UNIVERSITATIS OULUENSIS ACTA G OECONOMICA G 51 ACTA Mari Juntunen OULU 2011 G 51 Mari Juntunen CORPORATE REBRANDING PROCESSES IN SMALL COMPANIES A MULTIPLE CASE STUDY FROM THE B2B SOFTWARE INDUSTRY UNIVERSITY OF OULU, OULU BUSINESS SCHOOL, DEPARTMENT OF MARKETING
286
Embed
SERIES EDITORS OECONOMICA A SCIENTIAE RERUM …jultika.oulu.fi/files/isbn9789514294518.pdf · HUMANIORA TECHNICA MEDICA SCIENTIAE RERUM SOCIALIUM SCRIPTA ACADEMICA OECONOMICA EDITOR
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
ABCDEFG
UNIVERS ITY OF OULU P.O.B . 7500 F I -90014 UNIVERS ITY OF OULU F INLAND
A C T A U N I V E R S I T A T I S O U L U E N S I S
S E R I E S E D I T O R S
SCIENTIAE RERUM NATURALIUM
HUMANIORA
TECHNICA
MEDICA
SCIENTIAE RERUM SOCIALIUM
SCRIPTA ACADEMICA
OECONOMICA
EDITOR IN CHIEF
PUBLICATIONS EDITOR
Senior Assistant Jorma Arhippainen
Lecturer Santeri Palviainen
Professor Hannu Heusala
Professor Olli Vuolteenaho
Senior Researcher Eila Estola
Director Sinikka Eskelinen
Professor Jari Juga
Professor Olli Vuolteenaho
Publications Editor Kirsti Nurkkala
ISBN 978-951-42-9450-1 (Paperback)ISBN 978-951-42-9451-8 (PDF)ISSN 1455-2647 (Print)ISSN 1796-2269 (Online)
U N I V E R S I TAT I S O U L U E N S I SACTAG
OECONOMICA
G 51
ACTA
Mari Juntunen
OULU 2011
G 51
Mari Juntunen
CORPORATE REBRANDING PROCESSES IN SMALL COMPANIESA MULTIPLE CASE STUDY FROM THE B2B SOFTWARE INDUSTRY
UNIVERSITY OF OULU,OULU BUSINESS SCHOOL,DEPARTMENT OF MARKETING
A C T A U N I V E R S I T A T I S O U L U E N S I SG O e c o n o m i c a 5 1
MARI JUNTUNEN
CORPORATE REBRANDING PROCESSES IN SMALL COMPANIESA multiple case study from the B2B software industry
Academic dissertation to be presented with the assent ofOulu Business School, University of Oulu for publicdefence in Arina-sali (Auditorium TA105), Linnanmaa, on10 June 2011, at 12 noon
Reviewed byProfessor Bill MerrileesDocent Kirsti Lindberg-Repo
ISBN 978-951-42-9450-1 (Paperback)ISBN 978-951-42-9451-8 (PDF)http://herkules.oulu.fi/isbn9789514294518/ISSN 1455-2647 (Printed)ISSN 1796-2269 (Online)http://herkules.oulu.fi/issn14552647/
Cover DesignRaimo Ahonen
JUVENES PRINTTAMPERE 2011
Juntunen, Mari, Corporate rebranding processes in small companies. A multiplecase study from the B2B software industryUniversity of Oulu, Oulu Business School, Department of Marketing, P.O. Box 4600, FI-90014University of OuluActa Univ. Oul. G 51, 2011Oulu, Finland
AbstractThe purpose of the present study is to build a theoretically based and empirically groundedframework that enables a better understanding of corporate rebranding processes among smallcompanies. Corporate rebranding is addressed from a visual viewpoint concentrating on changesto corporate name and logo. The theoretical background is based on corporate branding, corporaterebranding and organisational change literature.
The research setting is small software companies that operate in B2B markets. The empiricalpart is conducted as a multiple case study of three cases by gathering data both before and aftercorporate name changes. The main data gathering method was narrative interviews supported byseveral specifying interviews and secondary data.
The results are first presented as narratives followed by process descriptions and finallycombined into an empirically grounded processual framework for corporate rebranding. First,context-related characteristics influencing and reasons for corporate rebranding are revealed.Second, sub-processes of corporate rebranding are presented during three different time periods;1) before establishing the company, 2) after establishing the company during the time when theoriginal corporate name is in use and 3) after establishing the company when the new corporatename is in use. Third, outputs of corporate rebranding are described in the forms of the new nameand logo.
For small business managers the study offers four interesting findings. First, developing a newcorporate name in company is cheap but may take several years. Using marketing communicationsagencies may result in a faster process, but in that case, the cost implications should be accepted.Second, the company should inform its stakeholders of the forthcoming name change for tworeasons: 1) stakeholders may provide ideas for a new name; and 2) proactively spreadinginformation on a forthcoming name change may avoid misunderstandings, for example, rumoursof bankruptcy, when the name change is executed. Third, encouraging stakeholders to invent anew name and evaluate the potential new name may help to ensure that the new name will notcause any unwanted associations. Fourth, in launching the new name electronic devices may befar more cost-effective than expensive marketing communications campaigns to communicate thechange.
TiivistelmäTämän tutkimuksen tarkoituksena on luoda teorioihin perustuva ja empiirisesti perusteltu viite-kehys, joka auttaa ymmärtämään yrityksen uudelleenbrändäykseen liittyviä prosesseja pienissäyritysmarkkinoilla toimivissa (B2B) ohjelmistoyrityksissä. Yritysbrändäys nähdään visuaalises-ta näkökulmasta, ja sillä tarkoitetaan yrityksen nimen ja logon vaihtamista. Tutkimuksen teoreet-tinen tausta on rakennettu yritysbrändäystä, yrityksen uudelleenbrändäystä ja organisaation muu-tosta käsittelevien kirjallisuuksien perusteella.
Empiirinen osa on toteutettu kolmen tapauksen tapaustutkimuksena. Ensisijainen aineiston-keruumenetelmä ovat narratiiviset haastattelut, joilla tuotetaan haastateltavien omia tarinoita tut-kitusta ilmiöstä. Näitä tuetaan useilla tarkentavilla haastatteluilla ja kirjallisella aineistolla.
Tulokset esitetään ensin narratiiveina, sen jälkeen prosessikuvioina ja lopuksi empiirisestiperusteltuna viitekehyksenä yrityksen uudelleenbrändäysprosesseista. Viitekehys koostuu kol-mesta osasta: 1) yrityksen uudelleenbräyksen syyt ja siihen vaikuttavat kontekstin erityispiir-teet, 2) yrityksen uudelleenbrändäyksen alaprosessit i) ennen yrityksen perustamista sekä senperustamisen jälkeen ii) aikana jolloin yrityksen alkuperäinen nimi on käytössä ja iii) aikana jol-loin yrityksen uusi nimi on käytössä, sekä 3) yrityksen uudelleenbrändäyksen lopputulema, eliuusi yritysnimi ja logo.
Tutkimus tarjoaa pienyrittäjille neljä tärkeää näkökulmaa. Ensinnäkin, uuden yritysnimenkehittäminen itse on edullista, mutta sopivan nimen löytäminen voi tällöin kestää vuosia. Mark-kinointiviestintätoimisto voi tuottaa nimen nopeammin, mutta silloin on hyväksyttävä siitäaiheutuvat kustannukset. Toiseksi, yritysten kannattaa informoida tärkeitä sidosryhmiään mah-dollisesta tulevasta nimen muutoksesta jo ennakkoon kahdesta syystä: 1) sidosryhmät voivat aut-taa nimen keksimisessä, ja 2) näin voidaan välttää väärinkäsityksiä (mm. konkurssiepäilyt) var-sinaiseen nimenvaihtamiseen liittyen. Kolmanneksi, kun sidosryhmät osallistuvat nimen kehittä-miseen ja nimiehdotusten arviointiin, voidaan kartoittaa ja välttää ei-toivottuja assosiaatioitanimeen liittyen. Neljänneksi, suurten markkinointiviestintäkampanjoiden sijasta uuden nimenlanseeraamisessa kannattaa pohtia elektronisten viestintävälineiden käyttämistä.
Tämä kirja on omistettu rakkaille isovanhemmilleni Maila-mummolle ja Erkki-ukille.
This book is dedicated to my lovely grandparents Maila and Erkki.
8
9
Acknowledgements
After struggling for several years looking for the focus for this thesis and living
through the spectrum of events of life, it is finally here: my dissertation. Eventual-
ly I am able to express my deepest gratitude to all those people who have encour-
aged, supported and guided me throughout this journey.
I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my excellent supervisor, Pro-
fessor Jaana Tähtinen. You seldom gave me any straight answers but forced me,
time after time, to think by myself, to find the answers by myself, to make my
own decisions and to justify them. In this way you have guided my learning and
supported me to become a strong and independent researcher - who also has the
courage to ask for help when she needs it. Thank you for your patience and time,
Jaana!
I was honored to have two experienced pre-examiners for this thesis: Docent
Kirsti Lindberg-Repo from Hanken School of Economics and Professor Bill Mer-
rilees from Griffith University, Australia. Thank you for your considerable efforts
and critical but encouraging comments for the thesis. Your comments made it
possible to improve this thesis further than I would have been able to do by my-
self.
I am grateful to all those persons at the Oulu Business School at the Universi-
ty of Oulu, especially at the Department of Marketing, who have provided me
resources for this thesis. In addition, I appreciate the assistance of the Finnish
Graduate School of Marketing (FINNMARK), the Tekes project Cobra - Corpo-
rate Branding, Foundation for Economic Education and Tauno Tönning Founda-
tion for their financial support for the thesis. In addition, this journey of mine
might have never begun without encouragement and resources from the Universi-
ty of Joensuu. Thank you. I also express my warmest gratitude to the contributors
from the case companies for sharing your valuable time to make this thesis possi-
ble, as well as all the people who have helped me in transcribing the interviews,
preparing the language and finalizing this thesis.
I would like to thank my colleagues at the Department of Marketing for the
challenging and fruitful discussions about research and teaching over the years. In
addition, I am grateful to all those excellent researchers in Finland and around the
world who I have been fortunate enough to work with on a variety of projects.
Being in the presence of active and enquiring intellects has certainly shaped my
own thought-processes and so indirectly enhanced the quality of this study. But
most of all, I express my warmest thanks to my colleagues Dr. Saila Saraniemi
10
and M.Sc. Anita Juho, who have shared the ups and downs, not only in research
and work but also in personal life. Thank you for being there!
To all my lovely friends who shared their lives with me before I began this
thesis and have continued to be so supportive, and those who have come into my
life during these years – thank you for keeping my feet on the ground. Especially
my dear friends Taina and Mari, I know that I can always rely on you, however
far apart we are.
I am honored to have relatives who have always encouraged and supported
me, no matter what is going on in my life. Thank you all! Erityisesti isovanhem-
pani Maila-mummo ja Erkki-ukki, olette aina tukeneet ja rohkaisseet minua kai-
kissa asioissa elämässäni. Olen siitä syvästi kiitollinen teille molemmille. My
mother Arja, thank you for your unquestionable love and support, no matter hap-
pens in my life. Also my in-laws, especially those who have offered help with the
children while I have been writing this thesis, deserve my warmest thanks.
Indeed the greatest support has come from my family. Miika, Nea, Jenna and
Joel - you are the sunshine of my life, the most precious apples of my eye, my
dearest babies - and the most important teachers in my life. I am proud and privi-
leged to be your mother. Thank you for reminding me what is really important in
life. Notwithstanding all the important people mentioned above, this dissertation
would not exist without the endless support, encouragement, love and time from
the loveliest person in the world, my beloved husband, Jouni. You are my best
friend and the most important encourager of research. You are my soul mate and
the love of my life. I would be nothing without you. Thank you for sharing your
love and life with me.
Oulu, 29.4.2011 Mari Juntunen
11
Contents
Abstract
Tiivistelmä
Acknowledgements 9 Contents 11 1 Introduction 15
1.1 Importance of the topic ........................................................................... 15 1.2 Objective and the research questions ...................................................... 19 1.3 Positioning of the study ........................................................................... 20
1.3.1 Underlying research approaches ................................................... 20 1.3.2 The literature base ........................................................................ 21 1.3.3 The exclusions .............................................................................. 25 1.3.4 Choosing the empirical context .................................................... 28
1.4 Scientific approach .................................................................................. 29 1.5 Research strategy .................................................................................... 32 1.6 The structure of the thesis ....................................................................... 35
2 Theoretical understanding of corporate rebranding as a process 37 2.1 Corporate branding ................................................................................. 37
2.1.1 Roots of corporate branding ......................................................... 37 2.1.2 Defining corporate brand and corporate branding ........................ 40 2.1.3 A visual perspective on corporate branding.................................. 45 2.1.4 Special characteristics of corporate branding in small B2B
2.2.1 Defining corporate rebranding ..................................................... 53 2.2.2 The reasons for corporate rebranding ........................................... 54 2.2.3 Corporate rebranding as a process ................................................ 56 2.2.4 Outputs of corporate rebranding ................................................... 63
2.3 Organisational change processes ............................................................. 68 2.3.1 Planned change and life-cycle process theory .............................. 69 2.3.2 Emergent change and teleology process theory ............................ 71 2.3.3 The nature of corporate rebranding process ................................. 75
2.4 The theoretical processual framework for corporate rebranding in
small companies ...................................................................................... 77 2.4.1 Context-related characteristics influencing and reasons for
2.4.2 Sub-processes of corporate rebranding ......................................... 80 2.4.3 Outputs of corporate rebranding ................................................... 84
3 Empirical research design 87 3.1 Choosing the research approach .............................................................. 87 3.2 Defining a case and the research setting ................................................. 89 3.3 Collecting the data ................................................................................... 91 3.4 Analysing the data ................................................................................... 98
4 Case 1: Corporate rebranding - one name change 101 4.1 Introducing the company in Case 1 ....................................................... 101
4.1.1 Basic information about the company ........................................ 101 4.1.2 Original name and logo .............................................................. 103 4.1.3 Software solution ........................................................................ 104
5 Case 2: Business unit rebranding 145 5.1 Introducing the business unit in Case 2 ................................................. 145
5.1.1 Basic information ....................................................................... 145 5.1.2 Software solutions ...................................................................... 146
5.2 Narrative of business unit rebranding ................................................... 147 5.3 The events, actions and actors in business unit rebranding sub-
5.3.4 Evaluating ................................................................................... 162 5.4 Outputs of business unit rebranding ...................................................... 164
5.4.1 Business unit names ................................................................... 164 5.4.2 Business unit logos ..................................................................... 166 5.4.3 Business unit rebranding type .................................................... 167
6 Case 3: Corporate rebranding - two name changes 169 6.1 Introducing the company in Case 3 ....................................................... 169
6.2 Narrative of corporate rebranding ......................................................... 171 6.3 Sub-processes of the corporate rebranding ........................................... 174
7 Comparisons of the corporate rebranding processes 191 7.1 Context-related characteristics in and reasons for corporate
rebranding ............................................................................................. 191 7.1.1 Relations of the context-related characteristics in and
reasons for corporate rebranding ................................................ 192 7.1.2 Context-related characteristics ................................................... 193 7.1.3 Reasons for corporate rebranding ............................................... 199
7.2 Sub-processes of corporate rebranding ................................................. 201 7.2.1 Renaming.................................................................................... 201 7.2.2 Redesigning ................................................................................ 205 7.2.3 Launching ................................................................................... 207 7.2.4 Evaluating ................................................................................... 210 7.2.5 The processual view on corporate rebranding sub-
processes ..................................................................................... 212 7.3 Outputs of corporate rebranding ........................................................... 215
7.3.1 Name changes ............................................................................. 215 7.3.2 Logo changes .............................................................................. 216 7.3.3 Corporate rebranding types ........................................................ 217
14
8 Findings 219 8.1 Context-related characteristics in and reasons for corporate
rebranding ............................................................................................. 221 8.2 Sub-processes of corporate rebranding ................................................. 222 8.3 Outputs of corporate rebranding ........................................................... 224
9 Conclusions 227 9.1 Summary of the findings ....................................................................... 227 9.2 Theoretical contribution ........................................................................ 229 9.3 Methodological contribution ................................................................. 233 9.4 Managerial contribution ........................................................................ 234 9.5 Evaluation of the study .......................................................................... 235 9.6 Limitations of the study ........................................................................ 239 9.7 Avenues for further studies ................................................................... 240
References 243 Appendices 263
15
1 Introduction
1.1 Importance of the topic
This research aims to understand and describe corporate rebranding in small
companies from a process perspective. In this particular study, ‘corporate rebrand-
ing’ means corporate name and logo change; ‘logo change’ consists of layout,
fonts, colours, and text change; ‘process’ refers to the order of stages, sub-
processes, events and activities that describe how things change over time; and
‘small companies’ refers to companies that employ fewer than ten (i.e. micro-
sized companies).
