The paper "Measuring and Interpreting Brand Performance - Double Jeopardy and Duplication of Law " is a good example of marketing coursework. In the report, Smith’ s depicts both Double Jeopardy and Duplication of Law patterns of brand performance. In addition, Duplication of Law pattern exhibited by Smith’ s has implications as well as likely reasons for deviations. Smith’ s also operates in a repertoire market. Further, the brand attitude and brand salience of Smith’ s are compared in the report and brand salience highlighted as being more important to measure as compared to brand attitude. Smith’ s also meets expected performance within the total sample as well as in its client base and depicts a free choice in attitudinal construct pattern of brand attitude.
However, the performance of Smith’ s can be enhanced by improving its customers’ base positive attitude towards the brand. Finally, Smith’ s has the same clientele base as competing brands and has no attraction on any particular client type. Consequently, the marketing manager should not unnecessarily utilize additional resources in a particular segment despite having a slightly higher number of customers in that market segment as compared to competing brands. Section 1: Brand Performance 1.
Double Jeopardy is an archetypal Brand Performance Measures (BPMs) pattern that depicts the level of loyalty of the brand in relation to its magnitude. Clients for bigger brands are more and have a continuous propensity of purchasing more often as compared to customers for smaller brands that are fewer and have an on-going tendency of purchasing less often (Wright & Riebe 2010). In table 1, Smith’ s has the highest sole loyalty which is 22% while sole loyalty for Red Rock Deli, as well as Jumpy’ s, is 0.
In addition, Smith’ s has the biggest market share which is 34%. Consequently, Smith’ s is a big brand in the same category market because it has high penetration that is 72% and high market share. Further, it has high loyalty. On the other hand, Red Rock Deli and Jumpy’ s are small brands in the same market category. 2. De Chernatony (2010) argues that the repertoire market entails the general purchasing of many brands in the same category in a short period by clients, such as a year. In addition, the share-of-category requirement (SCR) is capable of being used to measure brand loyalty in repertoire categories (East, Wright & Vanhuele 2013).
SCR depicts the portion of category purchases that a client gives to a particular brand over a definite time span. Further, each brand in one category in the repertoire market shares the loyalty as anticipated in brand performance metrics. For instance, Smith’ s is operating in a repertoire market as a result of clients purchasing numerous dissimilar brands in the same category over the same period. East, Wright and Vanhuele (2013) stipulate that Duplication of Purchase Law shows the sharing of clients by competing brands in the same market category.
The average duplication declines as the penetration of a brand reduce. Bigger brands with more market share have a higher average duplication as compared to their smaller counterparts with lesser market share. Further, small brands share a majority of their clients with larger brands. However, larger brands will share lesser customers with smaller brands.
De Chernatony, L, 2010, From brand vision to brand evaluation: the strategic process of growing and strengthening brands, Routledge.
Wright, M., & Riebe, E, 2010, Double jeopardy in brand defection, European Journal of Marketing, vol. 44 no. 6, pp 860-873.
East, R, Wright, ., & Vanhuele, M, 2013, Consumer behaviour: applications in marketing. Sage.
Kennedy, R & Ehrenberg, A 2001, ‘There is no brand level segmentation’, Journal of Marketing Research, vol. Spring, pp. 4-7.
Romaniuk, J & Sharp, B 2004, ‘Conceptualizing and measuring brand salience’, Marketing Theory, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 327-342
Sharp, B., & Ehrenberg-Bass institute for marketing science Melbourne, Australia, 2010, How brands grow: What marketers don't know, Vol. 189, South Melbourne: Oxford University Press.
Liu, F., Li, J., Mizerski, D., & Soh, H., 2012, Self-congruity, brand attitude, and brand loyalty: a study on luxury brands. European Journal of Marketing, vol.46, no.7/8, pp 922-937.
Whan Park, C, MacInnis, D, J, Priester, J, Eisingerich, A, B, & Iacobucci, D, 2010. Brand attachment and brand attitude strength: conceptual and empirical differentiation of two critical brand equity drivers, Journal of Marketing, vol.74, no.6, pp 1-17.
Ehrenberg, A, S, C, & Goodhardt, G, J, 2011, Models of Buyer Behavior, Chapter 18: Repeat Buying of a New Brand: A 10-Point Case History, Marketing Classics Press.
Ehrenberg, A, S, Uncles, M, D, & Goodhardt, G, J, 2004, Understanding brand performance measures: using Dirichlet benchmarks, Journal of Business Research, vol. 57 no. 12, pp 1307-1325.