Brand Personality

Last reviewed: February 2017

Abstract

“Brand personality” refers to ascribing elements of human personality to a brand so that it may appear more attractive and engaging to an audience. Some companies may create brand personalities that reflect that of their founder or CEO; others reflect the culture of the organization. Whichever strategy a firm undertakes to develop its brand personality, it is understood that carelessness in developing a brand personality may lead to failure and that culture and technology have become crucial factors in developing a strong and durable brand personality.

Overview

The concept of “brand personality” has generated a great deal of interest since the late 1990s. A brand personality is a dynamic thing, in which organizations create and imbue a brand with anthropomorphic characteristics. Consumers give the brand symbolic value through their interactions with, use, or consumption of the brand. Brand personality, then, refers to human characteristics allocated to the brand by both its creators and consumers.

Among the reasons found by marketing managers to develop the concept of brand personality was the growing proliferation or excess number of brands in the market. In order to stand out from the crowd, and to fight against a target market increasingly desensitized to conventional advertising cues, firms had to find better ways to express and communicate their message. For instance, they found that it was crucial that content be relevant and provide a differential added value. This content should be created in a way that is relevant not only to the brand but also to the needs of its target market and other interest groups. To achieve this, they began to give brands a gloss or appearance of personality, so that consumers are able to relate to the brand as if the brand has the capacity to relate to them. The challenge for marketers is to define the specific personal characteristics that reflect the key values firms want the brand to express.

Because human beings are complex, the best brand personalities are those able to encompass human complexities and even contradictions. In other words, a successful brand personality usually includes nuances or shades of meaning to better reach a larger number of consumers, who will feel a personal connection with the brand. However, although in theory it is possible for firms to add as many nuances as they desire to a brand, it is also convenient to limit characteristics to those that are coherent with its attributes and with the company’s general values and discursive aspects.

A common example of a successful brand personality is that of Coca-Cola. Coca-Cola successfully integrated and disseminated the concept of happiness as part of its brand philosophy. Happiness has long been a part of its differentiation strategy and one that has been consolidated throughout its marketing campaigns for decades. Nevertheless, although it may reflect the idea of happiness, the brand itself is incapable of feeling joy. It is merely part of a conscious marketing strategy.

There is, in fact, a very real difference between brand personality and that of human beings. People develop personalities as an admixture of traits and assimilation, by learning behavioral models from the world around them. This includes all sorts of external influences, such as human relationships—parents, relatives, friends—but also pervasive elements such as the media, through advertising and celebrity culture. A brand’s personality, on the other hand, is created internally, through research, trial and error, and seeking those values and attributes deemed by a marketing team as the most convenient for its goals and representative of the brand’s “essence.”

However, both human and brand personalities are imbued by tangible and intangible elements, those that reflect material objects and personal feelings. In the case of a brand, tangible and intangible elements are those offered to its target market, consumers, stakeholders, and all other interest groups. The end goal is differentiation, and the means to differentiation include offering better prices than the competition, offering added value, being a unique product, incorporating flexible policies, and customer relations strategies.

When speaking of differentiation, elements that make a product different and unique should also reflect organizational values. This commitment of the firm to the brand is part of the intangible elements that contribute to added value, the elements that a customer receives beyond the product itself—in this case, trust in the brand and the sense of having acquired a quality product. Usually, upon creating or renewing a brand, brand managers and their teams make a list of the values and benefits they wish to be reflected. These are then organized in order of priority according to interest and relevance, and distilled into the essence of the brand. It makes a difference, for instance, if customer satisfaction is among the topmost priorities. Being able to satisfy customers’ needs and wants for that brand and product makes for much better long-term sustainability. The commitment to customer satisfaction, however, must come across as real or customers will, in time, eventually see through the façade and lose trust in the brand. There are many products, however, who for a variety of reasons do not need to place customer satisfaction as the topmost priority and instead favor other factors that better align with their brand profile.

There are a great many ways in which brand managers sort out personality factors in order to develop brand personalities. Among the most common ways to characterize brand personality elements or concepts are the following: (a) rational—measurable and tangible concepts; (b) emotional—related to moods, able to conjure abstract ideas and feelings; (c) internal—used in connection to internal factors such as employees and company stakeholders; and (d) external—necessary to generate a favorable opinion among audiences and other external interest groups.

Further Insights

Once the basic “personality traits” have been decided upon, these must translated or expressed through the stage of verbal identity, which includes content-based elements such as brand voice, tone, and style. These are important to establishing an emotional connection with the brand’s target market. According to experts, the success of a brand is dependent—in about 90 percent of cases—to successfully establishing an emotional connection with the audience and consumer groups.

Reaching this goal is challenging, because a vast array of human relationships and ways of connecting exist, as well as symbolic meanings that customers can assign to a brand. Many brand managers, then, strive to assign something extra, an added value, to that relationship between the brand and its target. One of the most effective strategies used to achieve this, is verbal identity. Once the brand personality’s “essence” or core values have been identified, the marketing team must implement ways to communicate the values and its attributes. Besides the visual components of a brand—its logo, for example—experts use the principle of “the 3 Cs” to develop its verbal identity.