This study is important for six theoretical and three empirical reasons. First,
corporate branding has recently become one of the most often discussed phenom-
ena both among managers and academics. On one hand, it builds on product
branding in the discipline of marketing, where the role of branding and brand
management has been primarily to create differentiation and preference for a
product or service in the mind of the customer. On the other hand, it has devel-
oped from multidisciplinary studies with a starting point of organisational focus.
(Knox & Bickerton 2003.) It is argued that the shift from product level to corpo-
rate level is not being addressed adequately in the marketing literature (Hatch &
Schultz 2003), and that by relying on product branding, scholars have largely ig-
nored the challenges presented by corporate brand management (Balmer & Gray
2003). Consequently, it is important to study branding at corporate level.
Second, in the literature of product branding, it is widely recognised that
when a product brand reaches maturity, there are several ways to renew the brand
(or rebrand) for example, through line extensions (extending to other product
categories), distribution extensions, price reductions, facelifts, or repositioning the
brand (chaning the brand’s position withing the product category) (Kapferer 2008:
33, 239, 324–326). Corporate branding refers to a process undertaken in order to
create a strong corporate brand (see, e.g. Einwiller & Will 2002, Van Riel & Van
Bruggen 2002, Urde 2003). The current literature on corporate branding often
examines the subject from a perspective which assumes that once the corporate
brand is created it should not be changed unless absolutely necessary, because
changing a corporate brand has an impact on corporate brand equity (Muzellec
2006). Research on corporate rebranding is in its embryonic phase and has mainly
concentrated on facelifts in the form of corporate name and aesthetics changes. It
16
is defined in the existing research as corporate name change (Muzellec, Doogan
& Lambkin 2003), but, the litersture also suggests that it concerns a change in
aesthetics, brand positioning (Muzellec et al. 2003, Daly & Moloney 2004, Stuart
According to Krake (2005), responsibility for brand management lies at the
management level; for example, brand policy and logo changes are made by the
owner. Krake also lists several factors that influence the role of brand manage-
ment in small companies: the owner/director/manager, market in which the com-
pany operates, the company structure, type of products, market orientation of the
company, and competitors. The role of brand management, the available budget
and creativity in marketing for their part, affect the marketing activities and how
51
messages are communicated from the company. Fig. 6 summarises the special
characteristics of branding in small business.
Fig. 6. Special characteristics of branding in small business.
Special characteristics of branding in B2B companies
Business to business (B2B) companies offer an interesting context that differs
from traditional consumer-based product branding for researching brands and
branding both at product and corporate levels. B2B branding has received rela-
tively little attention from academics (Lynch & De Chernatony 2004) even though
the main business operations of many of the world’s strongest brands, for exam-
ple, IBM, Microsoft, FedEx and Boeing, concentrate on B2B (Kotler et al. 2006:
2). However, interest in B2B branding has increased in recent years (see, e.g.
Lynch & De Chernatony 2004, Bendixen et al. 2004, Van Riel et al. 2005).
It is suggested that in the B2B arena, a brand is more than a product or busi-
ness. As Kotler et al. (2006: 5) state, a brand is a promise and a totality of percep-
tions, in other words, everything there is to see, hear, read, know, feel, think, and
so on, about a company, product or service. “It also holds a distinctive position in
customers’ minds based on past experiences, associations and future expectations.
A brand is a shortcut of attributes, benefits, beliefs and values that differentiate,
reduce complexity, and simplify the decision making process.” It summarises a
person’s feelings towards a product or business. In addition, B2B brands reach not
only customers but other stakeholders, for example, investors, employees, part-
ners, suppliers, competitors and regulators as well. (Kotler et al. 2006: 4.) It is
also suggested that corporate image and corporate brands may have a salient role
in the selection of subcontractors (Blombäck & Axelsson 2007), and that in B2B
markets brand equity exists in the form of a buyers’ willingness to pay a price
premium for their preferred brand (Hutton 1997). Brand equity seems to be one of
- Corporate branding begins before the company is even established
- The role of the entrepreneur is emphasised; (s)he is the personification of the corporate brand
- Responsibility for brand management lies at the management level
- The owner/director/manager, market in which the company operates, the company structure, type of the products, market orientation of the com-pany, and competitors have an influence on the role of brand management
52
the most studied issues in B2B branding, both in industrial (see e.g. Bendixen et
al. 2004, Kuhn et al. 2008) and services (see e.g. Taylor et al. 2007, Roberts &
Merrilees 2007, Davis et al. 2008, Kim et al. 2008, Rauyruen et al. 2009, Jun-
tunen, Juntunen & Juga 2011) companies. Aspara and Tikkanen (2008) argue that,
in general, corporate brands are particularly important in the B2B context. Fig. 7
summarises the special characteristics of branding in small business.
Fig. 7. Special characteristics of B2B branding.
Special characteristics of branding in software companies
Even though the current research delivers some brand-related issues in studies
The reasons for corporate rebranding were reviewed in chapter 2.2.2. The reasons
were categorised into two groups; reasons for name change and reasons for logo
change and are summarised in Fig. 17.
Characteristics of branding in small companies
- Corporate branding begins before the company is even established
- The role of the entrepreneur is emphasised; (s)he it the personification of the corpo-rate brand
- Responsibility of brand management lies at the management level
- The owner/director/manager, market in which the company operates, the company structure, type of the products, market orientation of the company, and competitors have an influence on the role of brand management
Characteristics of B2B branding
- Corporate brands are important
- Brand is a promise and a totality of perceptions
- B2B brand reaches all the stakeholders Characteristics of branding in software companies
- No distinction between software product branding and software corporate branding.
- Companies take care of the visual image and material production themselves.
- Challenging to get personnel to maintain a consistent line in communication.
- The decision making related to branding is conducted by few managers; the per-sonnel are not involved.
- The company name is often the product line’s “family name”
- The individual products are named by combining the company name with a product-specific extension.
80
Fig. 17. Reasons for corporate rebranding.
In the theoretical processual framework for corporate rebranding in small compa-
nies, I assume that both context-related factors and reasons for corporate rebrand-
ing may influence sub-processes of corporate rebranding, which I will summarise
next.
2.4.2 Sub-processes of corporate rebranding
This section summarises the theoretical discussions from the perspective of cor-
porate rebranding sub-processes. I see the process as the nature, sequence, and
order of events and activities that unfold over time (Van de Ven 1992, 170), and in
corporate rebranding I concentrate on changing the corporate name or aesthetics
(changing the logo, colours and fonts). I treat corporate rebranding as consisting
of four sub-processes; Renaming, Redesigning, Launching, and Evaluating. In the
next chapter I will first present corporate rebranding stages and sub-processes in
general and then continue with a review of the events and actors in each corporate
rebranding sub-process.
Corporate rebranding stages and sub-processes
Based on the literature, I see that corporate branding can be divided into two peri-
ods: the first, when corporate branding is conducted with the original corporate
name, and the second, when corporate branding is conducted with the new corpo-
Reasons for name change Change in ownership structure
- Mergers & acquisitions, spin-offs, private to public owner-ship, public to private owner-ship,
Change in corporate strategy - Diversification and divest-ment, internationalization and localization
Change in competitive position - Erosion of market position, outdated image, reputation problems
Change in external environment - Legal obligation, major cri-ses or catastrophes
Reasons for logo change Change in the company
-structural or strategic change, management change, corporate name change, increased or de-creased scope of operations
Change in the external environment - regulatory change, competition and the need for scale econo-mies
Willingness to change the corporate image
- repositioning an organisation, modernisation, updating, exter-nal/internal misunderstanding of the organisation and its pur-poses
81
rate name. Following this logic, I assume that in general, sub-processes of corpo-
rate rebranding can also be divided into two main periods; the first, in the period
when the old corporate name is in use, and the second, in the period when the new
corporate name is in use. Here I call the first period Stage 1 and the second Stage
2 (see, Fig. 18).
Fig. 18. Corporate rebranding stages and sub-processes.
I assume that the order of stages follows the logic of a planned change process in
that the two stages need to happen in certain order (Van de Ven & Poole 1995)
and in so doing, are cumulative in nature. In other words, Stage 2 cannot exist
before Stage 1, because in Stage 2 the question is about the new name, and in
Stage 1 about the old name. Their characteristics enable the stages to be described
by lifecycle process theory (Van de Ven & Poole 1995).
Based on the theoretical view, I see corporate rebranding as consisting of four
sub-processes; Renaming, Redesigning, Launching, and Evaluating. I assume that
Renaming and Redesigning need to be conducted during the time when the old
corporate name is still in use, that is, during Stage 1, because a new name must
surely be created before it can be launched or evaluated. In addition, I assume that
Redesigning is also conducted before Launching because the new logo is created
for the company before Launching. After the new name and logo are created, it is
possible to move on to the Stage 2, the stage of the new corporate name. During
this stage, Launching of the new corporate name is conducted. Because Evaluat-
ing concentrates on examining the customer view about the changes (e.g. Kaikati
2003) or evaluating the process (e.g. Daly & Moloney 2004), it seems natural that
Evaluating is done at the end of the process, for example, after Launching the
new name. I therefore assume that, at least for the most part, Renaming, Redes-
igning, Launching and Evaluating are consecutive processes and in so doing, rep-
Corporate rebranding
Stage 1: Old corporate name
Renaming Redesigning
Stage 2: New corporate name
Launching Evaluating
82
resent planned change and can therefore be described with lifecycle process the-
ory.
Events and actors in sub-processes
In the theoretical background I provide a more detailed description of the events
of each of these four sub-processes and the actors involved in them, and have
summarised them in Table 11. Renaming is as consisting of six main events;
Communicating the new identity of the company internally; Inventing a new
name; Evaluating the names; Creating selection criteria for a new name; Select-
ing a new name; and Registering a new name. Again, I assume that these need to
be executed in a certain order, but, as the study of Kollmann and Suckow (2007)
revealed, the order may vary. In so doing, I assume that Renaming mainly follows
the logic of lifecycle process theory. It may however also have elements of teleol-
ogy process theory, because the events do not need to be executed in a certain
order, there is no predefined roadmap of how these events are to progress, and not
all the events are cumulative in nature.
The existing research on corporate branding or corporate rebranding reveals
five events under Redesigning: Examining the present corporate logo, Creating a
working brief, Analysing the firm’s brand values and strategy direction, Choosing
logo structure, and Creating a logo/symbol, colour palette and font type. Simi-
larly to Renaming, I assume that these need to be executed in a certain order, but
the order may vary.
Launching includes two aspects; internal launching and external launching.
Several researchers suggest that external launching cannot be executed before
internal launching, so I would infer that those aspects are also part of a lifecycle.
More specifically, external launching is seen as consisting of several aspects.
Evaluating includes two perspectives, evaluating the new name and evaluating
the process. No research suggest order for these.
83
Table 11. Summary of events and actors in corporate rebranding sub-processes.
Sub-process Events Actors
Renaming Communicating the new identity
Inventing a new name
Creating selection criteria for a new name
Evaluating the potential name(s)
Selecting a new name
Registering the new name
Management
Corporate identity consultants, marketing
communications office, staff
Branding consultancy
Executive committee, the board of direc-
tors, shareholders
Redesigning Examining the present corporate logo
Creating a working brief
Analysing the firm’s brand values and strat-
egy direction
A company and brand consultants
Choosing logo structure
Creating a logo/symbol, colour palette and
font type
Branding consultancy
Launching Launching internally
Introducing the new name internally
to the employees
Launching externally
Pre-campaign situation analysis
Informing the public about acquisition
Interim/dual branding campaign
Pre-launch
Launch
Management
Evaluating Evaluating the new name
Evaluating the process
Customers
84
2.4.3 Outputs of corporate rebranding
For revealing the outputs of corporate rebranding I created, classification catego-
ries (see this chapter, especially Table 13) which will help in analysing changes in
the corporate name and the logo as an output of corporate rebranding. Addition-
ally, this will help in revealing the corporate rebranding type.
The outputs of corporate rebranding can be examined through consideration
of the changes that occur during the sub-processes of corporate rebranding from
Stage 1 to Stage 2, in terms of both the corporate name and the logo. The type of
name change can be revealed by initial examination of the corporate name types
in Stage 1 and then in Stage 2, and on the basis of these, defining the corporate
name change type. The types of logo change can be revealed by initial examina-
tion of changes in the logo elements, that is, examination of how each element in
a new logo has changed compared to the previous logo. On the basis of this, the
type of the logo change can be defined. The end result is to reveal the corporate
rebranding type (see, Fig. 19).
Fig. 19. Processes for revealing the corporate rebranding type.
The examination of corporate name types is based on examining the old corporate
name and the new corporate name type based on the categorisations that are in
turn based on the theoretical background (see Table 12). The theoretical view-
points suggested six different corporate name types: descriptive, geographic, pat-
ronymic, acronymic, associative and freestanding.
Examining corporate name types
Defining corporate name change types
Examining change in the logo elements
Defining the logo change type
Revealing the corporate rebranding type
Corporate name change Corporate logo change
85
Table 12. Corporate name types and their descriptions.
Name type Description
Descriptive Describes the product or service for which the company is designed or
Infer what the corporation does (industry-related attributes) or what it stands for (busi-
ness values/culture attributes).
May describe the organisations' activity, but never depict a feature of the corporation
Geographic Refers to locations
Patronymic Person based
Acronymic Consists of letters
Is often an abbreviation
Associative Evokes associations implicitly or explicitly with product features or a set of corporate
values.
Refers to the company's way of doing business or its business culture, often represent-
ing what the company stands for
Freestanding Has no link with the product or service that it refers to but might have a meaning of its
own, or by being an abstract name, it may have no intrinsic meaning at all
The examination of the types of the old and the new corporate name operates as a
basis for defining corporate name change types. Based on the theoretical back-
ground, I created three categories for corporate name change types: minor change,
brand adaptation, and complete change (see Table 13).
Table 13. Name change, logo change and corporate rebranding types.
Type of change Description
Name change
types
Reinventing
Brand adoption
Adding or deleting something to the name
Taking a name of the company’s well-recognised brand
Makeover No link to the previous name
Change types of
logo elements
No change
Minor change
The element remains exactly the same
A minor change in the element by adding or deleting something
Complete change No link to the previous version of the element/logo
Logo change
types
Refreshing Some or many, but not all, of the elements in the logo are
changed in either completely or minor way
Renewal All the elements in the logo are changed completely
Corporate
rebranding types
Minor change
Intermediate change
Complete change
Both corporate name and logo changes are minor
Minor or intermediate name change and complete logo change
Intermediate or complete name change and minor logo change
Both name change and logo change are complete
86
Logo/element change types also have three categories: no change, minor change,
or complete change. Logo change is based on the changes in the elements in the
logo: layout, typography, text, and colours.
Comparison of both the name change type and the logo change type will re-
sult in revealing the total corporate rebranding change type, which consists of
three categories too: minor change, intermediate change, and complete change. In
minor change, some of the logo elements are changed but the corporate name re-
mains the same. In intermediate change, name change represents either minor
change or brand adaptation, and the logo is updated with the new name, while
other elements remain the same. In complete change, both the name and the logo
are changed completely.
87
3 Empirical research design
The research question of the study, “How can corporate rebranding in small com-
panies be described in terms of processes?” guided my empirical research design.
In this section, I first outline how I came to select my research approach, and con-
tinue by defining the case and research setting. The section continues by detailing
the data collection for the empirical study, and finally concludes with a descrip-
tion of the data analysis.
3.1 Choosing the research approach
New phenomena are often studied by way of case studies (Yin 2003) because the
latter can be particularly effective in providing new insights into a phenomenon of
which very little is known (Eisenhardt 1989). This also has a relatively long his-
tory within business research and in the discipline of marketing. Therefore, noting
the ontological and epistemological positioning of the study, I rely on a qualita-
tive case study approach (Stake 2005, Eriksson & Kovalainen 2008) in my re-
search design.
The research question of the study involves the examination of corporate re-
branding as a process. Buchanan and Dawson (2007) call for case studies that
combine elements of a narrative approach with processual/contextual analysis in
the field of organisational change. For research design and the development of
theory, this perspective has implications beyond existing processual perspectives.
These often identify competing narratives, but seek to either report or reconcile
them.
In order to understand this research phenomenon, corporate rebranding, in de-
tail, I chose to use an instrumental case study (Stake 2005). In an instrumental
case study, the case is seen as an instrument in understanding something else.
Therefore, rather than attempting to understand a unique intensive or intrinsic
case from the inside and providing a thick, holistic and contextualised description
(Stake 2005, Eriksson & Kovalainen 2008) of it, I examine this phenomenon in
all the cases in detail and aim to understand the process of how the phenomenon
is executed.
A multiple case study can be seen as an instrumental case study extended to
several cases (Stake 2005). I chose a multiple case study over a single case study
because the current theory of corporate rebranding in general and in small busi-
ness in particular, has gaps that demand elaboration. In addition, each case may
88
add something new to the understanding the phenomenon (Eriksson &
Kovalainen 2008: 122). By choosing some cases that are similar and some that
are different, it is possible to provide theoretically interesting comparisons (see,
Eriksson & Kovalainen 2008: 122). It is also suggested that in studying a process
it is important to go beyond the explanation of a single case (Poole et al. 2000:
12). According to Poole et al. (2000: 12), a process study aims to find a general
narrative that offers a common explanation for a range of cases, and finding such
a general narrative requires matching specific cases to the general pattern.
Narrative, when used in the context of social sciences, refers to a research ap-
proach that has its ontological and epistemological roots in social constructivism
(Berger and Luckmann, 1967) and does not usually consider itself as a process
research. A narrative is a textual actualisation of a story that is usually told by
someone (Eriksson & Kovalainen 2008: 211–212, Elliot 2005) and includes the
entire sequence of events from the beginning to the end. In this study, I gathered
stories from the interviewees by using narrative interviews, and provided narra-
tives on those stories. Explanation in process theories relies on the narrative that
explains what led to what: the reasons that influenced the case, the order in which
they occurred and how long they operated (Poole et al. 2000, 12–13), and what
actors were involved (Pentland 1999). In addition, they conclude with results or
an evaluation of outputs (Buchanan & Dawson 2007). Consequently, narratives
give a sense of the whole, the “big picture” that lends significance to individual
events. This is why the narrative approach can be considered as a “process ap-
proach”.
Narrative research has deep roots in anthropology and sociology, but this ap-
proach is fairly recent in organisational studies (Gabriel 2000). This might be be-
cause many business researchers find it difficult to comprehend the practical im-
plications of the narrative results, even though it offers potential to go beyond the
more traditional choices (Eriksson & Kovalainen 2008: 7, 211). As Czarniawska-
Joerges (1998) points out, narrative forms of reporting will enrich organisation
studies by complementing, illustrating and scrutinising logical scientific forms of
reporting. Therefore, instead of presenting the results of this study in a narrative
form alone (see, e.g. chapter 4.2), I also decided to illustrate events, actions and
actors in more detail by relying on more traditional ways of case study reporting.
In this study, this means that I illustrated the contents of the narrative in detail by
using figures, and supported these findings with direct quotations from the em-
pirical data (e.g. chapter 4.3).
89
3.2 Defining a case and the research setting
Eriksson and Kovalainen (2008) suggest that the boundaries of the case should be
identifiable in one way or another, and the researcher should pay particular atten-
tion to the criteria used in defining the boundaries of the case. Yin (2002) warns
about choosing topics in which the beginning and the end of the case cannot be
defined. So, I began my research by defining my case as being a process of corpo-
rate name change (Muzellec et al. 2003) which begins with noticing the reasons
for the decision to change the company name (Muzellec & Lambkin 2006), ends
when the new name is evaluated after its launching (Kaikati 2003), and also in-
- Corporate branding begins before the company is even established
- The role of the entrepreneur is empha-sised
- Responsibility of brand management rests at management level
- Owner/director/manager, market, the company structure, type of the products, market orientation, and competitors have an influence on the role of brand man-agement
- Corporate rebranding begins before the company is even established
- The role of the entrepreneur/manager is emphasised
- Responsibility of brand management rests at management level
- Owner/director/manager, business and markets, the company structure, type of the product, stakeholders’ awareness of the products and stakeholders have an influence on corporate rebranding
194
pany was established. In so doing, the empirical data reveals that also corporate
rebranding begins before the company is even established.
In each case, the roles of the manager and the company structure in the corpo-
rate rebranding were enormous; in Case 2 and Case 3 the manager was often the
only person prosecuting events in the corporate rebranding sub-processes. The
important role of the entrepreneur as a personification of the corporate brand was
not found from the process descriptions, but it became obvious from the inter-
views. It was seen that a personal brand could be an entrepreneur or the manager
of the company.
“-- a personal brand needs to be developed as being a front man of the com-
pany.” (A board member)
In addition, the product, business and the markets in which the company operate,
were considered important in corporate rebranding. The interviewees recognised
clearly that there are differences in branding in different industries and empha-
sised that the context-related characteristics are important in brand building.
Many of the interviewees had a background in telecommunications in a large
multinational company. Therefore they had previous experience of brand building
– if not experience of building a brand. However, working for a large company,
they had followed product brand building closely from inside the company. One
of the interviewees describes the importance of the nature of the business as fol-
lows:
“But selling the future is not the same in this business as it is in telecommu-
nications. There they sell the future all the time, what it is about to come. You
cannot do business with what you have now but you do business with what
you promise you will do in the future. … But it is not the game here. It is
much more about the customers – that they look what you are selling. … they
are not interested in what your vision is in two or three years. Maybe it will
be emphasised in the future but now it is much more about what do you have
now. You either have something or not, well, come again when you have
something and let’s see then. In that sense this is very simplified and that is
just about the customers. These doctors are peculiar people, not like engi-
neers. There is not much long-term thinking. They live today, what is it about
today and what can I do with this, how would this help my job and so on. It is
not easy to get the message across that this is the first step and in the future
we will build great functionality onto this. This kind of message is not easily
195
accepted, they do not think in the long term. In the mobile business they
think: if I invest in this, what can I build on it? But this kind of mindset is to-
tally missing here.” (Managing director A3)
It was also recognised that the business that they are doing and their products are
as such not anything special, but their solutions offered to end users are new and
may have a great impact for them.
“Our business is so new that even though it is not an amazing issue we pro-
duce but when we bring it to the end customers it is a huge change there”
(Managing director A3)
Rather than just the type of products influencing the role of brand management, as
theoretically suggested, stakeholder awareness of the products was shown to be
important in influencing corporate rebranding. In Case 3, the corporate name was
changed to mirror that of the best-known product, because it was noticed that the
product name was better known than the corporate name. In addition, rather than
seeing only competitors influencing the choice, several other stakeholders, includ-
ing financiers and customers, had an influence on the invention of a new name for
the company, its evaluation, and also on the design of a new corporate logo.
Special characteristics of B2B branding
In the theoretical background, three characteristics of B2B branding were pre-
sented (see, Fig. 48). Two of those were found in the empirical data as well, albeit
slightly modified. The characteristic relating to The B2B brand reaches all the
stakeholders could not be found.
Fig. 48. Theoretical and empirical characteristics of B2B branding.
- No distinction between software product branding and software corporate branding
- Companies take care of the visual image and material production themselves
- Challenging to get personnel to maintain a consistent line in communication.
- The decision making related to branding is conducted by few managers; the personnel are not involved.
- The company name is often the product line’s “family name”
- The individual products are named by combining the company name with a prod-uct-specific extension.
- There is a distinction between software product branding and software corporate branding
- Companies utilise external stake-holders or personnel in creating visual image and communications material
- Challenging to get personnel to maintain a consistent line in communication
- The company name is often the product line’s “family name” after the product has become well-known
199
7.1.3 Reasons for corporate rebranding
Reasons for Renaming
In all the cases the reason for the name change was that the original name was
difficult to use (see, Table 27). The difficulties varied; in Case 1 the name was
difficult to write and pronounce, in the Case 3 the name was long and difficult to
write, and in Case 2 the name had wrong associations. It is worth remembering
that Case 3 registered the name only as an auxiliary firm name, not as an official
new corporate name. The firm in case study 3 also conducted another name
change to reflect its product name, because the product was better known than the
company. At this time, the corporate name was officially changed.
Table 27. Summary of the reasons for renaming in the three cases.
Case 1 Case 2 Case 3
Difficult to write and pronounce,
difficult to connect the company’s
products to it
Has unfortunate associations 1. Too long, difficult to use
2. Product better known than the
company
In the theoretical framework four main reasons for corporate renaming were sug-
gested; change in ownership structure, change in corporate strategy, change in
competitive position and change in external environment (see, Fig. 50).
200
Fig. 50. Theoretical and empirical reasons for corporate renaming.
The empirical part of this study revealed that none of these was the reason for
corporate rebranding in the three cases studies. Instead, in each case, the common
reason for the name change was that the existing name was difficult to use; the
name was difficult to write and/or pronounce, it was too long, it had unfortunate
associations, or, was not as well-known as the name of the company’s product.
Therefore, I formed a new category for reasons for corporate rebranding; diffi-
culty of using the existing corporate name. This is one of the main findings of the
study at hand.
Reasons for Redesigning
The reasons for Redesigning were similar in all the cases (see Table 28). In Cases
1 and 3, the reason for changing the logo for first time was that the original logo
was outdated, and the reason for changing the logo for the second time was that
the company had changed its name, and the logo had therefore to be updated.
Also in Case 2, the reason for logo change was that the business unit name had
changed.
Empirical reasons Theoretical reasons
Change in ownership structure Mergers & acquisitions, spin-offs, private to public ownership, sponsorship
Change in corporate strategy Diversification and divest-ment, internationalization and localization
Change in competitive position Erosion of market position, outdated image, reputation problems
Change in external environment Legal obligation, major cri-ses or catastrophes
Difficulty of using the existing corporate name - Difficult to write and/or pronounce - Difficult to connect company’s products to it - Too long - Causes wrong associations - Not as known as the product name
201
Table 28. Summary of the reasons for Redesigning in the three cases
Case 1 Case 2 Case 3
1. Old-fashioned, cannot connect
products and the company
2. Corporate name had changed
Business unit name had
changed
1. Old-fashioned
2. Corporate name had changed
The existing research suggested that reasons for logo changes are change in the
company, change in the external environment, and willingness to change the cor-
porate image (see, Fig. 51).
Fig. 51. Summary of the reasons for Redesigning in the three cases.
The empirical data supported the view that a logo is changed because it would
benefit from modernisation and/or updating. The other reasons were change of the
corporate name and change of the business unit name. However, the empirical
data did not reveal change in the external environment as a driving force.
7.2 Sub-processes of corporate rebranding
This chapter summarises the main events and actors in corporate rebranding sub-
processes.
7.2.1 Renaming
In the cases, the number of events in Renaming varied from three in Case 2 to six
in Case 1 (see, Table 29). In all the cases, the events Evaluating the name, Invent-
Empirical reasons Theoretical reasons
Change in the company structural or strategic change, man-agement change, corporate name change, increased or decreased scope of operations
Change in the external environment regulatory change, competition and the need for scale economies
Willingness to change the corporate image repositioning the organisation, mod-ernisation, updating, external/internal misunderstanding of the organisation and its purposes
Change in the company corporate name change, business unit name change
Willingness to change the corporate image modernisation/updating
202
ing the name and Selecting a new name were found. In addition to these, also
Registering was found in all the cases, but whereas it was Registering the new
name in Cases 1 and 3, it was Registering the domain in Case 2. This was because
the Case 2 was a business unit, and even though it changed its name, it could not
be registered.
In all the cases the Renaming process began with Evaluating the name. Be-
fore the next event could begin, its predecessor event needed to end with some
result. Even though all the events were not found in all the cases, the order of the
events that were found was always the same. In addition, some events in the proc-
esses seemed to be repeated, so if some event did not result in a satisfactory result
the process continued from some of the previous events. The only exception to
this was the process of planning the spin-off in Case 2, where it was impossible to
find any specific order for the events, as they had been executed more or less si-
multaneously.
The type and number of actors and the amount of them in the events varied
between the cases. In the Case 2 and Case 3 the manager was almost the only per-
son that participated in a process. In the Case 3, the only stakeholders other than
the manager were the personnel who participated in Inventing a name. In Case 2,
in addition to the manager, personnel participated in Inventing a name and Select-
ing a name, and external stakeholders actively criticised the name in Evaluating
the name. In Case 1 the most vocal actors were the management board and man-
ager, who were both active implementers of four events, and in addition, the staff
participated in two events, Evaluating the name and Inventing a name, and exter-
nal stakeholders participated in Inventing a name.
Ta
ble
29
. S
um
ma
ry o
f R
en
am
ing
in
th
e t
hre
e c
as
es
.
C
ase
1
Case
2
Case
3
Main
eve
nts
in
ren
am
ing
be
fore
est
ablis
hm
ent
Eva
luatin
g the n
am
e: m
anager,
pers
onnel
1. N
am
ing th
e fort
hco
min
g s
pin
-off
Com
munic
atin
g a
bout th
e fort
hco
min
g
spin
off: m
anag
er
Inve
ntin
g the n
am
e: m
anager,
pers
onnel
Cre
atin
g c
rite
ria
fo
r th
e n
am
e:
mana
ger
Sele
ctin
g a
nam
e:
ma
na
ge
r
Regis
terin
g the n
am
e:
manager
Main
eve
nts
durin
g
the o
rigin
al n
am
e
Com
munic
atin
g th
e fort
hco
min
g n
am
e c
hange
:
managem
ent
board
, m
anager
Inve
ntin
g a
new
nam
e:
ma
na
ge
me
nt
bo
ard
,
manager,
pers
onn
el,
stake
ho
lders
Cre
atin
g c
rite
ria f
or
a n
ew
nam
e:
ma
na
ge
me
nt
bo
ard
Sele
ctin
g a
ne
w n
am
e:
ma
na
ge
me
nt
bo
ard
Regis
terin
g a
new
nam
e:
manager
(Renam
ing o
f th
e p
roduct
in li
ne w
ith c
orp
ora
te
na
me
: m
an
ag
em
en
t b
oa
rd)
2. R
enam
ing the b
usi
ness
unit
Eva
luatin
g the n
am
e: m
an
ag
er,
stake
hold
ers
Sele
ctin
g a
ne
w n
am
e:
ma
na
ge
r,
pers
onne
l
Regis
terin
g the d
om
ain
: m
anager
Eva
luatin
g the n
am
e: m
anager
Inve
ntin
g a
new
nam
e:
ma
na
ge
r, p
ers
on
ne
l
Sele
ctin
g a
ne
w n
am
e:
manager
Regis
terin
g a
new
nam
e:
manager
203
204
When compared to the theoretical framework, the empirical data revealed all the
same events (see, Fig. 52). In addition, with one exception, the events were exe-
cuted in a similar order. The exception was the event Evaluating the potential
name(s). Whereas in the theoretical framework this was presented as the third
event after Communicating new identity internally and Inventing a name, in all
the empirical cases this was the first event that was done. This is understandable,
when one recalls the reasons for Renaming: in the theoretical view all the reasons
for corporate name changes were change in something, and the company needed
to accept and adapt the change. In the empirical cases, the reason for Renaming
was that the corporate name was difficult to use. As a result of that difficulty, it is
understandable that the corporate name was largely carefully evaluated before the
decision was made on whether it should be changed. In addition, according to the
empirical data, evaluating the name occurred as a part of several other events.
