Scribd
Upload
59 views4 pages

Young Rubicam - Brand-Asset Valuator Power Grid Model-En

Uploaded by

guillermo
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
59 views4 pages

Young Rubicam - Brand-Asset Valuator Power Grid Model-En

Uploaded by

guillermo
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 4

EUROPEAN INSTITUTE FOR BRAND MANAGEMENT

Model: Brand Asset Valuator Power Grid

Type of model: Brand model (process model)


Author(s): Young & Rubicam
Domain: Brand-Added Value/ Brand Equity

Figure 1: Young & Rubicam's Brand Asset Valuator Power Grid

Young & Rubicam’s (Y&R) model identifies four quadrants that can be
considered stages/ phases that brands go through in their development. The
idea behind that is that the stronger/ more powerful the brand (i.e. the higher the
brand equity), the greater the brand’s viability. This model views brand equity
from the perspective of the customer, and consists of two main dimensions:
1 Brand Vitality: a brand's vitality is based on two mainstays:
• Differentiation: how unique and different a brand is in the eyes of the
customer.
• Relevance: whether a brand matches a customer, or is personally
relevant to the customer.
2 Brand Stature: the brand’s reputation, also based on two mainstays:
• Esteem: the extent to which a brand is seen in a positive light and
whether it is respected.

1
EUROPEAN INSTITUTE FOR BRAND MANAGEMENT

• Knowledge: ascertains levels of customer knowledge of the brand in


question.
The Power Grid works on the basis that a brand can only be successful by
going through abovementioned stages in the given order. Brand Vitality
(relevant differentiation) is an important indicator for future growth in this model.
Brand Stature (esteem and knowledge) subsequently forms a reliable indicator
of the brand’s strength at a given moment. When the brand gets to the last
phase (knowledge), the model considers the brand to be a leadership brand,
which has made optimum use of its growth potential (and has, of course, very
high brand asset).

Figure 2: the four building blocks of Brand Asset Valuator

Newly launched brands will initially perform relatively poorly on all four variables
(bottom-left quadrant). As the brand gains in strength, it will score higher on
differentiation, with relevance lagging slightly behind, and esteem and
knowledge of the brand still very underdeveloped (top-left quadrant). When
brands manage to make the most of their growth potential (and current brand
stature), they will turn into so-called leadership brands (top-right quadrant).
These brands do well on all four variables. Brands that have already peaked
(bottom-right quadrant) tend to struggle in the realms of differentiation and
relevance, but still do well on esteem and knowledge.

A brand's vitality (and brand asset) can be defined using the four variables from
this model. As a general rule, vital brands are highly differentiating and relevant.
Vital brands can, however, also have high scores on differentiation, coupled
with low ones on relevance. The customer does, in that case, not (yet) have a
clear idea of the benefits/ relevance of a brand, possibly due to fact that he/ she
does not know the product - or its benefits. In the case of brands such as

2
EUROPEAN INSTITUTE FOR BRAND MANAGEMENT

Senseo and Cup-A-Soup, potential customers first had to overcome an initial


resistance before they started buying these brands’ products. The presence of a
unique differentiating aspect creates possibilities for future relevance; brands
that succeed on this front (i.e. become relevant to customers) will as a result
score highly on vitality, and therefore be able to realize considerable growth.
Brands with great personal relevance, but which are lacking on the
differentiation front, will find they have less room for growth, simply because
they do not stand out, or have a very low profile. Competitors will in that case
offer virtually the same. If the emphasis is more on relevance than on
differentiation, the brand runs the risk of becoming a commodity for which price
is the main purchase driver.

Strong brands are generally well-known to (potential) customers, and also tend
to meet with high levels of appreciation. Strong brands can, however, also have
high scores on differentiation, coupled with low ones on relevance. In such
cases, there is a willingness to get to know the brand better among customers.
The brand is thought and spoken of in positive terms, but people have little
experience with the brand, so that there is no real loyalty yet. It should be clear
that brands finding themselves in this situation, do have an opportunity to
increase brand loyalty. And the other way round, high levels of brand loyalty
offer fewer opportunities for brand asset boosting, simply because the growth
potential has already been used up. Loyal customers have gone through all
stages, meaning that a brand can only grow by retaining these customers. The
level of knowledge of the brand can also be too high; customers can, as a
result, tire of the brand. This often happens with major established brands that
are challenged by newcomers (which mostly do very well in terms of
differentiation and relevance).

Practical value
Based on generated insights into the level of vitality of a brand, action can be
taken to hold on to a brand’s position, make a brand grow, or ward off a drop
down the grid. The scores on the four variables enable the brand manager to
choose to take measures in one of the four realms. The model is therefore most
suited as a strategic planning tool. What is unique about this model is that it
facilitates comparisons between brands and between products categories. It
therefore not only lends itself for the mapping of the competition, but also for
benchmarking in relation to other markets.

3
EUROPEAN INSTITUTE FOR BRAND MANAGEMENT

Reference(s)
Keller, K.L. (1998), Strategic Brand Management; building, measuring and
managing brand equity. Prentice Hall, New Jersey, U.S.A. *

* : available in the EURIB library.

© 2009 EURIB (www.eurib.org)

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy