LEEDS BECKETT UNIVERSITY

Contemporary Brand
Management
Nissan
C3289835
5/12/2015

BA(hons) Marketing

Word Count: 4392

Dr Kenneth Henrie
 1

Table of Contents
1.0 The Brand ............................................................................................................................... 3
1.1 What is a Brand? ................................................................................................................. 3
1.2 Brand Versus Product .......................................................................................................... 3
1.3 Nissan Background .............................................................................................................. 3
1.4 Market Insight..................................................................................................................... 3
1.5 Brand Architecture .............................................................................................................. 4
2.0 Brand Positioning.................................................................................................................... 5
2.1 What is Brand Positioning? .................................................................................................. 5
2.2 Nissan’s Brand Positioning Statement................................................................................... 5
2.3 Nissan’s Perceptual Positioning Map .................................................................................... 6
3.0 Brand Analysis ........................................................................................................................ 8
3.1 Brand Identity ..................................................................................................................... 8
3.1.1 What is Brand Identity................................................................................................... 8
3.1.2 The Brand Identity Prism ............................................................................................... 9
3.2 Brand Image...................................................................................................................... 11
3.2.1 What is Brand Image ................................................................................................... 11
3.2.2 The Brand Love Curve.................................................................................................. 11
3.2.3 Self-image and Image Congruence Hypothesis .............................................................. 12
3.3 Brand Equity ..................................................................................................................... 13
3.3.1 What is Brand Equity ................................................................................................... 13
3.3.2 Nissan’s Brand Equity and The Customer-Based Brand Equity Pyramid ........................... 14
3.4 Brand Loyalty .................................................................................................................... 16
3.4.1 What is Brand Loyalty.................................................................................................. 16
3.4.2 Percy and Elliott Brand Loyalty Model .......................................................................... 16
3.4.3 Rosenbaum-Elliot, Percy and Pervan (2011) Steps to Brand Loyalty................................ 18
3.4.4 Nissan’s Brand Pyramid (De Chernatony, 2010)............................................................. 18
4.0 Special Interest ..................................................................................................................... 20
4.1 Corporate and Ethical Branding.......................................................................................... 20
4.2 The Aim of Corporate and Ethical Branding ......................................................................... 20
4.3 Nissan as a Corporate and Ethical Brand ............................................................................. 20
4.4 Nissans CSR Model ............................................................................................................ 21
4.4.1 Carroll’s (1991) CSR Pyramid vs Nissan’s CSR Approach ................................................. 22
4.4.2 Schwartz and Carroll’s (2003) Intersecting Circles Model vs Nissan’s CSR Model ............. 23
 2

4.4.3 Quazi and O’Brien’s (2000) Two-Dimensional Model of CSR........................................... 23

5.0 Recommendation.................................................................................................................. 25
5.1 Rationale .......................................................................................................................... 25
5.2 The Recommendation ....................................................................................................... 25
Bibliography............................................................................................................................... 27
Appendices ................................................................................................................................ 30
1.0 ......................................................................................................................................... 30
2.0 ......................................................................................................................................... 30
3.0 ......................................................................................................................................... 30
4.0 ......................................................................................................................................... 31
5.0 ......................................................................................................................................... 31
6.0 ......................................................................................................................................... 32
 3

Contemporary Brand Management –

Nissan
1.0 The Brand
1.1 What is a Brand?
There are two main perspectives when looking at the definition of a brand, the financial perspective
and the legal perspective. The financial perspective defines a brand as “a set of mental associations
held by the consumer, which add to the perceived value of a product or service” ( Keller, 2013). This
definition highlights the gain in perceived value to the consumer due to the brand values. The legal
perspective, cited by Kapferer (2008) defines a brand as “a sign or set of signs certifying the origin of
a product or service and differentiating it from competition“. The key point in the legal definition is
that brands, once registered, can be defended against infringements and counterfeiting. This
definition focuses on clearly identifying and differentiating itself from competition. It creates value in
the mind of the buyer through building a reputation for the producer or distributor (Kapferer, 2004).

1.2 Brand Versus Product

Keller’s (2013) definition differentiates the product or service from the brand, which is important in
truly defining what a brand is. The brand itself provides the product or service with intangible
dimensions that add value, in Nissans case the brand adds value through their reputation for
innovation. A strong brand is created when the product and brand are effectively aligned. This is
summed up by Batey (2008); “a product becomes a brand when the physical product is augmented
by something else- images, symbols, perceptions, feelings- to produce an integral idea greater than
the sum of its parts”.

1.3 Nissan Background

Nissan is a Japanese automotive manufacturer, established in 1993. They manufacture automobiles
in 20 different countries and have an alliance with Renault whereby both companies work as
partners, however keep separate brand identities (Mason, 2015). Their mission is; “to provide
unique and innovative automotive products and services and deliver superior measurable values to
all stakeholders in alliance with Renault” (Nissan.co.uk, 2015).

1.4 Market Insight

The UK automobile market can be segmented into four sectors; Mini/Supermini, Lower
Medium/Upper Medium, Dual/Multipurpose, Exec/Luxury Sports ( Mason, 2015). Nissan competes
within all four segments, however their two key segments are Lower Medium/Upper Medium and
 4

Dual/Multipurpose (Nissan.co.uk, 2015). Their product range stands them in good stead for the near
future with the market seeing a “rising demand for Dual/Multipurpose cars” (Mason, 2015).

Nissan is the sixth most popular car manufacturer with a 5.6% market share of the UK automobile
market. The market leaders are Ford and with a 13% share (Mason, 2015). Nissans competitors are
listed in Fig 1.1 below.

Figure 1.1 - Nassan's competitors and their market share % (Mason, 2015)

1.5 Brand Architecture

Nissan’s brand architecture strategy is ‘source’. It is a two-tier structure, similar to umbrella brands
where there is a house brand, Nissan, but the products contain their own distinctly different product
names (Dahlen, Lange and Smith, 2010), for example, Nissan Micra, Nissan Note or Nissan Juke
(Nissan.co.uk, 2015). Being a source brand creates depth of customer communication for Nissan as
certain things are associated with the source brand and others from the product-brand-specific
communication (Moss, 2014), for example the new Nissan Juke has connotations to do with style
and fashion with their colour personalisation options (See appendix 1.0), whilst the brand Nissan
carries an image associated with being eco-friendly, innovation leaders.
 5

2.0 Brand Positioning

2.1 What is Brand Positioning?
Brand positioning introduced by Ries and Trout, cited by Parameswaran (2006) they defined it as
“the mental position occupied by the brand in the minds of consumers”. This definition however is
basic and ignores the ‘segmentation’ and ‘targeting’ stages of brand positioning, by using term
‘consumers’, implying there is no differentiation between them. It also fails to emphasise the
importance and value of the ‘place’ or ‘position’ occupied by the brand in the consumers mind.
Kotler and Keller (2012) recognise this and develop the definition to include these by stating that
brand positioning is “the act of designing the company’s offer and image so that it occupies a distinct
and valued place in the target customer’s minds”. Keller (2013) develops this even further to include
why we use brand positioning. He defines brand positioning as “finding the proper “location” in the
minds of a group of consumers or market segment, so that they think about a product or service in
the “right” or desired way to maximise potential benefit to the firm”.

Brand positioning is competition orientated as its primary concern is attacking competitors’ market
share (Kapferrer, 2008). However, there are different interpretations as to what brand positioning
actually aims to do. For example, Rosenbaum-Elliot, Percy and Pervan (2011) put the focus much
more so on the brand benefit to the target audience; “in the eyes of the target audience, the brand
must be linked to a benefit that provides a motivating reason to consider it”. However, Chernatony
(2006) states that its purpose is to “identify a brands differential advantage” which Kapferrer (2008)
agrees with this and adds that it aims to identify, take possession of and communicate a ‘strong
purchasing rationale’.