Fig. 52. Theoretical and empirical events and actors in Renaming processes.
The theoretical framework provided actors for only three events; Communicating
the new identity, Inventing a new name, and Evaluating the potential name(s).
Compared to the actors in the empirical cases, the actors in Communicating the
new identity and Communicating the forthcoming name change were manage-
ment. Whereas in the theoretical framework Inventing a new name was done by
personnel and external professionals, in the empirical cases it was done by man-
agement, personnel and stakeholders (but stakeholders other than marketing
Empirical events and actors Theoretical events and actors
Renaming Communicating the forthcoming spin-off Inventing the name
Creating criteria for the name
Selecting a name Registering the name
RedesigningExamining
ideas for the logo
Launching Launching internally
Launching externally
Evaluating Evaluating
the new name Evaluating the
Renaming process Evaluating the
Redesigning process Actors: manager, personnel
215
Stage 3 was diverged into five sub-processes: Internal launching, Internal evalu-
ating, Updating the logo, External launching, and Post-evaluating instead of two
described in the theoretical framework. In all the cases the Stage 3 begun after the
new corporate name was registered. In Case 1 and Case 2 it was continued with
the Internal launching of the new name by the management and followed by In-
ternal evaluating of the new name. At this stage, whatever the result of the
evaluation, the cases continueed on with the new name. In Case 3 these events
could not be found. Additionally, after Internal launching the process of Updating
the logo was undertaken in all the companies (or after registering the new name in
Case 3). At this stage redesigning was conducted in all the cases as Updating the
logo, which consisted of three Redesigning events only that were executed mainly
for changing the new corporate name to the existing logo. After the logo was up-
dated and adopted for use, including, for example, on all communications mate-
rial, the corporate rebranding process continued with External launching of the
new name and logo to the stakeholders. Finally, in all the cases Post-evaluating,
which was quite similar to Evaluation in the theoretical framework, was con-
ducted including evaluation of both the outputs and the processes.
7.3 Outputs of corporate rebranding
7.3.1 Name changes
In the theoretical section, it was suggested that former company names would be
descriptive or person-based, and the new name types are more likely to be ab-
stract, being either freestanding or associative (Muzellec 2006). According to the
empirical data, all the original company names were of different types, varying
from descriptive to freestanding to acronymic (see Table 33). What they had in
common was that they all had descriptive features. The new names, were almost
all descriptive with freestanding features or freestanding with descriptive features.
216
Table 33. Summary of the name types and name changes in three cases.
Case 1 Case 2 Case 3
Original name type
(Has also features
from)
Freestanding
Acronymic
Descriptive
Acronymic
Descriptive
Descriptive
Patronymic
New name type
(Has also features
from)
Freestanding
Descriptive
Acronymic
Descriptive
Freestanding
1. Acronymic
Descriptive
2. Descriptive
Freestanding
Name change type Makeover Makeover 1. Reinventing
2. Brand adoption
In cases 1 and 2, the name change type was Makeover, while in Case 3, which
demonstrated two changes, the first one was in the nature of Reinventing and the
second one was Brand adoption.
7.3.2 Logo changes
The number of logo changes varied from one in Case 2 to four in Case 3. In the
first of the logo changes, the font and colour were changed completely in all the
cases, and other elements either in a minor way or completely (see Table 34). In
Cases 1 and 3, the logo change was minor, Refreshment, while in Case 2 it was
complete, Renewal. In the second of the logo changes the only element that was
changed was the text, which was changed either in a minor way or completely in
both cases. All the other elements remained the same in both cases.
217
Table 34. Summary of the logo changes in the three cases
Case 1 Case 2 Case 3
First logo change
Font change Complete Complete Complete
Text change Minor Complete Minor
Colour change Complete Complete Complete
Layout change Minor Complete Minor
Total logo change Refreshment Renewal Refreshment
Second logo change
Font change No change No change
Text change Complete Minor
Colour change No change No change
Layout change No change No change
Total logo change Refreshment Refreshment
Third logo change
Font change Complete
Text change No change
Colour change No change
Layout change Minor
Total logo change Refreshment
Fourth logo change Brand adoption
In the third logo change in Case 3, the font was changed completely and the lay-out in a minor way, while text and colours remained the same. The fourth logo change in Case 3 was brand adoption, where the logo of the company’s product was adopted as the logo of the company. Overall, in the logo changes, the only complete change was executed by the firm in Case 2 while all the other logo change types were minor in nature, despite brand adoption in Case 3.
7.3.3 Corporate rebranding types
The data revealed that the case companies conducted corporate rebranding exer-
cises between one and four times (see Table 35).
218
Table 35. Summary of the corporate rebranding types in three cases.
Case 1 Case 2 Case 3
First change Logo:
Minor change
Name and logo:
Complete change
Logo:
Minor change
Second change Name and logo:
Intermediate change
Name and logo:
Minor change
Third change Logo:
Minor change
Fourth change Name and logo:
Intermediate change
Only Case 2 conducted a complete change. It is, however, worth bearing in mind
that in that case the information on all changes may not have been available, so
Case 2 may not be fully comparable with the other cases.
The other cases, however, provided examples of only minor or intermediate
changes. This means that in neither case was both the corporate name and the
logo changed completely and simultaneously.
219
8 Findings
The study reported here aims to determine how we could describe corporate re-
branding processes in small companies. The previous chapters have concentrated
on developing the theoretical framework for the study, describing the multiple
case study of three empirical cases as well as comparing the empirical cases and
the theoretical framework. In this chapter I summarise the empirical findings and
present them as an empirically grounded processual framework for corporate re-
branding in small companies (Fig. 57).
The resulting framework consists of three main elements: the context-related
characteristics in and the reasons for corporate rebranding; sub-processes of cor-
porate rebranding and; the outputs of corporate rebranding. The framework is a
combination of all the analyses and interpretations of the data in this study and is
a simplified description of dynamic and even chaotic processes, events and ac-
tions revealed by the data.
In short, context-related characteristics have an influence on corporate re-
branding processes, but they also come into existence through the processes. They
also have an influence on reasons for corporate rebranding. The reasons for cor-
porate rebranding, for their part, influence sub-processes of corporate rebranding.
Four sub-processes of corporate rebranding, Renaming, Redesigning, Launch-
ing, and Evaluating, are executed during three stages. The events of the sub-
processes can be planned and even proceed before establishing the company, in
Phase 1. Renaming and Redesigning are mainly conducted during Phase 2, and
Launching and Evaluating during Phase 3. Please note that the size of the stages
and sub-processes in Fig. 57 does not describe their duration but is different only
for technical reasons.
The outputs of corporate rebranding are a new corporate name and new cor-
porate logo. In addition, as an output, the corporate rebranding type can be de-
fined. The following section provides a summary of each of the main elements of
the processual framework.
Fig
. 57
. An
em
pir
ica
lly
gro
un
de
d p
roc
es
su
al
fra
me
wo
rk f
or
co
rpo
rate
reb
ran
din
g in
sm
all c
om
pa
nie
s.
Su
b-p
roc
es
se
s o
f c
orp
ora
te r
eb
ran
din
g
Stag
e 1:
Tim
e be
fore
com
pany
est
abli
shm
ent
Pla
nnin
g t
he f
ort
hco
min
g
corp
ora
te r
eb
ran
din
g
Stag
e 2:
Tim
e w
hen
the
old
corp
orat
e na
me
is i
n us
e St
age
3: T
ime
whe
n th
e ne
w c
orpo
rate
na
me
is i
n us
e
Lau
nchi
ng
Red
esig
ning
Renam
ing
m p
Redesi
gnin
gm
p
Launch
ing
m
Eva
luatin
g
m
Dir
ecti
on o
f th
e pr
oces
s
Act
ors
in p
roce
sses
: m
b=m
anag
emen
t bo
ard
m
=m
anag
er
p=pe
rson
nel
s=
exte
rnal
sta
keho
lder
s
Eva
luat
ing
Re
as
on
s f
or
co
rpo
rate
re
bra
nd
ing
- R
easo
ns
for
nam
e c
hange
-
Reaso
ns
for
logo
change
Co
nte
xt-
rela
ted
ch
ara
cte
risti
cs
-
Bra
nd
ing
in S
ME
s -
B2
B b
ran
din
g
- B
ran
din
g in
so
ftw
are
co
mp
an
ies
Infl
uenc
e
Infl
uenc
e
Dir
ecti
on o
f th
e pr
oces
s
Ou
tpu
ts
New
corp
ora
te n
am
e
New
logo
Corp
ora
te r
ebra
ndin
g t
ype
Inte
rnal
ev
alua
ting
m
b m
p
Inte
rnal
la
unch
ing
mb,
m
Ext
erna
l la
unch
ing
m p
s
Red
esig
ning
mb
m p
s
Upd
atin
g th
e lo
go
mb
m p
s
Ren
amin
g m
b m
p s
Pos
t-ev
alua
ting
m
b m
p s
Pre
-ev
alua
ting
m
b m
p s
220
221
8.1 Context-related characteristics in and reasons for corporate rebranding
Context-related characteristics in corporate rebranding are special characteristics
of branding in small business, B2B branding, and branding in software compa-
nies. They are not only “background factors” that affect the corporate rebranding
process, but they also contain characteristics that construct and come into exis-
tence as the process develops. For example, the role of the small business man-
ager is important in corporate rebranding, as he might be the only person conduct-
ing it. In addition, the relation of a product brand and a corporate brand is strong
in the software business (see, e.g. Ojasalo et al. 2008). As this study revealed, a
company can either be renamed according to its well-known product, or the prod-
uct can be given the corporate name. Context-related characteristics may also in-
fluence the reasons for corporate rebranding.
The reasons for corporate rebranding can be divided in two categories; rea-
sons for name change (renaming) and reasons for logo change (redesigning). Rea-
sons for renaming vary from change in ownership structure or corporate strategy
to competitive position, and external environment. Even though none of these was
found in this particular study, they are general occurrences that might result in
corporate rebranding. In this study, a totally new reason emerged; difficulty in
using the existing corporate name. The emergence of the difficulty reason, estab-
lishes that a major change event occurring in the background may not always be a
prerequisite for corporate rebranding and in so doing, it offers one of the contribu-
tions of the study. However, it should be noted that this new category is related to
the other categories. For example a merger or acquisition, representing a change
in company’s ownership, and a merging of two companies with different product
ranges or market positions may be what creates the difficulty in using the former
corporate name.
The reasons for logo change may vary from a change happening in the com-
pany (for example, corporate name change) or in the external environment to a
desire to change the corporate image (for example, modernisation/updating the
current logo). Even though change in the external environment was not found in
this particular study, it can be considered a general occurrence that might result in
corporate redesigning.
222
8.2 Sub-processes of corporate rebranding
Description of corporate rebranding sub-processes reveals the stages of corporate
rebranding, the order of the sub-processes, as well as the actors in the sub-
processes. The process description is a combination of all the analyses and inter-
pretations of the data in this study and is a simplified illustration of dynamic and
even chaotic processes, events and actions revealed from the data.
Corporate rebranding consists of four sub-processes; Renaming, Redesigning,
Launching, and Evaluating, which are further divided into eight sub-processes as
will be explained below. The sub-processes are executed during three time pe-
riods, here termed stages: ‘Stage 1’ before the company is even established; ‘Stage
2’ during the time of the original corporate name and; ‘Stage 3’ during the time of
the new corporate name. Two stages of the theoretical framework are adjusted
according to the empirical data, which suggests that corporate rebranding may
begin in small companies even before the company is established.
In Stage 1 it is possible for a manager to begin Planning the forthcoming cor-
porate rebranding. This can be the case, for example, when the question is about
a forthcoming spin-off. Spin-offs are one important reason for corporate rebrand-
ing (Muzellec & Lambkin 2006). In planning the forthcoming corporate rebrand-
ing all the sub-processes of corporate branding - Renaming, Redesigning, Launch-
ing, and Evaluating - can be considered, and many of the events in them can be
planned or even executed. However, it should be remembered that this study does
not argue that this kind of planning would be executed in every company in which
a spin off is planned, or by all entrepreneurs who are planning to establish a com-
pany. Furthermore, this study neither suggests that each of these would be
planned, nor that these would be planned or executed in a structured way. Rather,
these are iterative and ad hoc processes which do not produce any result at this
stage. Thus, one of the main findings of the study is that as long as corporate re-
branding is at the planning stage, the processes and their events are not executed
in any specific order, and none of the events results in any output. Therefore, in
Planning the forthcoming corporate rebranding the corporate rebranding sub-
processes and their events represent teleology process theory.
The sub-process of Renaming can also begin in Stage 1. This may be applica-
ble to entrepreneurial companies where the entrepreneur/manager evaluates the
name developed for the company even before officially establishing the company
and realises that it is not the best possible, but nevertheless decides to establish
the company with the initial name.
223
Stage 2 of corporate rebranding is the time when the original corporate name
is in use. In this stage, two corporate rebranding sub-processes, Renaming and
Redesigning, can be executed independently of each other. Renaming is about
creating a new name for the company. It is an extensive process of up to five
events and involving management, staff and external stakeholders. If the logo of
the company is considered old fashioned, a Redesigning process can be conducted
to create a new logo for the company in a situation where the company operates
with its original name. The process of Redesigning is also quite extensive consist-
ing of up to seven different events and involving the participation of management,
staff and external stakeholders. Accordingly, Renaming and Redesigning represent
teleology process theory at this stage, even though, according to the data, it is
possible that Redesigning instigates the renaming process. At this stage, when the
new name for the company is chosen but not yet registered, a part of Evaluating,
namely, Pre-evaluating the possible new name can be conducted by management
board, personnel and external stakeholders. Processes are iterative and consist of
several attempts to execute the events.
Stage 3 begins after the new corporate name is registered and consists mainly
of two sub-processes: Launching and Evaluating. These are presented in Fig. 57
as independent processes that are conducted simultaneously. Therefore it can be
considered that they accord with teleology process theory. However, both the
theoretical part and empirical data revealed that in order to understand these better
they both need to be divided into smaller sub-processes. Launching is divided into
Internal launching by the management and External launching by a manager,
personnel and external stakeholders. Internal launching is very weak; orders are
simply given with an expectation of compliance with minimal explanation.
Evaluating is divided into Internal evaluating by the management and personnel,
and Post-evaluating to evaluate both the outputs and the processes by manage-
ment, personnel and external stakeholder. However, there is almost no attempt to
evaluate either processes or outputs (for more details, see Chapter 7.2.5).
In addition to these, in this stage the process of Updating the logo as a result
of corporate name change can also be undertaken. Even though this is about re-
designing, at this time the process is not as extensive as the process of Redesign-
ing at the previous stage; this time it consists up to three events. These smaller
sub-processes, in turn, can be arranged in a specific order in which the previous
sub-process need to be conducted and result in some output before the following
one can be finalized. Therefore, these represent lifecycle process theory.