Clarity. Strong or successful brands are able to express very clearly how they wish to be perceived. The image and message remain clear and understandable across interest groups and, in some cases, across languages and nations. This differentiates them from their competitors and is a useful platform to cultivate brand loyalty among its target groups, as well as name recognition among the general audience. A strong brand personality can be based on the bold and unique personality of its major representative, such as Virgin Airlines and its CEO Richard Branson, or it may be a company brand that remains strong in the public consciousness, such as Coca-Cola.

Consistency. Even constant change may become consistent, if a brand or celebrity becomes known for constant reinvention. In fact, human beings can be a brand; one can think of such celebrities as Madonna, the Kardashian sisters, or Angelina Jolie. Each change may start a new trend and thus, the brand becomes known a trend-setter. Most brands, however, do better by remaining consistent in image and message, while adapting to social changes and developments. In other words, successful brands ensure that their essence remains true, despite sometimes necessary change and adaptation. A powerful idea—and its values—will endure.

Constancy. It is known among successful firms that strong brands are constant. That is, their message is heard frequently and repeatedly, ideally through a variety of channels and platforms. They are always “available” to their public, even if the feeling of nearness or closeness they provide is an illusion. These brands may include famous television talk show or reality show celebrities, company CEOs, or brands such as Pepsi or including government agencies, such as USAID, which has been successful in many of its foreign relations campaigns abroad furthering humanitarian aid in the form of educational and health services aid.

Alternatively, some brand managers have interpreted the 3 Cs as consistency, culture, and content or communication. Content refers to verbal communication—in its written or spoken form—to promote a message. Culture, however, is a novel element that speaks of shared values, beliefs, behaviors, languages and ways of life; it includes the way people interpret and engage with slogans and symbols as presented through a brand personality. Many cases of brand failure have been ascribed to focusing on the visual aspect of a brand, but failing to take into account the verbal and cultural aspects of their brand strategy.

Important brand personality elements, such as brand voice, then, are directly related to culture. Each organization has a specific or unique culture, which should be reflected in its brand: what makes it unique, what it stands for, and why its product is important. Guidelines such as the 3 Cs help brand managers be more accurate in visualizing a long-term branding strategy, including the personality that a brand should have—that is, what characteristics such a personality should have and how to make it relate to its customers, both local and global. It is for these reasons that experts insist verbal identity must always be an integral part—a clear, coherent, and culturally relevant part—of a brand’s personality.

Issues

According to experts, iconic brands—those that have risen to become the most successful at representing the ideals and desires of a society—follow principles known as “cultural branding.” These precepts, developed in the 1990s, are different than traditional branding strategies established around the 1950s and sometimes even contradict established advertising conventions. As such, it remains a relatively new and sometimes controversial field that demands new mindsets and innovative models. Conventional branding practices include a dependence on cognitive models, whereas the novel strategies were based on “emotional branding.” Rather than appeal to rational responses, emotional branding appeals to its audience’s emotions, feelings, and aspirations. In the contemporary marketing field, however, brand managers who seek to create or strengthen a brand’s personality usually draw upon a combination of these approaches.

In the 1970s, the idea that most took hold among brand managers was that for a brand to become successful, it must keep its marketing approach simple and position each product in consumers’ minds as offering a single, specific benefit. This idea, known as “mind share,” was directly related to the concept of “brand positioning,” which, at the time, related to occupying a preferred place in the consumer’s mind, as compared with the competition, based on reasons and benefits to buy. In other words, it relied on the mind to make the connections between the specific realities and functions of the service or good as the focus of the brand, and secondarily, factors such as status, benefits, or brand personality attributes. An example of a distinctive benefit of a product, for instance, might be the specific cavity-fighting ingredients of a specific brand of toothpaste or the added vitamins in a brand of children’s cereal. These elements are secondarily supported by emotional appeals, such as the natural desire of people to provide the best for their family.

Mind share—also known as “brand identity” and “brand essence”—remains useful and valued among brand managers. Its strategy seeks to identify the concepts that are important in an individual’s mind and create the necessary connections between these and the brand. Once identified, these concepts should be clearly and consistently recalled in the mind of a customer in relation to the brand.

Emotional branding seeks to differentiate a brand from its competition by making strong emotional connections with consumers. Brand personality is developed accordingly. An emotional connection might be better able to overrule rational arguments against purchasing a product. Creating an emotional bond with consumers requires understanding that contemporary customers define their identities through the brands they consume, places they frequent, colleges they attend, music they listen to, and other consuming behaviors. Emotional branding is centered on its customers’ material and emotional needs. Critics, however, warn of the risks of manipulating the emotions of an audience to the extent that they may overrule the call of reason or disregard their better nature.

