that carries the impulse enters your most inner space. What is expressed by it merges with your self. You find your own longing.

Somehow the brand has become an expression of an archetype – one of the primary principles, proto-images, through which people express themselves and give meaning to their lives.

Any brand, no matter small or large, local or global, can become a bearer of archetypal images and aspirations. In some brands this is the result of purposeful work, in others it can be a side effect.

In any case, it is worth checking how your brand is perceived, whether consumers associate it with an archetypal image and with which one, at least because at the archetype level the strongest connections are created.

How does the use of archetypes in brand development goes beyond just working with values or personas? The point is which attitudes and personas you choose to use. Do they express something so essential that when you recognise it in a brand, something clicks? Or it turns out that the persona you have chosen does not arouse such primary reactions. Archetypes are a good system of reference for the expected potency of the image you are building.

How you can use archetypes in brand management

For already established brands, the goal is to determine what archetype your brand expresses through its communication.

Even if archetypal images were not consciously embedded in the brand, what the brand has communicated since its creation, the stories it was telling, the characters who represented them, may have evoked in the minds of the consumer associations with deeply rooted longings and fundamental life principles.

What can you do:
- Review of communication and ongoing advertising campaigns – with which archetype can you connect them, were there any changes, what does the brand express today.

- Explore consumer perceptions – what is left in the consumer mind from earlier messages and images, how are people touched by the stories and characters, are there associations with archetypal layers.

- Comparison of what you have learned with the values, purpose, principles that guide you in brand management. Are you moving in the right direction?

If you are preparing to introduce a new brand, you have the chance to integrate the appropriate archetype from the very beginning of brand development. What fundamental principle does your brand represent? To be of help, to discover new horizons, to enable people to enjoy the small things in life or maybe to make the world better?

There is no good or bad archetype, just as every human image has its light and dark side. Good implementation of the strategy will emphasize the positive in the image and will not leave any opportunity for associations with undesirable characteristics. For example, the victorious hero may be heartless in his desire to succeed, the leader may become a tyrant, and the explorer may get lost in the search of his uniqueness.

Three steps for successful use of archetypes in branding:

1. Choosing the right archetype
2. Careful building of the image
3. Consistency in communication

What to consider when choosing an archetype:

There are two starting points – to what extent this archetype reflects the values of the brand and to what extent it corresponds to the prevailing attitudes of consumers.

It is also good to study the main competitors in the category – to what extent are these brands associated with archetypal images and with which ones? How much more appealing will be the story you will tell?

In building the image, beware of possible associations with the negative traits that each archetype also carries. Tune in to consumer perceptions.

You may be tempted to mix elements from several archetypes in the image of your brand. If you think of yourself, of the values you are guided by, you will most likely find at least a few active archetypes for you at the moment. Maybe at different stages of your life, a different archetype has prevailed, but all along in your life choices you can find the influence of other archetypes too. For a brand, unlike humans, it is better to focus on one archetypal image in order to send out homogeneous and consistent messages. In any case, we have seen that even a unified and consistently built brand around one archetype triggers associations with various meanings as consumers perceive brand communication through the lenses of their own life experience.

Consistency in communication

Consumer perceptions are long-lasting, some brands stay with us for much of our lives and the memories we have of them intertwine with the present. A change of the archetype of a successful brand can be confusing to consumers and harmful. When the choice of archetype is right and the execution is good so far, the brand can be reinvented and renewed while remaining true to its archetype.

To change the brand archetype is meaningful and justified in case of significant transformations in the market and consumer expectations and can be quite useful in rebranding and repositioning.

It is well accepted that through brands consumers express themselves.When using a brand, the qualities and image, associated with it, attach to the consumer, augmenting his or hers perception of themselves. Using a brand expresses who you are or who you want to be.

Consumers often prefer brands that project images similar to their own self-image. Additionally, individuals have the tendency to enhance their image in the perception of other people. Products and brands are used as instruments of symbolic communication in social interactions to project the desired image.

In theory, consumer-brand identification is an underlying factor of a strong relationship with the brand and loyalty to that brand. In our research we wanted to confirm whether the consumer-brand identification plays a role in building the relationship with the brand, in establishing loyalty and willingness to pay a higher price.

Also, we wanted to understand whether the consumer-brand identification is an equally important driver across different product categories.

The research covered 10 industries/categories: Airlines, Automotive, Cosmetics, Financial Services, Food, Retailers, Soft Drinks, Alcoholic beverages, Technologies and Telecommunications

We studied different levels at which brands may connect with consumers:

• Consumer-Brand Identification:Self-Identity, Group Identity, Common values, Aspirations
• Experiences and emotions
• Utility: Product quality, Instrumental to achieve objectives

Our test model of Consumer-Brand Identification includes four expressions – the first is self-identity, when the consumer finds similarities between himself or herself and the image of the brand. We also tested group identification – whether using the brand creates the feeling that you belong to a particular group. The values the consumer shares with the brand is another variant we tested. And the fourth expression of Consumer–Brand Identification is on aspirational level – whether the brand expresses the lifestyle one aspires to.

Not all four were equally important in determining the relationship with the brand: self-identity, followed by common values with the brand played a role in more categories. Also, there were differences across categories: self-identity determines the relationship with the brand in telecommunications and retail, food and soft drinks, while group identity has shown importance in telecommunication and alcoholic beverages only. The common values of the brand and the consumer are a driver for consumer-brand relationship in automotive, financial services and alcoholic beverages. And finally, the aspirational level of the consumer-brand identification works in cosmetics and retail.

Overall the consumer-brand identification is a stronger driver than experience and utilitarian factors (quality mostly) for building a relationship with the brand for airlines, alcoholic beverages, automotive and retail.

When it comes to paying a higher price, group identity and aspirations are active across more categories. Group identity determines the willingness to pay a higher price for airlines, financial services, retail and soft drinks. The aspiration towards a certain lifestyle determines the willingness to pay more in automotive, food, cosmetics and technology. Common values with the brand are important in financial services, telecommunications and alcoholic beverages. Self-identity is a driver in only cosmetics and telecommunications.

It is very interesting to see that Consumer-Brand Identification determines overall the willingness to pay a higher price more than experience & emotions and utilitarian factors in all of the tested industries except fmcg.

Loyalty (measured as purchase intention) seems less influenced by the Consumer-Brand Identification. Utilitarian factors and quality in particular are a stronger driver for building loyalty among the tested factors.