224
Of course, it should be noted that it is possible to conduct the sub-processes
and their events in a different order than presented here. As this study revealed, it
is also possible that the different sub-processes and/or their events are at least
planned and perhaps also partly conducted simultaneously. In other words, as
long as they are in in the course of being conducted, but while they have not re-
sulted in an output, they represent teleology process theory. Nevertheless, it might
also be possible – at least afterwards – to arrange them into the order in which
they occurred based on the dates when they resulted in some output.
In conclusion, sub-processes are management-centric and the involvement of
other stakeholders is limited. Many decisions are made in a reactive, ad hoc way
with weak use of criteria, instead of being formally planned, and cumulatively,
these ad hoc decisions amount to something close to chaos.
8.3 Outputs of corporate rebranding
For revealing the outputs of corporate rebranding I created, based on the existing
research, classification categories (see Chapter 2.4.3, especially Table 13) which
helped in analysing changes in the corporate name and the logo as an output of
corporate rebranding. Additionally, this helped in revealing the corporate rebrand-
ing type. Creating this categorisation provides one contribution of the study.
Type of name change can be revealed by first examining the original corpo-
rate name type and then the new name type. On the basis of these, it is possible to
define corporate name change type: Reinventing (minor change), Brand adapta-
tion (intermediate change), or Makeover, (complete change). Revealing logo
change type begins by first examining how each element (layout, typography,
text, colours) in a new logo is changed compared to the previous logo, and on the
basis of this, the type of the logo change can be defined being either Refreshment,
(minor change), or Renewal (complete change). Based on name and logo change
types it is possible to reveal whether the type of corporate rebranding is minor,
intermediate or complete change in nature.
One important finding in this study was that whereas the existing research
suggested that the corporate names are one specific type (Muzellec 2006), the
names in the cases belonged into some main category but in addition to that, had
elements of other categories. In addition, in this specific context the companies
seem to change their names from a name that either is descriptive or at least, has
features, to descriptive names that have freestanding features, or freestanding
names that have descriptive features. In addition, acronyms seem to be popular
225
both in old and new names, and official name changes are either complete or a
brand adoption.
As described in the theoretical part and revealed also in the empirical data,
companies change their logos separately from the corporate name change, and
also simultaneously with the name change. On both occasions, the logo changes
are, according to the study, minor in nature. However, diverging from the theoret-
ical framework, logo change can also be brand adoption, as it was in Case 3,
where the logo of the product was adopted as the logo of the company.
226
227
9 Conclusions
In this chapter, I summarise the findings, present the theoretical, methodological
and managerial contributions of the study, evaluate the research process, assess
the limitations of the study and finally, provide some ideas for further studies.
9.1 Summary of the findings
The purpose of the study was to determine how we could describe corporate re-
branding processes in small companies. Specifically, the study aimed to answer
the following research question: How can corporate rebranding in small compa-
nies be described in terms of processes?
In answer to the research question I provided an empirically grounded proc-
essual framework of corporate rebranding in small companies. The framework
provides three different viewpoints: 1) context-related characteristics in and rea-
sons for corporate rebranding, 2) sub-processes of corporate rebranding, and 3)
the outputs of corporate rebranding.
Context-related characteristics are special characteristics of branding in the
context; in this study, small business, B2B branding, and branding in software
companies. They have an influence on corporate rebranding processes, but also
come into existence through processes. In addition, they influence the reasons
behind corporate rebranding, which vary from major change events in a com-
pany’s internal or external environment to difficulties with using the existing cor-
porate name, a factor found in this study. The reasons indentified as being behind
corporate rebranding, for their part, influence sub-processes of corporate rebrand-
ing.
Four theoretical sub-processes of corporate rebranding, Renaming, Redesign-
ing, Launching and Evaluating, are further divided into eight sub-processes based
on the empirical data and analyses: Renaming, Redesigning, Updating the logo,
Internal launching, External launching, Pre-evaluating, Internal evaluating and
Post-evaluating. Sub-processes are executed during three time periods, here la-
belled stages: ‘Stage 1’ before the company is even established; ‘Stage 2’ during
the time of the original corporate name and; ‘Stage 3’ during the time of the new
corporate name. Accordingly, corporate rebranding may begin in small companies
during Stage 1 with planning and even executing some of the events in the sub-
processes. Thus, at this stage, when sub-processes have not resulted in any output,
they represent emergent change and teleology process theory. Renaming, Rede-
228
signing and Pre-evaluating are mainly executed during Stage 2, and Updating the
logo, Internal launching, External launching, Internal evaluating and Post-
evaluating during Stage 3. Some of them - for example, Renaming and Redesign-
ing - can be conducted simultaneously, while some of them are conducted in a
specific order in which one process results in some output before the second
process can result in output. In so doing, from a process view corporate rebrand-
ing consists of both teleology and life-cycle processes. Furthermore, sub-
processes are management-centric with limited involvement on behalf of other
stakeholders.
Each sub-process consists of several events and actions. Because the empiri-
cal data was gathered both before corporate name changes were complete (in oth-
er words; while corporate name changes were being executed) and after the name
was changed, it was possible to find the elements of both lifecycle and teleology
process theories from within sub-processes. In sub-processes, many decisions are
made in a reactive, ad hoc way with weak use of criteria, instead of being formal-
ly planned, and cumulatively these ad hoc decisions come close to the chaotic.
Events are iterative, chaotic and ad hoc in nature. As the events are conducted, so
when they have not brought about any specific outcome, sub-processes represent
emergent change and are teleological in nature. However, when the events have
resulted in outcomes, it is possible to arrange them into a specific order. In other
words, at this time it becomes possible to describe the processes as lifecycle
processes which represent planned change. Accordingly, even though the events
in sub-processes are chaotic in nature and conducted without formal planning,
once they have been conducted, it is possible to arrange the events into a specific
order. In so doing, the illustration of the process follows the logic of lifecycle
process theory rather than teleology process theory. There are almost no attempts
to evaluate either processes or outputs.
Outputs of corporate rebranding include the new corporate name and the new
logo. Based on name and logo change types it is possible to reveal whether the
type of corporate rebranding is a minor change, an intermediate or a complete
change in nature. In this specific context the name changes are mainly complete.
The new names seem to have elements of several name categories. Descriptive
names or names that have descriptive features are changed to descriptive names
that have freestanding features, or freestanding names that have descriptive fea-
tures. In addition, acronyms are popular both in old and new names, and official
name changes are either complete or a brand adoption. Interestingly, new corpo-
229
rate names are either the same as the product name or describe the use of the
product.
Logos are changed separately from the corporate name change, and also si-
multaneously with the name change. On both occasions, the logo changes are,
according to the study, minor in nature.
9.2 Theoretical contribution
This study has discussed corporate rebranding in the context of small business,
specifically among software companies that operate in B2B markets. By con-
structing an empirically grounded processual framework for corporate rebranding
in small companies the study has concentrated on building new theory. In so do-
ing, it offers five theoretical contributions; three to corporate rebranding litera-
ture, one to corporate branding literature, and one to literature on organisational
change processes.
The first theoretical contribution to corporate rebranding literature relates to
the concept of corporate rebranding. This study reveals two main options; 1) the
corporate name is changed, and as a consequence, the corporate visual identity is
also updated, and 2) corporate visual identity is changed. In the first, corporate
rebranding is a process of renaming and updating the company’s visual identity,
launching these both to the internal and external stakeholders and during and after
the process, evaluating both the outputs of the process and the process itself. In
this case, corporate rebranding can consist of reinventing, brand adoption or a
makeover. In the second option, corporate rebranding is the process of refreshing
or renewing the corporate brand by changing the visual identity of the company
and adopting the new visual identity. The findings of the study support those of
existing studies that suggest that corporate rebranding is about corporate name
change (Muzellec et al. 2003, Daly & Moloney 2004, Stuart & Muzellec 2004,
Lomax & Mador 2006) and/or change in aesthetics (Muzellec et al. 2003, Daly &
Moloney 2004, Stuart & Muzellec 2004, Muzellec & Lambkin 2006). The prior
research, however, lacks the description of these changes and their relation to
each other, which this study provides. However, due to the visual view of this
study the contribution is limited when it concerns rebranding or corporate re-
branding in general, because the study neither touches upon line extensions, dis-
tribution extensions or price reductions (Kapferer 2008: 239) for example, which
are typical in product branding, nor does it address repositioning (Muzellec et al.
ing the data from external stakeholders too, including, for example, customers,
might have offered a more comprehensive view on the phenomenon. Related to
this is the positioning of the study. As presented in the introduction, the study is
strongly based on organisational research. If the study had been rooted in the re-
search provided by the Industrial Marketing and Purchasing (IMP) Group from
the very beginning, it might have made different kinds of contributions.
9.7 Avenues for further studies
This journey of mine has proved to me that the amount of research gaps in the
current literature is enormous – and I cannot wait to get at them. Nevertheless,
continuing from this study I would like to mention four main avenues for further
studies.
First, each of the limitations I described above could form the basis of further
studies. It would be valuable to study corporate rebranding in small business con-
texts other than in the B2B software company context. Examining small B2B
companies that operate in the product business in other industries would perhaps
reveal other aspects, either confirming these results or challenging them. In addi-
tion, studying corporate rebranding in small B2B services companies might result
in interesting comparisons with this study, and help to develop the theories fur-
ther. After these openings it might be possible to develop quantitative measures
for corporate rebranding and continue in quantitative manner. In addition, a new
241
trigger for corporate renaming was found in this study, specifically, the difficulty
of using the name. As this study was only a three case study, this finding cannot be
statistically generalised, but the role of the finding definitely merits more exami-
nation.
Second, as I outlined in the theoretical framework, corporate branding has
several other aspects apart from the visual, which was the primary aspect in this
study. It would be important to study corporate rebranding by examining the
changing of the other corporate branding related concepts, for example, corporate
values or corporate identity. In addition, due to the shortcomings in this study,
corporate rebranding sub-processes of launching and evaluating should be further
examined.
Third, the amount of corporate branding studies has extensively increased
during the last few years. They offer several new insights to study. Rather than
being developed, it has recently been suggested that a corporate brand is co-
created with its stakeholders (e.g. Gregory 2007, Boyle 2007, Juntunen 2011). In
the current study, stakeholders connected to one company were observed to have
participated in the development of the new company name. It would be interest-
ing to continue by examining the role of stakeholders in corporate rebranding.
Fourth, any of the theoretical perspectives I excluded from the study could of-
fer an interesting perspective from which to re-examine the data and/or offer new
insights into ways to acquire new data on corporate rebranding. For example, it
might be fruitful to study what kind of impact the changing of a market orienta-
tion would cause among stakeholders? Or the impact of corporate rebranding re-
lated to a specific entrepreneur?
242
243
References
Aaker DA (1991) Managing Brand Equity. The Free Press: New York, NY. Aaker DA (1992) Strategic Market Management. 3rd ed. John Wiley Inc.: New York, NY. Aaker DA & Joachimsthaler E (2000a) Brand leadership. Managing brand equity and
building strong brand. The Free Press: New York. Aaker DA & Joachimsthaler E (2000b) The brand relationship spectrum: The key to the
brand architecture challenge. California Management Review 42(4): 8–23. Abimbola T (2001) Branding as a competitive strategy for demand management in SMEs.
Journal of Research in Marketing & Entrepreneurship 3(3): 97–106. Abratt R (1989) A new approach to the corporate image management process. Journal of
Marketing Management 5(1): 63–76. Adler M (2010) Google's main brands in a GE Matrix: International marketing strategy.
Germany: GRIN Verlag. Available at http://www.google.com/books?hl=fi&lr=&id=AlnC_-KY_wsC&oi=fnd&pg=PT25&dq=brand+google&ots=GytHeassdV&sig=FTFAtA_LSY4llzkM92VrE7uWAUQ#v=onepage&q=brand%20google&f=false
Ahonen M (2008a) Branding - does it even exist among SMEs? Proceedings of the 16th Nordic Conference on Small Business Research, May 21st -23rd 2008, Tallinn, Esto-nia.
Ahonen M (2008b) Clarifying the stage of corporate branding research (1996–2007): a literature review and a classification. Proceedings of the Australian & New Zealand Marketing Academy Conference ANZMAC, December 1st – 3rd, 2008, Sydney, Aus-tralia.
Ahonen M (2008c) Corporate re-branding process. A Preliminary Theoretical Framework. Proceedings of the Conference on Corporate Communication 2008, June 6th-9th, 2008, Wroxton, England, 41–48.
Ahonen M, Juntunen J, Autere V & Saarinen T (2008) The Corporate Character Scale in the Finnish Military Context. Proceedings of the Australian & New Zealand Market-ing Academy Conference ANZMAC, December 1st – 3rd, 2008, Sydney, Australia.
Ahonen M, Saraniemi S & Tähtinen J (2007) Does a country have an identity? An applica-tion of corporate identity perspective to country level. In Genest, C. & Goodman, M.B. (Eds) (2007) Proceedings of the Conference on Corporate Communication 2007, June1st.-4th, 2007, Wroxton, England: 1–10.
Alahuhta J, Juntunen M, Saraniemi S & Tähtinen J (2009) Transferring brand equity hie-rarchically by rebranding. Proceedings of the 5th International Colloquium of the Academy of Marketing's Brand, Corporate Identity and Reputation Special Interest Group conference, Cambridge, U.K., 1–3 September, 2009
Aldrich HE (2001) Who wants to be an evolutionary theorist? Remarks on the occasion of the year 2000 OMT distinguished scholarly career award presentation. Journal of Manage-ment Inquiry 10(2): 115–127.
Andriopoulos C & Gotsi M (2000) Benchmarking brand management in the creative in-dustry. Benchmarking: An International Journal 7(5): 360–372.
244
Anisimova TA (2007) The effects of corporate brand attributes on attitudinal and behav-ioural consumer loyalty. Journal of Consumer Marketing 24(7): 395–405.
Anson W (2000) Corporate Identity - value and valuation. Corporate Reputation Review 3(2): 164.
Argenti PA & Druckenmiller B (2004) Reputation and the corporate brand. Corporate Reputation Review 6(4): 368.
Armenakis A, Harris S & Feild H (1999). Paradigms in organizational change: Change agent and change target perspectives. In Golembiewski R (Ed) Handbook of organiza-tional behavior. Marcel Dekker: New York.
Ashill NJ, Frederikson M & Davies J (2003) Strategic marketing planning: a grounded investigation. European Journal of Marketing 37(3/4): 430–460.
Aspara J & Tikkanen H (2008) Significance of corporate brand for business-to-business companies. The Marketing Review 8(1): 43–60.
Aurand TW, Gorchels L & Bishop TR (2005) Human resource management’s role in in-ternal branding: an opportunity for cross-functional brand message synergy. The Jour-nal of Product and Brand Management 14(3): 163–169.
Backhaus K. & Tikoo S. (2004) Conceptualizing and researching employer branding. Ca-reer Development International 9(5): 501–517.
Baker MJ & Balmer JMT (1997) Visual identity: trappings or substance? European Journal of Marketing 31(5/6): 366–382.
Balmer JMT (1997) Corporate identity: past, present and future. Department of Marketing, Working Paper Series: University of Strathclyde.
Balmer JMT (1998) Corporate identity and the advent of corporate marketing. Journal of Marketing Management 14: 963–996.
Balmer JMT (2001a) Corporate identity, corporate branding and corporate marketing. See-ing through the fog. European Journal of Marketing 35(3/4): 248–291.
Balmer JMT (2001b) From the pentagon: A new identity framework. Corporate Reputation Review 4(1): 11–22.
Balmer JMT (2003) The three virtues and seven deadly sins of corporate brand manage-ment. In Balmer JMT & Greyser SA (Eds) (2003) Revealing the corporation. Perspec-tives on identity, image, reputation, corporate branding and corporate-level marketing. Routledge: London: 299–316. Earlier published in Journal of General Management 2001, 27(1): 1–17.
