Positioning Brands Against Large Competitors to Increase Sales

Neeru  Paharia; Jill  Avery; Anat   Keinan

Article | Journal of Marketing Research (JMR)

Positioning Brands Against Large Competitors to Increase Sales

by Neeru Paharia, Jill Avery and Anat Keinan

Abstract

We explore the effect of having a large dominant competitor and show the conditions under which focusing on a competitive threat, rather than hiding it, can actually help a brand. We demonstrate through lab and field studies that highlighting a large competitor's size and close proximity can help smaller brands instead of harming them. We find that support for small brands goes up when faced with a competitive threat from large brands, versus when they are in competition with brands that are similar to them, or when consumers view them outside of a competitive context. This support translates into purchase intention, real purchase, and more favorable online reviews in a study of over 10,000 Yelp posts. We argue that this "framing the game effect" is mediated by consumers' motivation to express their views and have an impact on the marketplace through their purchasing.

Keywords: marketing; Brands; brands and branding; brand management; brand positioning; competitive positioning; Brands and Branding; Marketing; Marketing Strategy; Consumer Products Industry; Retail Industry; Food and Beverage Industry; Air Transportation Industry; United States;

Format: Print

Find at Harvard

Citation:

Paharia, Neeru, Jill Avery, and Anat Keinan. "Positioning Brands Against Large Competitors to Increase Sales." Journal of Marketing Research (JMR) 51, no. 6 (December 2014): 647–656. (Lead article.)

Nike’s selection of politically polarizing Colin Kaepernick as the spokesperson for the thirtieth anniversary of its iconic “Just Do It” campaign catapulted the brand into the media spotlight and made it a political flashpoint for consumers across America. Would the choice of Kaepernick be positively or negatively perceived? And, would it affect Nike's business results or just generate a lot of social media chatter? As Nike’s management team watched some people burn their sneakers in protest on YouTube and others applaud the company’s behavior on Facebook, they wondered whether inserting Nike into the middle of a heated political debate was the right thing to do or the most reckless action Nike’s brand stewards had ever taken, putting Nike’s $30 billion brand asset at risk? After all, on social media, it was easy to say that one would boycott or buycott a brand due to one’s political beliefs, but in the marketplace, other purchase criteria often reigned supreme.

On October 7, 2019, the Shiseido Group announced that it would acquire clean skincare brand Drunk Elephant for $845 million, a valuation of 8.5 times sales. Did Shiseido pay too much or too little for this brand asset? How much was the Drunk Elephant brand worth and how could it be valued? Every acquisition had to be measured against the cost of developing and building a look-a-like brand internally. Would Drunk Elephant prove to be an integral part of Shiseido’s future success and what would it take to unlock its full brand value? What kinds of further investments would Shiseido need to make to realize the new brand’s potential? How would the brand fit into the company’s existing brand portfolio of 42 brands?

Faculty & Research

Positioning Brands Against Large Competitors to Increase Sales

Abstract

Citation:

About the Author

More from the Author