How many associations does a strong brand have? And what are strong associations?
Posted: Tue Dec 17, 2024 4:07 am
We see that Johan Derksen is seen as a football analyst of Veronica Inside, with a strong opinion of his own, a jerk and linked to music/blues. Akwasi is seen as a rapper, singer, linked to Expeditie Robinson, BLM and Zwarte Piet. Where Derksen is still the grumpy guy, straight to the point, he is linked to racism by a small part. With Akwasi, the share of associations that are linked to discrimination is much stronger. And we see that a part of the Netherlands does not know him.
Let's look at the bigger picture, because Derksen is a much better known brand (score 5.6 on a 7-point scale) than Akwasi (score 4.0) and also evokes significantly more associations (4.4 average per respondent) than Akwasi (3.5 average). Based on our own research, we can say that both are strong brands: they evoke as many or more associations than our benchmark, see box.
There has been little scientific research into the number of associations that brands evoke. From our own research since 2003, in which we have examined hundreds of brands, we have come to an overall average of 3.4. Because our brain is programmed to store associations when a link has been made often enough, the brain needs to know india telegram data in which 'folder'. By categorising this, people will have a product or category association by default (what is it? And where does it belong?). We therefore set the lower limit to become a brand at 2. If you go below that, people do not even know what you are or where you belong. That is why we can state that both Akwasi with 3.5 and Derksen with 4.4 are real brands. They also evoke other associations than just product or category associations.
There has also been relatively little research into determining the strength of associations in brand literature. There are also methods to measure response time ( response time latency , for example Till, Baack and Waterman, 20), where the response time is inversely proportional to the strength. The longer it takes for an association to emerge, the weaker the link with the brand. We have therefore developed our own benchmark: the penetration of the association among respondents. This means that we determine what percentage of respondents have one or more associations in a certain category.
Based on the same meta-analyses on more than 100 brands, our benchmark is as follows: if less than 5% has an association in that category (for example 'price'), we call it low. 'Price' is mentioned so little that it is barely linked to the brand. Between 5% and 15% we call an association 'weak'. It is an association that could do something for the brand, but too few people have that association. And we call an association strong if more than 15% of respondents have this association with the brand.
Let's look at the bigger picture, because Derksen is a much better known brand (score 5.6 on a 7-point scale) than Akwasi (score 4.0) and also evokes significantly more associations (4.4 average per respondent) than Akwasi (3.5 average). Based on our own research, we can say that both are strong brands: they evoke as many or more associations than our benchmark, see box.
There has been little scientific research into the number of associations that brands evoke. From our own research since 2003, in which we have examined hundreds of brands, we have come to an overall average of 3.4. Because our brain is programmed to store associations when a link has been made often enough, the brain needs to know india telegram data in which 'folder'. By categorising this, people will have a product or category association by default (what is it? And where does it belong?). We therefore set the lower limit to become a brand at 2. If you go below that, people do not even know what you are or where you belong. That is why we can state that both Akwasi with 3.5 and Derksen with 4.4 are real brands. They also evoke other associations than just product or category associations.
There has also been relatively little research into determining the strength of associations in brand literature. There are also methods to measure response time ( response time latency , for example Till, Baack and Waterman, 20), where the response time is inversely proportional to the strength. The longer it takes for an association to emerge, the weaker the link with the brand. We have therefore developed our own benchmark: the penetration of the association among respondents. This means that we determine what percentage of respondents have one or more associations in a certain category.
Based on the same meta-analyses on more than 100 brands, our benchmark is as follows: if less than 5% has an association in that category (for example 'price'), we call it low. 'Price' is mentioned so little that it is barely linked to the brand. Between 5% and 15% we call an association 'weak'. It is an association that could do something for the brand, but too few people have that association. And we call an association strong if more than 15% of respondents have this association with the brand.