Balmer JMT & Gray ER (1999) Corporate identity and corporate communications: creat-ing a competitive advantage. Corporate Communications: An International Journal 4(4): 171–176.
Balmer JMT & Gray ER (2000) Corporate identity and corporate communications: creat-ing a competitive advantage. Industrial and Commercial Training 32(7): 256–261.
Balmer JMT & Gray ER (2003) Corporate brands: What are they? What of them? Euro-pean Journal of Marketing 37(7/8): 972–997.
245
Balmer JMT & Greyser SA (2003) Managing the multiple identities of the corporation. In Balmer JMT & Greyser SA (Eds) (2003) Revealing the corporation. Perspectives on identity, image, reputation, corporate branding and corporate-level marketing. Routledge: London: 15–29.
Balmer JMT & Greyser SA (2006) Corporate marketing: Integrating corporate identity, corporate branding, corporate communications, corporate image and corporate reputa-tion. European Journal of Marketing 40(7/8): 730–741.
Balmer JMT, Greyser SA & Urde M (2006) The Crown as a corporate brand: Insights from monarchies. Journal of Brand Management 14(1/2): 137–161.
Balmer JMT & Liao M (2007) Student corporate brand identification: an exploratory case study. Corporate Communications: An International Journal 12(4): 356–375.
Balogun J & Johnson G (2005) From Intended Strategies to Unintended Outcomes: The Impact of Change Recipient Sensemaking. Organization Studies OnlineFirst, pub-lished on September 20, 2005 as doi:10.1177/0170840605054624.
Bamford DR & Forrester PL (2003) Managing planned and emergent change within an opera-tions management environment. International Journal of Operations & Production Man-agement 23(5): 546–564.
Becker F, Sims W & Schoss JH (2003) Interaction, identity and collocation: What value is a corporate campus? Journal of Corporate Real Estate 5(4): 344–365.
Beer M & Nohria N (Eds) (2000) Breaking the code of change. Harvard Business School Press: Boston, MA.
Bendixen M, Bukasa KA & Abratt R (2004) Brand equity in the business-to-business mar-ket. Industrial Marketing Management 33:.371–380.
Berens G, van Riel GBM & van Bruggen GH (2005) Corporate associations and consumer product responses: the moderating role of corporate brand dominance. Journal of Marketing 69(3): 35–48.
Berger PL & Luckmann T (1967) The social construction of reality. Doubleday: New York.
Bernstein D (1989) Corporate void. International Journal of Advertising 8: 315–320. Berry L (2000) Cultivating service brand equity. Journal of Academy of Marketing Sci-
ence 28: 128–137. Berry L & Parasuraman A (1991) Marketing services - competing through quality. Free
Press: New York. Berthon P, Ewing MT & Napoli J (2008) Brand management in small to medium-sized
enterprises. Journal of Small Business Management 46(1): 27–45. Bick G, Jacobson MC & Abratt R (2003) The corporate identity management process re-
visited. Journal of Marketing Management 19(7/8): 835–855. Bickerton D (2000) Corporate reputation versus corporate branding: the realist debate.
Corporate Communications: An International Journal 5(1): 42–48. Biehal GJ & Sheinin DA (2007) The influence of corporate messages on the product port-
folio. Journal of Marketing 71(2): 12–25. Biel A (1992) How brand image drives brand equity. Journal of Advertising Research
32(6): 6–12.
246
Blankson C & Stokes D (2002) Marketing practices in the UK small business sector. Mar-keting Intelligence & Planning 20(1): 49–61.
Blombäck A & Axelsson B (2007) The role of corporate brand image in the selection of new subcontractors. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing 22(6): 418–430.
Boulding KE (1956) The Image. University of Michigan Press: Ann Arbor, MI. Boyle E (2003) A study of entrepreneurial brand building in the manufacturing sector in
the UK. The Journal of Product and Brand Management 12(2): 79–93. Boyle E (2007) A process model of brand cocreation: brand management and research
implications. The Journal of Product and Brand Management 12(2): 79–93. Brodie R, Glynn MS & Little V (2006) The service brand and the service-dominant logic:
missing fundamental premise or the need for stronger theory? Marketing Theory 6(3): 363–379.
Brønn PS (2006) Building corporate brands through community involvement: Is it export-able? The case of the Ronald McDonald House in Norway. Journal of Marketing Communications 12(4): 309–320.
Brønn PS, Engell A & Martinsen H (2006) A reflective approach to uncovering actual identity. European Journal of Marketing 40(7/8): 886–901.
Brooksbank R (1996) The BASIC marketing planning process: a practical framework for the smaller business. Marketing Intelligence & Planning 14(4): 16–23.
Brooksbank R (1999) The theory and practice of marketing planning in the smaller busi-ness. Marketing Intelligence & Planning 17(2): 78–90.
Buchanan D & Dawson P (2007) Discourse and audience: organizational change as multi-story process. Journal of Management Studies 44(5): 669–686.
Bullock RJ & Batten D (1985) It's just a phase we're going through: A review and synthe-sis of OD phase analysis. Group & Organization Management 10(4): 383–412.
Burghausen M & Fan Y (2002) Corporate branding in the retail sector: a pilot study. Cor-porate Communications: An International Journal 7(2): 92–99.
Burnes B (1996) No such thing as . . . a “one best way” to manage organizational change. Man-agement Decision 34(10): 11–18.
Burnes B (2004) Emergent change and planned change – competitors or allies? The case of XYZ construction. International Journal of Operations & Production Management 24(9): 886–902.
Burrell G & Morgan G (1979) Sociological paradigms and organisational analysis. Ele-ments of the sociology of corporate life. Gower.
Burt SL & Sparks L (2002) Corporate branding, retailing, and retail internationalization. Corporate Reputation Review 5(2/3): 194.
By RT (2005) Organisational change management: A critical review. Journal of Change Management 5(4): 369–380.
Campman M (2001) Branding.com: Building brand leadership in the new economy. Cor-porate Reputation Review 4(3): 200.
Chaston I (1997) Small firm performance: assessing the interaction between entrepreneu-rial style and organizational structure. European Journal of Marketing 31(11/12): 814–831.
247
Chun R & Davies G (2006) The influence of corporate character on customers and em-ployees: Exploring similarities and differences. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 34(2): 138–146.
Churchill NC & Lewis VL (1983) The five stages of small business growth. Harvard Business Review 61(3): 30–39.
Collins L (1977) A name to conjure with. European Journal of Marketing 11(5): 339–363. Cooper M, Gulen H & Rau PR (2005) Changing names with style: Mutual fund name
changes and their effect on fund flows. The Journal of Finance 60: 2825–2858. Cooper MJ, Dimitrov O & Rau PR (2001) A Rose.com by any other name. The Journal of
Finance 56(6): 2371–2388. Cooper MJ, Khorana A, Osobov I, Patel A & Rau PR (2005) Managerial actions in re-
sponse to a downturn: Valuation effects of name changes in the dot.com decline. Journal of Corporate Finance 11: 319–335.
Cornelissen JP & Elving WJL (2003) Managing corporate identity: an integrative frame-work of dimensions and determinants. Corporate Communications: An International Journal 8(2): 114–120.
Cornelissen JP & Harris P (2001) The corporate identity metaphor: Perspectives, problems and prospects. Journal of Marketing Management 17(1/2): 49–71.
Cummings TG & Huse EE (1989) Organizational development and change. West: St Paul, MN.
Cummings TG & Worley CG (2001) Organization Development and Change. 7th ed. South-Western College Publishing: Mason, OH.
Cunha MPE & Da Cunha JV (2003) Organizational improvisation and change: two synthe-ses and a filled gap. Journal of Organizational Change Management 16(2): 169–185.
Czarniawska-Joerges B (1998) A narrative approach to organization studies. Sage: USA. Da Silva, RVD & Alwi, SFS (2006) Cognitive, affective attributes and conative, behav-
ioural responses in retail corporate branding. Journal of Product & Brand Management 15(5):293–305.
Da Silva RVD & Alwi SFS (2008) The link between offline brand attributes and corporate brand image in bookstores. Journal of Product and Brand Management 17(3): 175–187.
Daffey A & Abratt R (2002) Corporate branding in a banking environment. Corporate Communications: An International Journal 7(2): 87–91.
Daly A & Moloney D (2004) Managing corporate rebranding. Irish Marketing Review 17(1/2): 30–36.
Davies I (2002) Radio taxi cabs (London) limited v owner drive radio taxi services limited. Journal of Brand Management 9(4/5): 400.
Davies G (2008) Employer branding and its influence on managers. European Journal of Marketing 42(5/6): 667–681.
Davies G & Chun R (2002) Gaps between the internal and external perceptions of the cor-porate brand. Corporate Reputation Review 5(2/3): 144.
248
Davis DF, Golicic SL & Marquardt AJ (2008) Branding a B2B service: Does a brand dif-ferentiate a logistics service provider? Industrial Marketing Management 37(2): 218–227.
Dawson P (1994) Organisational change: A processual approach. Paul Chapman Publishing: London.
de Chernatony L & Cottam S (2008) Interactions between organisational cultures and cor-porate brands. Journal of Product & Brand Management 17(1): 13–24.
de Chernatony L & Dall’Olmo Riley F (1998) Modelling the components of the brand. European Journal of Marketing 32(11/12): 1074–1090.
de Chernatony L & Segal-Horn S (2001) Building on services’ characteristics to develop successful services brands. Journal of Marketing Management 17(7/8): 645–669.
de Chernatony L & Segal-Horn S (2003) The criteria for successful services brands. Euro-pean Journal of Marketing 37(7/8): 1095–1118.
Delattre E (2002) Business name changes: The French experience. Journal of Small Business Management 40(4): 360.
Devlin JF & McKechnie S (2008) Consumer perceptions of brand architecture in financial services. European Journal of Marketing 42(5/6): 654–666.
Donavan DT, Janda S & Suh J (2006) Environmental influences in corporate brand identi-fication and outcomes. The Journal of Brand Management 14(1/2): 125–136.
Dowling G (1986) Managing your corporate images. Industrial Marketing Management 15: 109–115.
Dowling G (Ed) (1994) Corporate reputations: strategies for developing the corporate brand. Kogan Page: London.
Dubois A & Gadde L-E (2002) Systematic combining: an abductive approach to case re-search. Journal of Business Research 55: 553–560.
Duncan TR & Everett SE (1993) Client perceptions of integrated marketing communica-tions. Journal of Advertising Research 33(3): 30–39.
Dunphy D & Stace D (1993) The strategic management of corporate change. Human Relations 46(8): 905–918.
Einwiller S & Will M (2002) Towards an integrated approach to corporate branding – an empirical study. Corporate Communications: An International Journal 7(2): 100–109.
Eisenhardt KM (1989) Building theories from case study research. The Academy of Man-agement Review 14(4): 532–550.
Elliot BJ (2005) Using narrative in social research: qualitative and quantitative approaches. Sage: London.
Eppler MJ & Will M (2001) Branding knowledge: Brand building beyond product and service brands. The Journal of Brand Management 8(6): 445–456.
Eriksson P & Kovalainen A (2008) Qualitative methods in business research. Sage: Lon-don.
European Commission (2009) Commission staff working document on the implementation of Commission Recommendation of 6 May 2003 concerning the definition of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises. Brussels, 7.10.2009. Accessed 20 December 2010, http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/sme/files/sme_definition/sme_report_2009_en.pdf
249
Fan Y & Pfitzenmaier N (2002) Event sponsorship in China. Corporate Communications: An International Journal 7(2): 110–116.
Fan Y (2005) Ethical branding and corporate reputation. Corporate Communications: An International Journal 10(4): 341–350.
Fombrun CJ & van Riel CBM (1997) The reputational landscape. Corporate Reputation Review 1(1): 5–15.
Foo CT, Lowe A & Foo CT (2001) Corporate identity strategy: empirical analyses of ma-jor ASEAN corporations. Corporate Communications: An International Journal 6(3): 137–143.
Ford D, Gadde L-E, Håkansson H & Snehota I (2003) Managing Business Relationships, 2nd edition. John Wiley & Sons Ltd: Chichester, UK.
Forman J & Argenti PA (2005) How corporate communication influences strategy imple-mentation, reputation and the corporate brand: An exploratory qualitative study. Cor-porate Reputation Review 8(3): 245–264.
Freeman RE (1984) Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Pitman: Marshfield, MA.
Galpin T (1996) The human side of change: A practical guide to organization redesign. Jossey-Bass: San Francisco.
Garvin DA (1994) Building a learning organization. Harvard Business Review Ju-ly/August: 78–91.
Gilmore A, Carson D & Grant K (2001) SME marketing in practice. Marketing Intelli-gence & Planning 19(1): 6–11.
Givon M, Mahajan V & Muller E (1997) Assessing the relationship between the user-based market share and unit sales-based market share for pirated software brands in competitive markets. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 55: 131–144.
Glynn MA & Abzug R (2002) Institutionalizing identity: Symbolic isomorphism and or-ganizational names. Academy of Management Journal 45(1): 267–280.
Gotsi M & Andriopoulos C (2007) Understanding the pitfalls in the corporate rebranding process. Corporate Communications: An International Journal 12(4): 341–355.
Gotsi M, Andriopoulos C & Wilson A (2008) Corporate re-branding: is cultural alignment the weakest link? Management Decision 46(1): 46–57.
Grant D, Juntunen J, Juga J & Juntunen M (2009) Using logistics service to achieve satis-faction and turn corporate brand equity into loyalty. Proceedings of The 14th Interna-tional Symposium on Logistics (14th ISL), Istanbul, Turkey 5–8 July, 2009.
Gregory A (2007) Involving stakeholders in developing corporate brands: the communica-tion dimension. Journal of Marketing Management 23(1–2): 59–73.
Gregory JR (1997) Part III: Measuring and valuing reputations: ROI: Calculating advertis-ing's impact on stock price. Corporate Reputation Review 1(1): 56.
Gregory JR (1998) Does corporate reputation provide a cushion to companies facing mar-ket volatility? Some supportive evidence. Corporate Reputation Review 1(3): 288.
Gregory JR (2001) The bottom-line impact of corporate brand investment: An analytical perspective on the drivers of ROI of corporate brand communications. Journal of Brand Management 8(6): 405.
250
Greyser SA, Balmer JMT & Urde M (2006) The monarchy as a corporate brand. Some corporate communications dimensions. European Journal of Marketing 40(7/8): 902–908.
Gylling C & Lindberg-Repo K (2006) Investigating the links between a corporate brand and a customer brand. Journal of Brand Management 13(4/5): 257–267.
Halinen A & Tähtinen J (2002) A process theory of relationship ending. International Journal of Service Industry Management 13(2): 163–180.
Halttu M, Juntunen M, Saraniemi S & Tähtinen J (2009) Corporate brand building actions in different stages of small business growth. Proceedings of the 5th International Col-loquium of the Academy of Marketing's Brand, Corporate Identity and Reputation Special Interest Group conference, Cambridge, U.K., 1–3 September, 2009.
Handelman JM (2006) Corporate identity and the societal constituent. Journal of the Acad-emy of Marketing Science 34(2): 107–114.
Hansen F & Christensen LB (2007) Dimensions in consumer evaluation of corporate brands and the role of emotional response strength (NERS). Innovative Marketing 3(3): 19–27.
Hardaker S & Fill C (2005) Corporate services brands: The intellectual and emotional en-gagement of employees. Corporate Reputation Review 7(4): 365–376.
Harris F & de Chernatony L (2001) Corporate branding and corporate brand performance. European Journal of Marketing 35(3/4): 441–456.
Harris LC & Ogbonna E (2002) The unintended consequences of culture interventions: A study of unexpected outcomes. British Journal of Management 13(1): 31–49.
Hatch MJ & Schultz M (1997) Relations between organizational culture, identity and im-age. European Journal of Marketing 31(5/6): 356–365.