Both mind share and emotional branding can be combined with cultural branding, a highly innovative model that seeks not only to be relevant and appropriate to the culture in which it develops, but also to identify opportunities unique to each market. Although the spread and reach of technology has to some extent equalized much of a brand’s audience, media users remain embedded in their cultural environment, which inevitably influences how they respond to brands.

The phenomenon of social media has become an important player in developing brand personalities, highlighting the need to build personal connections with individuals through a variety of platforms. Social media outlets exist for every single aspect of social life. Successful brand managers use the vast array of social media to establish its brand in a variety of media platforms. Social media not only makes for a ubiquitous brand presence, but also is an extremely cost effective way to position and promote almost any kind of product or service, due to its relatively low cost and its capacity to reach vast numbers of users.

It is important to note, however, that the relentless pervasiveness of social media illuminates, more than ever, the importance of employing clarity, consistency and good practices of cultural communication. For example, essential elements of brand personality should remain consistent throughout different social media platforms and media outlets in general. These include visual elements, brand voice and style, and message tone. Individuals, however, use a variety of media, and inconsistent branding across outlets results in consumer confusion and a diffused brand message. One of the most important factors in building a loyal customer base is not only trust, quality and image, but also coherence and consistency.

Terms & Concepts

Added Value: A specific amount of something added to the value of a good or service.

Brand: An identifying name or a product or service provided by a firm under a specific name.

Essence: Refers to the inherent or intrinsic nature of something; it defines the object to the extent that without it, it would not exist as such.

Personality: Combination or set of qualities and characteristics that form an individual’s personae or psyche.

Social Media: Computer or mobile technologies—usually Internet-based—which allow the creation and sharing of information.

Stakeholders: All individuals who may be impacted or affected by a firm’s actions, and who in turn may also influence the firm.

Bibliography

Bechter, C., Farinelli, G., Daniel, R., & Frey, M. (2016). Advertising between archetype and brand personality. Administrative Sciences, 6(2), 1–11. Retrieved October 23, 2016, from EBSCO Online Database Business Source Ultimate. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bsu&AN=116380833&site=ehost-live

Ghosh, S. (2016). Modeling the personality construct of brands: A study on apparel brands in India. IUP Journal of Brand Management, 13(2), 57–74. Retrieved October 23, 2016, from EBSCO Online Database Business Source Ultimate. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bsu&AN=117397840&site=ehost-live

Holt, D. B., & Cameron, D. (2012). Cultural strategy: Using innovative ideologies to build breakthrough brands. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Kastiya, S. (2016). The impact of consumer personality traits on luxury brand market: An empirical study on closet consumers. IUP Journal of Brand Management, 13(1), 20–33. Retrieved October 23, 2016, from EBSCO Online Database Business Source Ultimate. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bsu&AN=114187528&site=ehost-live

Shehu, E., Becker, J., Langmaack, A., & Clement, M. (2016). The brand personality of nonprofit organizations and the influence of monetary incentives. Journal of Business Ethics, 138(3), 589–600. Retrieved October 23, 2016, from EBSCO Online Database Business Source Ultimate. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bsu&AN=118555338&site=ehost-live

Thomas, B. J., & Jenifer, S. C. (2016). Measurement model of employer brand personality. Journal of Contemporary Management Research, 10(1), 58–78. Retrieved October 23, 2016, from EBSCO Online Database Business Source Ultimate. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bsu&AN=113644338&site=ehost-live

Vegheş, C., & Popescu, I. C. (2016). The Proust Questionnaire as tool of studying the brand personality: an exploratory approach. Romanian Journal of Marketing, (2), 77–78. Retrieved October 23, 2016, from EBSCO Online Database Business Source Ultimate. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bsu&AN=117267260&site=ehost-live

Suggested Reading

Kang, C., Bennett, G., & Welty Peachey, J. (2016). Five dimensions of brand personality traits in sport. Sport Management Review, 19(4), 441–453. Retrieved October 23, 2016, from EBSCO Online Database Business Source Ultimate. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bsu&AN=117734766&site=ehost-live

Mann, B. S., & Rawat, J. (2016). The role of consumer personality trait and brand personality trait in creating customer experience. IUP Journal of Brand Management, 13(3), 23–42. Retrieved October 23, 2016, from EBSCO Online Database Business Source Ultimate. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bsu&AN=119548845&site=ehost-live

Roy, P., Khandeparkar, K., & Motiani, M. (2016). A lovable personality: The effect of brand personality on brand love. Journal of Brand Management, 23(5), 97–113. Retrieved October 23, 2016, from EBSCO Online Database Business Source Ultimate. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bsu&AN=119206809&site=ehost-live

Sundar, A., & Noseworthy, T. J. (2016). Too exciting to fail, too sincere to succeed: The effects of brand personality on sensory disconfirmation. Journal of Consumer Research, 43(1), 44–67. Retrieved October 23, 2016, from EBSCO Online Database Business Source Ultimate. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bsu&AN=115648580&site=ehost-live