Hatch MJ & Schultz M (2001) Are the strategic stars aligned for your corporate brand. Harvard Business Review (79)2: 128–134
Hatch MJ & Schultz M (2003) Bringing the corporation into corporate branding. European Journal of Marketing 37(7/8): 1041–1064.
Hatch MJ & Schultz M (2010) Toward a theory of brand co-creation with implications for brand governance. Journal of Brand Management 17(8): 590–604.
Hatch MJ & Rubin J (2006) The hermeneutics of branding. Journal of Brand Management 14: 40–59.
He H-W & Balmer JMT (2006) Alliance brands: Building corporate brands through strate-gic alliances? Brand Management 13(4/5): 242–256.
Henderson PW & Cote JA (1998) Guidelines for selecting or modifying logos. Journal of Marketing 62(2): 14–30.
Hill J (2001a) A multidimensional study of the key determinants of effective SME market-ing activity: Part 1. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research 7(5): 171–204.
Hill J (2001b) A multidimensional study of the key determinants of effective SME market-ing activity: Part 2. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research 7(6): 211–235.
251
Horsky D & Swyngedouw P (1987) Does it pay to change your company’s name? A stock market perspective. Marketing Science 6(4): 320–335.
Hsieh H-F & Shannon SE (2005) Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualita-tive Health Research 15(9): 1277–1288.
Hulberg J (2006) Integrating corporate branding and sociological paradigms: A literature study. Journal of Brand Management 14(1/2): 60–73.
Hurmelinna-Laukkanen P, Juntunen M & Saraniemi S (2009) IPRs in corporate branding. Examining corporate visual identity system from a legal perspective. Proceedings of the Academy of Marketing Annual Conference 2009, Leeds, UK, 6–7 July, 2009.
Hurmelinna-Laukkanen P, Juntunen M, Saraniemi S & Alahuhta J (2009) Analyzing legal issues as endogenous factor in corporate brand management – a brand hierarchy pers-pective. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Research in Advertising (ICORIA) 2009, Klagenfurt am Woerthersee, Austria, 25–27 June, 2009.
Hurmelinna-Laukkanen P, Juntunen M, Saraniemi S & Elving WJL (2010) Visual Identity and IPRs in corporate brand management. Proceedings of the Conference on Corpo-rate Communication, June 4–7, Wroxton, England.
Hutton JG (1997) A study of brand equity in an organizational-buying context. Journal of Product & Brand Management 6(6): 428–439.
Håkansson H & Snehota I (1995) Developing Relationships in Business Networks. Routledge: London, UK.
Ind N (1997) The corporate brand. Macmillan: London. Inskip H (2004) Corporate branding for small to medium-sized businesses – A missed op-
portunity or an indulgence? Journal of Brand Management 11(5): 358–365. Jaju A, Joiner C & Reddy SK (2006) Consumer evaluations of corporate brand redeploy-
ments. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 34(2): 206–215. Jaworski SP & Fosher D (2003) National brand identity & its effect on corporate brands:
The Nation Brand Effect (NBE). Multinational Business Review 11(2): 99. Jenkins N (1991) The business of image. Kogan Page: London. Jian G (2007) Unpacking unintended consequences in planned organizational change. A
process model. Management Communication Quarterly 21(1): 5–28. Jocumsen G (2004) How do small business managers make strategic marketing decisions?
A model of process. European Journal of Marketing 38(5/6): 659–674. Judson A (1991) Changing behavior in organizations: Minimizing resistance to change.
Basil Blackwell: Cambridge, MA. Juga J, Juntunen J & Juntunen M (2010) Impact of service quality, image and relational
aspects on satisfaction and loyalty in logistics outsourcing relationships. 17th Annual EurOMA Conference, June 6–9, Porto.
Juntunen J, Autere V & Juntunen M (2009) The effect of standardization and agility on logistics costs. Proceedings of the Informs Annual Meeting, San Diego, USA, October 11–14, 2009
Juntunen J, Autere V & Juntunen M (2010a) Negotiation power, service level and costs: Learning from the military forces. The Proceedings of the 22nd NOFOMA Confe-rence, June 10–11, Kolding, Denmark.
252
Juntunen J, Autere V & Juntunen M (2010b) Degree of standardization, agility and supply chain performance. International Journal of Services and Standards 6(2): 112–122.
Juntunen J & Juntunen M (2009a) External economies and confidence, a way to decrease logistics costs. Proceedings of the Logistics Research Network Annual Conference (LRN), Cardiff, UK, September 9–11, 2009.
Juntunen J & Juntunen M (2009b) Soft and hard commitments: Two supplement methods to external economies. Proceedings of the Informs Annual Meeting, San Diego, USA, October 11–14, 2009.
Juntunen J & Juntunen M (2010a) A study of the effect of external economies and confi-dence on cost reductions of the logistics service purchasers. Proceedings of the 4th Bi-ennial Conference of the Academy of World Business, Marketing and Management Development, July 12–15, Oulu, Finland.
Juntunen J & Juntunen M (2010b) External economies and confidence: a way to reduce logistics costs. International Journal of Logistics: Research and Applications 13(5): 329–337.
Juntunen J, Juntunen M & Autere V (2009a) Factors affecting the profits of LSPs. In Hil-mola O-P & Korovyakovsky E (Eds) North-European Logistics in the Era of Global Economic Turmoil. Lappeenranta University of Technology, Department of Industrial Management. Research Report 213.
Juntunen J, Juntunen M & Autere V (2009b) Negotiation power, corporate brand and con-tracts as factors for LSP’s profit. Proceedings of the Fifth International Railway Lo-gistics Seminar, Kouvola, Finland, 2–4 June, 2009.
Juntunen J, Juntunen M & Autere V (2011) Protecting Finnish defence security: a logistics challenge. International Journal of Shipping and Transport Logistics 3(3): 295–311.
Juntunen M (2011) Co-creating corporate brands in start-ups. Forthcoming in the Special Issue “Marketing and SMEs” in Marketing Intelligence & Planning.
Juntunen M, Juntunen J & Juga J (2011) Corporate brand equity and loyalty in B2B mar-kets. A study among logistics service purchasers. Special issue "Branding across the Service Industries in the European and Mediterranean region". Journal of Brand Man-agement 18(4–5): 300–311.
Juntunen M, Saraniemi S, Halttu M, & Tähtinen J (2010) Corporate brand building in dif-ferent stages of small business growth. Journal of Brand Management 18(2): 115–133.
Juntunen M, Saraniemi S & Jussila R (2009) Corporate re-branding as a process in a pro-fessional health care organization. Proceedings of the 5th Thought Leaders Interna-tional Conference on Brand Management, 6–7 April 2009, Athens, Greece.
Kaikati JG (2003) Lessons from Accenture's 3Rs: rebranding, restructuring and reposition-ing. Journal of Product & Brand Management 12(7): 477–490
Kanter RM, Stein BA & Jick TD (1992) The challenge of organizational change. Free Press: New York, NY.
Kapferer J-N (1997) Strategic Brand Management. Kogan Page: London. Kapferer J-N (2008) The new strategic brand management: creating and sustaining brand
equity long term. Kogan Page: London.
253
Kay MJ (2006) Strong brands and corporate brands. European Journal of Marketing 40(7/8): 742–760.
Keller KL (1993) Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand eq-uity. Journal of Marketing 57(January): 1–22.
Keller KL (2000) Building and managing corporate brand equity. In Schultz M, Hatch MJ & Holten Larsen M (Eds) (2000) The expressive organisation. Linking identity, repu-tation, and the corporate brand. Oxford University Press: Oxford: 115–137.
Keller KL & Aaker DA (1998) The impact of corporate marketing on a company's brand extensions. Corporate Reputation Review 1(4): 356–378.
Keller KL & Richey K (2006) The importance of corporate brand personality traits to a successful 21st century business. Journal of Brand Management 14(1/2): 74–81.
Kennedy S (1977) Nurturing corporate images. European Journal of Marketing 11(3): 120–164.
Kim KH, Kim KS, Kim DY, Kim JH & Kang SH (2008) Brand equity in hospital market-ing. Journal of Business Research 61: 75–82.
King S (1991) Brand-building in the 1990s. Journal of Marketing Management 7:3–13. Kiriakidou O & Millward LJ (2000) Corporate identity: external reality or internal fit?
Corporate Communications: An International Journal 5(1): 49–58. Kitchen PJ, Brignell J, Li T & Jones GS (2004) The emergence of IMC: A theoretical pers-
pective. Journal of Advertising Research 44: 19–30. Kitchen PJ & Laurence A (2003) Corporate reputation: An eight-country analysis. Corpo-
rate Reputation Review 6(2): 103–117. Kitchen PJ & Schultz DE (2003) Integrated corporate and product brand communication.
Advances in Competitiveness Research 11(1): 66–86. Kitchen PJ, Schultz DE, Kim I, Han D & Li T (2004) Will agencies ever “get” (or under-
stand) IMC? European Journal of Marketing 38 (11/12): 1417–1436. Klein L (2005) Systemic inquiry – exploring organizations. Kybernetes 34(3/4): 439–447. Klink RR (2001) Creating meaningful new brand names: A study of semantics and sound
symbolism. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice 9(2): 27. Knox S (2000) The marketing and branding of intangible assets: whose role is it anyway?
In Kerley R (Ed) Proceedings on Managing Across Boundaries, Paper No. 266, CD-ROM, British Academy of Management Conference, Edinburgh.
Knox S (2004) Positioning and branding your organisation. The Journal of Product and Brand Management 13(2): 105–115.
Knox S & Bickerton D (2003) The six conventions of corporate branding. European Jour-nal of Marketing 37(7/8): 998–1016.
Kohli C & Hemnes TM (1995) A corporation by any other name . . .? Business Horizons 38(6): 29–33.
Kohli C & LaBahn DW (1997) Observations: creating effective brand names: a study of the naming process. Journal of Advertising Research January/February: 67–75.
254
Kollmann T & Suckow C (2007) The corporate brand naming process in the net economy. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal 10(4): 349–361.
Kotler P, Pfoertsch W & Michi I (2006) B2B brand management. Springer: Germany. Kotter JP (1995) Leading change: why transformation efforts fail. Harvard Business Re-
view 73(2): 59–67. Kowalczyk SJ & Pawlish MJ (2002) Corporate branding through external perception of the
organizational culture. Corporate Reputation Review 5(2/3): 159–174. Krake FBGJM (2005) Successful brand management in SMEs: a new theory and practical
hints. The Journal of Product and Brand Management 14(4): 228–238. Kuhn K-AL, Alpert F & Pope NKL (2008) An application of Keller’s brand equity model
in a B2B context. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal 11(1): 40–58.
Laforet S (2007) British grocers’ brand extension in financial services. Journal of Product & Brand Management 16/2: 82–97
Laforet S & Saunders J (1999) Managing brand portfolios: Why the leaders do what they do. Journal of Advertising Research 39(1): 51–66.
Laforet S & Saunders J (2005) Managing brand portfolios: How strategies have changed. Journal of Advertising Research (45)3: 314–327.
Lambkin M & Muzellec L (2008) Rebranding in the banking industry following mergers and acquisitions. International Journal of Bank Marketing 26(5): 328–352.
Lassar W, Mittal B & Sharma A (1995) Measuring customer-based brand equity. Journal of Consumer Marketing 12(4): a11–19.
Leigh, J (2011) How to change or amend a corporations’ name. Available at http://www.ehow.com/how_7579071_change-amend-corporations-name.html Ac-cessed 22.4.2011.
Leitch S & Richardson N (2003) Corporate branding in the new economy. European Jour-nal of Marketing 37(7/8): 1065–1079.
Lewin K (1951) Field theory in social science. Harper & Row: New York, NY. Lewin K (1958) Group decisions and social change. In Swanson GE, Newcomb TM &
Nartley EL (Eds) Readings in social psychology. Holt, Rhinehart & Winston: New York, NY.
Lincoln YS & Cuba EG (1985) Naturalistic inquiry. CA Sage: Beverly Hills. Lindberg-Repo K (2001) Customer relationship communication - analysing communica-
tion from a value generating perspective. Swedish School of Econimich and Business Administration: Helsinki, Finland.
Lomax W & Mador M (2006) Corporate re-branding: From normative models to knowl-edge management. Journal of Brand Management 14(1/2): 82–95.
Lynch J & de Chernatony L (2004) The power of emotion: Brand communication in busi-ness-to-business markets. Journal of Brand Management 11(5): 403–419.
Markwick N & Fill C (1997) Towards a framework for managing corporate identity. Euro-pean Journal of Marketing 31(5/6): 396–409.
255
Martenson R (2007) Corporate brand image, satisfaction and store loyalty: A study of the store as a brand, store brands and manufacturer brands. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management 35(7): 544–555.
McAllister MP & Giglio JM (2005) The commodity flow of U.S. children's television. Critical Studies in Media Communication 22(1): 26–44.
McDonald MHB, de Chernatony L & Harris F (2001) Corporate marketing and service brands. Moving beyond the fast-moving consumer goods model. European Journal of Marketing 35(3/4): 335–352.
McKinley W & Scherer AG (2000) Some unanticipated consequences of organizational re-structuring. The Academy of Management Review 25(4): 735–752.
McLarty R (1998) Case study: evidence of a strategic marketing paradigm in a growing SME. Journal of Marketing Science 4(4): 105–117.
McNeal JU & Zeren LM (1981) Brand name selection for consumer products. MSU Busi-ness Topics 29(2): 35–39.
Melewar TC, Badal E & Small J (2006) Danone branding strategy in China. Journal of Brand Management 13(6): 407.
Melewar TC, Basset K & Simões C (2006) The role of communication and visual identity in modern organisations. Corporate Communications: An International Journal 11(2): 138–147.
Melewar TC, Hussey G & Srivoravilai N (2005) Corporate visual identity: The re-branding of France Télécom. Journal of Brand Management 12(5): 379–394.
Melewar TC & Saunders J (1998) Global corporate visual identity systems. Standardiza-tion, control and benefits. International Marketing Review 15(4): 291–308.
Melewar TC & Saunders J (1999) International corporate visual identity: Standardization or localization? Journal of International Business Studies 30(3): 583–598.
Melewar TC & Saunders J (2000) Global corporate visual identity systems: using an ex-tended marketing mix. European Journal of Marketing 34(5/6): 538–550.
Melewar TC & Walker CM (2003) Global corporate brand building: Guidelines and case studies The Journal of Brand Management 11(2): 157–170.
Merrilees B (2007) A theory of brand-led SME new venture development. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal 10(4): 403–415.
Merrilees B & Fry M (2002) Corporate branding: A framework for e-retailers. Corporate Reputation Review 5(2–3): 213–225.
Merrilees B & Miller D (2008) Principles of corporate rebranding. European Journal of Marketing 42(5/6): 537–552.
Merz MA, He Y & Vargo SL (2009) The evolving brand logic: a service-dominant logic perspective. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 37(3): 328–344.
Mohr LB (1982) Explaining organizational behaviour. Jossey-Bass: San Francisco. Morsing M (2006) Corporate moral branding: limits to aligning employees. Corporate
Communications: An International Journal 11(2): 97–108. Morsing M & Kristensen J (2001) The question of coherency in corporate branding--over
time and across stakeholders. Journal of Communication Management 6(1): 24–40.
256
Moss G & Schuiling I (2004) A brand logic for pharma?: A possible strategy based on FMCG experience. International Journal of Medical Marketing 4(1): 55.
Motion J, Leitch S & Brodie RJ (2003) Equity in corporate co-branding: The case of adi-das and the All Blacks. European Journal of Marketing 37(7/8): 1080–1094.
Mowle J & Merrilees B (2005) A functional and symbolic perspective to branding Austra-lian SME wineries. Journal of Product & Brand Management 14(4): 220–227.
Muzellec L (2006) What is in a name change? Re-joycing corporate names to create corpo-rate brands. Corporate Reputation Review 8(4): 305–321.
Muzellec L, Doogan M & Lambkin M (2003) Corporate rebranding - an exploratory re-view. Irish Marketing Review 16(2): 31–40.
Muzellec L & Lambkin M (2006) Corporate rebranding: destroying, transferring or creat-ing brand equity? European Journal of Marketing 40(7/8): 803–824.
M'zungu SDM, Merrilees B & Miller D (2010) Brand management to protect brand equity: A conceptual model. Journal of Brand Management 17(8): 605–617.
Möller K & Wilson DT (1995) Business Relationships – An Interaction Perspective. In: Möller K & Wilson DT (eds) Business Marketing: An Interaction and Network Perspective. Kluwer Academic publishers, London, UK, 23–52.
Nowak G & Phelps J (1994) Conceptualizing the integrated marketing communications’ phenomenon: an examination of its impact on advertising practices and its implica-tions for advertising research. Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising 16(1): 49–66.
Ojasalo J, Nätti S & Olkkonen R (2008) Brand building in software SMEs: an empirical study. Journal of Product & Brand Management 17(2): 92–107.
Olins W (1978) The corporate personality: An inquiry into the nature of corporate identity. Design Council: London.
Olins W (1986) Corporate identity: Making business strategy visible through design. Thames and Hudson: London.
Opoku RA, Abratt R, Bendixen M & Pitt L (2007) Communicating brand personality: are the web sites doing the talking for food SMEs? Qualitative Market Research: An In-ternational Journal 10(4): 362–374.
Palazzo G & Basu K (2007) The ethical backlash of corporate branding. Journal of Busi-ness Ethics 73: 333–346.
Papasolomou I & Vrontis D (2006a) Building corporate branding through internal market-ing: the case of the UK retail bank industry. The Journal of Product and Brand Man-agement 15(1): 37–47.
Papasolomou I & Vrontis D (2006b) Using internal marketing to ignite the corporate brand: The case of the UK retail bank industry. Journal of Brand Management 14(1/2): 177.
Parkerson B & Saunders J (2005) City branding: Can goods and services branding models be used to brand cities? Place Branding l(3): 242.
Peirce CS (1931) Volume I: Principles of philosophy. In Hartshorne C & Weiss P (Eds) Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA.
257
Pentland BT (1999) Building process theory with narrative: from description to explana-tion. The Academy of Management Review 24(4): 711–724.
Pettigrew AM (1992) The character and significance of strategy process research. Strategic Management Journal 13(52): 5–16.
Pettigrew AM (2000) Linking change processes and outcomes: a commentary on Ghosal, Bart-lett and Weick. In Beer M & Nohria N (Eds) Breaking the code of change. Harvard Busi-ness School Press: Boston, MA.
Pettigrew AM, Woodman RW & Cameron KS (2001) Studying organizational change and development: Challenges for future research. Academy of Management Journal 44(4): 697–713.
Piña JM, Martinez E, de Chernatony L & Drury S (2006) The effect of service brand ex-tensions on corporate image: An empirical model. European Journal of Marketing 40(1/2): 174–197.
Pitt LF, Watson RT, Berthon P, Wynn D & Zinkhan G (2006) The Penguin's window: corporate brands from an open-source perspective. Journal of the Academy of Market-ing Science 34(2): 115–127.
Pitta DA & Katsanis LP (1995) Understanding brand equity for successful brand exten-sions. Journal of Consumer Marketing 12(4): 51–64.
Polonsky MJ & Jevons C (2006) Understanding issue complexity when building a socially responsible brand. European Business Review 18(5): 340–349.
Poole MS, Van de Ven AH, Dooley K & Holmes ME (2000) Organizational change and inno-vation processes: Theory and methods for research. Oxford University Press: New York.
Power J, Whelan S & Davies G (2008) The attractiveness and connectedness of ruthless brands: the role of trust. European Journal of Marketing 42(5/6): 586–602.
Priluck R & Till BD (2010) Comparing a customer-based brand equity scale with the Im-plicit Association Test in examining consumer responses to brands. The Journal of Brand Management 17(6): 413–428.
Raggio RD & Leone RP (2007) The theoretical separation of brand equity and brand value: Managerial implications for strategic planning. Journal of Brand Management 14(5): 380–395.
Rao VR, Agarwal MK & Dahlhoff D (2004) How is manifest branding strategy related to the intangible value of a corporation? Journal of Marketing 68(4): 126–141.
Rauyruen P, Miller KE & Groth M (2009) B2B services: linking service loyalty and brand equity. Journal of Services Marketing 23(3): 175–186.
Remeney D, Williams B, Money A & Swartz E (1998) Doing research in business and management. Sage Publications
Ries A & Trout J (1982) Positioning: The battle for your mind. Warner Books: New York, NY.
Rios RE & Riquelme HE (2008) Brand equity for online companies. Marketing Intelli-gence & Planning 26(7): 719–742.
Roberts J & Merrilees B (2007) Multiple roles of brands in business-to-business services. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing 22(6):.410–417.
258
Rode V & Vallaster C (2005) Corporate branding for start-ups: the crucial role of entrepre-neurs. Corporate Reputation Review 8(2): 121–135.
Romano C & Ratnatunga J (1995) The role of marketing. Its impact on small enterprise research. European Journal of Marketing 29(7): 9–30.
Rowley, J (2002) Using case studies in research. Management Research News 25(1): 16–27.
Rubinson J & Pfeiffer M (2005) Brand key performance indicators as a force for brand equity management. Journal of Advertising Research 45(2): 187–197.
Saraniemi S (2009) Destination branding in a country context. A case study of Finland in the British market. Doctoral dissertation. Joensuu: Joensuu University Press.
Saraniemi S & Ahonen M (2008) Destination branding from corporate branding perspec-tive. Proceedings of the Conference on Corporate Communication 2008, June 6th-9th, 2008, Wroxton, England, 435–448.
Saraniemi S, Juntunen M, Niemelä T & Tähtinen J (2010) Internal elements influencing the corporate brand equity of small firms. Proceedings of the 6th Thought Leaders In-ternational Conference on Brand Management, April 18–20, Lugano, Switzerland.
Schein EH (1985) Organisational culture and leadership: A dynamic view. Jossey-Bass: San Francisco, CA.
Schmiemann M (2008) Enterprises by size class - overview of SMEs in the EU. Eurostat Sta-tistics in focus 31/2008. Industry, trade and services.
Schoenfelder J & Harris P (2004) High-tech corporate branding: lessons for market re-search in the next decade. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal 7(2): 91–99.
Schultz DE & Kitchen P (2004) Managing the changes in corporate branding and commu-nication: Closing and re-opening the corporate. Corporate Reputation Review 6(4): 347.
Schultz DE, Tannenbaum SI & Lauterborn RF (1994) Integrated marketing communica-tions. NTC Business Books: Illinois.
Scott M & Bruce R (1987) Five stages of growth in small business. Long Range Planning 20(3): 45–52.
Shipley D, Hooley GJ & Wallace S (1988) The brand name development process. Interna-tional Journal of Advertising 7: 253–266.
Sichtmann C (2007) An analysis of antecedents and consequences of trust in a corporate brand. European Journal of Marketing 41(9/10): 999–1015.
Silverman D (2005) Doing qualitative research. A practical handbook. Sage Publications: London.
Simon CJ & Sullivan MW (1993) The measurement and determinants of brand equity: a financial approach. Marketing Science 12(1): 28–52.
Siu W-S, Zhu Y & Kirby DA (2003) The interplay of environment and culture in small firm marketing: a comparative study of the marketing practices of Chinese small firms in Hong Kong and the UK. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development 10(1): 25–39.
259
Souiden N, Kassim NM & Hong H (2006) The effect of corporate branding dimensions on consumers' product evaluation: A cross-cultural analysis. European Journal of Market-ing 40(7/8): 825–845.
Spears N, Brown TJ & Dacin PA (2006) Assessing the corporate brand: The Unique Cor-porate Association Valence (UCAV) approach. Journal of Brand Management 14(1/2): 5–19.
Srivastava NV & Mookerjee A (2004) Determinants of brand equity for banking business application software products. International Journal of Technology Management 28(1): 128–138.
Stace D & Dunphy D (2001) Beyond the boundaries: Leading and recreating the successful enterprise. 2nd ed. McGraw-Hill: Sydney, Australia.
Stake RE (2005) Qualitative case studies. In Denzin NK & Lincoln YS (Eds) (2005) The SAGE handbook of qualitative research. Sage Publications: USA: 443–466.
Stokes D & Lomax W (2002) Taking control of word of mouth marketing: the case of an entrepreneurial hotelier. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development 9(4): 349–357.
Storey DJ (1994) Understanding the small business sector. Routledge: New York, NY. Stuart H (1998) Exploring the corporate identity/corporate image interface: an empirical
study of accounting firms. Journal of Communication Management 2(4): 357–371. Stuart H (1999) Towards a definitive model of the corporate identity management process.
Corporate Communications: An International Journal 4(4): 200–207. Stuart H & Jones C (2004) Corporate branding in marketspace. Corporate Reputation Re-
view 7(1): 84. Stuart H & Muzellec L (2004) Corporate makeovers: Can a hyena be rebranded? Journal of
Brand Management 11(6): 472–482. Supphellen M & Nysveen H (2001) Drivers of intention to revisit the websites of well-
known companies: The role of corporate brand loyalty. International Journal of Mar-ket Research 43(3): 341.
Tarnovskaya V, Elg U & Burt S (2008) The role of corporate branding in a market driving strategy. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management 36(11): 941–965.
Taylor, M (2011) How to change a corporation name. http://www.ehow.com/how_5498626_change-corporation-name.html Accessed 22.4.2011.
Taylor SA, Celuch K & Goodwin S (2004) The importance of brand equity to customer loyalty. Journal of Product & Brand Management 13(4): 217–227.
Taylor SA, Hunter GL & Lindberg DL (2007) Understanding (customer-based) brand eq-uity in financial services. Journal of Services Marketing 21(4): 241–252.
Tollin K (2007) Branding at a corporate management level. Innovative Marketing 3(1): 23. Topalian A (2003) Experienced reality. The development of corporate identity in the digi-
tal era. Executive perspective: 1. European Journal of Marketing 37(7/8): 1119–1132. Trueman M, Klemm M & Giroud A (2004) Can a city communicate? Bradford as a corpo-
rate brand. Corporate Communications: An International Journal 9(4): 317–330.
260
Tsoukas H (2005) Afterword: why language matters in the analysis of organizational change. Journal of Change Management 18(1): 96–104.
Tsoukas H & Chia R (2002) On organizational becoming: Rethinking organizational change. Organization Science 13(5): 567–584.
Turnbull S (2002) The planned and unintended emotions generated by a corporate change program. Advances in Developing Human Resources 4(1): 22–38.
Tähtinen J (2001) The dissolution process of a business relationship. A case study from tailored software business. Oulu University Press: Oulu, Finland.
Uggla H (2006) The corporate brand association base. A conceptual model for the creation of inclusive brand architecture. European Journal of Marketing 40(7/8): 785–802.
Urde M (2003) Core value based corporate brand building. European Journal of Marketing 37(7/8): 1017–1040.
Vallaster C & de Chernatony L (2006) Internal brand building and structuration: the role of leadership. European Journal of Marketing 40(7/8): 761–784.
Van de Ven AH (1992) Suggestions for studying strategy process: a research note. Strate-gic Management Journal 13: 169–188.
Van de Ven AH (2007) Engaged scholarship: A guide for organizational and social re-search. Oxford University Press: USA.
Van de Ven AH & Poole MS (1995) Explaining development and change in organizations. The Academy of Management Review 20(3): 510–541.
Van de Ven AH & Poole MS (2005) Alternative approaches for studying organizational change. Organization Studies 26(9): 1377–1404.
Van den Bosch ALM, de Jong MDT & Elving WJL (2005) How corporate visual identity supports reputation. Corporate Communications: An International Journal 10(2): 108–116.
Van den Bosch ALM, Elving WJL & de Jong MDT (2006) The impact of organisational characteristics on corporate visual identity. European Journal of Marketing 40(7/8): 870–885.
Van Rekom J, Jacobs G, Verlegh PWJ & Podnar K (2006) Capturing the essence of a cor-porate brand personality: A Western brand in Eastern Europe. Brand Management 14(1/2): 114–124.
Van Riel ACR, de Mortanges PC & Streukens S (2005) Marketing antecedents of industri-al brand equity: An empirical investigation in specialty chemicals. Industrial Market-ing Management 34(8): 841–847.
Van Riel CBM (1995) Principles of corporate communication. Prentice-Hall: Hemel Hempstead, UK.
Van Riel CBM (2002) Top of mind awareness of corporate brands among the Dutch pub-lic. Corporate Reputation Review 4(4): 362.
Van Riel CMB & Balmer JMT (1997) Corporate identity: the concept, its measurement and management. European Journal of Marketing 31(5/6): 340–355.
Van Riel CBM & van Bruggen GH (2002) Incorporating business unit managers' perspec-tives in corporate-branding strategy decision making. Corporate Reputation Review 5(2/3): 241–252.
261
Van Riel CBM, van den Ban A & Heijmans E-J (2001) The added value of corporate lo-gos. An empirical study. European Journal of Marketing 35(3/4): 428–440.
Virtsonis N & Harridge-March S (2008) Website elements in B2B online communications: a case from the UK print industry. Marketing Intelligence & Planning 26(7): 699–718.
Vitiello R & Willcocks M (2006) The difference is in the detail: Its potential as a place branding tool and impact upon perceptions and responses. Place Branding 2(3): 248.
Warnaby G, Bennison D & Davies BJ (2005) Marketing communications in planned shop-ping centres: evidence from the UK. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management 33(12): 893–904.
Weick KE (2000) Emergent change as a universal in organizations. In Beer M & Nohria N (Eds) Breaking the code of change. Harvard Business School Press: Boston, MA.
Weick KE & Quinn RE (1999) Organizational change and development. Annual Review of Psychology 50: 361–386.
Westcott Alessandri S (2001) Modeling corporate identity: a concept explication and theo-retical explanation. Corporate Communications: An International Journal 6(4): 173–182.
Wetzel F (2006) Brand England. Place Branding 2(2): 144. Wheeler AR, Richey RG, Tokkman M & Sablynski CJ (2006) Retaining employees for
service competency: the role of corporate brand identity. Journal of Brand Manage-ment 14(1/2): 96–113.
Wilkinson A & Balmer JMT (1996) Corporate and generic identities: lessons from the co-operative bank. International Journal of Bank Marketing 14(4): 22–35.
Wilkinson I (2001) A History of Network and Channels Thinking in Marketing in the 20th Century. Australasian Journal of Marketing 9 (2) 23–53.
Wilson DC (1992) A strategy of change. Routledge: London. Wong HY & Merrilees B (2005) A brand orientation typology for SMEs: a case research
approach. The Journal of Product and Brand Management 14(3): 155–162. Wu Y (2010) What’s in a name? What leads a firm to change its name and what the new
name foreshadows. Journal of Banking & Finance 34(6): 1344–1359. Xie HY & Boggs DJ (2006) Corporate branding versus product branding in emerging mar-
kets: A conceptual framework. Marketing Intelligence & Planning 24(4): 347–364. Yakhlef A & Maubourguet F (2004) The Lexus and the olive tree: a rising mode of inter-
nalisation. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research 10(3): 192–205.
Yin RK (2003) Case study research design and methods. 3rd Edition. Sage Publications. Zontanos G & Anderson AR (2004) Relationships, marketing and small business: an ex-
ploration of links in theory and practice. Qualitative Market Research: An Internation-al Journal 7(3): 228–236.
www.rethink.com
262
263
Appendices
Appendix 1: Illustration of some concepts close to corporate brand (Balmer 2001a,
published by permission of Emerald Group Publishing Limited).
264
Appendix 2: The methodology applied in corporate branding studies (continued from