2.2 Nissan’s Brand Positioning Statement

A positioning statement is a specific and brief statement that lays out what you want consumers to
think about a brand or product. It summaries strategy and acts as a guide for strategic marketing and
brand management (Temporal, 2010). A positioning statement describes how your brand differs and
is superior to competitor brands, and gives reason as to why consumers should buy your brand
(Shimp and Andrews, 2007). Kanzler (1998) argues that it is also beneficial to employees as it defines
a company’s direction and creates synergy between departments.

Rosenbaum-Elliot, Percy & Pervan (2011) put forward a model or format for creating an effective
positioning statement. The basic format is as follows;

“___ is the brand for (target audience) that satisfies (category need) by offering (benefit)”
(Rosenbaum-Elliot, Percy & Pervan, 2011)
 6

Nissan’s proposed positioning statement:

For environmentally conscious, urban drivers, Nissan satisfies the need for affordable,
reliable and trustworthy products whilst offering the most innovative and exciting
automobiles available.

Nissan’s previous campaigns have focused predominantly on their “innovative and exciting” product
range which is conveyed through the imagery and messages in their communications for the Nissan
Juke, for example (See appendix 2.0) (Nissan, 2015). However, when looking at factors considered
when buying a car, price was the single most important criteria, followed by reliability (Mason,
2014). For this reason it is important that Nissan position themselves to be affordable and reliable
whilst highlighting the ‘benefit’ of being innovative and exciting (Rosenbaum-Elliot, Percy & Pervan,
2011). Points of difference (Keller, 2013) can be communicated through the ‘innovative’ features
that Nissan’s current product range offers, for example, ‘lane departure warning’ and ‘blind spot
warning’. This would be advantageous as safety was ranked the 3 rd most important factor to
consider (behind price and reliability) when buying a car (Mason, 2014).

2.3 Nissan’s Perceptual Positioning Map

Before a brand positioning strategy can be implemented it is important that the market’s
perceptions are understood (Dibb and Simkin, 1996). To do this, a perceptual map can be used. This
is a “two or three dimensional display of customer perceptions of competing alternatives in a
market” (Lilien, Rangaswamy and De Bruyn, 2013). A brands position in the market is determined by
the comparisons made by consumers, of the brand against its competitors (Johansson and Carlson,
2013). It is therefore vital that we consider Nissan’s position in the context of its competitors.

The functional attributes chosen for the axes could include functional, physiological-emotional, and
personality characteristics (Johansson and Carlson, 2013). In Nissan’s case ‘Overall Satisfaction’ and
‘Trust’ will be used. ‘Trust’ gives a good indication of brand integrity and stature and ‘Differentiation’
gives an insight into the perceived energy and vitality of the brand (Mason, 2015), something that
Nissan is looking to communicate in its positioning.

The data in Figure 2.1, which has been plotted in Figure 2.2 was gained from Mintel’s report, UK Car
Review (Mason, 2015)
 7

Ford Volkswagen Fiat Nissan

% % % %

Trust 35 30 12 20

Differentiation 28 42 18 19

Figure 1.1 Perceived levels of trust, perceived levels of differentiation gained from Mintel (Mason,
2015)

Figure 2.2 - Nissan's Perceptual Positioning Map

The distance in between brands indicates similarities in the minds of consumers ( Lilien, Rangaswamy
and De Bruyn, 2013). From Figure 2.2 it is clear that customers perceive Nissan to be alike to Fiat in
terms of trustworthiness and differentiation. Volkswagen holds a unique position in on the
perceptual map. They are perceived to be more differentiated in comparison to its competitors; this
could be due to its premium positioning that gives them a point of difference (Keller, 2013). Ford are
perceived to be more trustworthy than Nissan (and the other competitors) possibly due to their long
history and many years leading the automobile industry (Mason, 2015). Ideally Nissan would like to
position themselves where the green dot is placed. Their ‘innovative and exciting’ position suggests
that they want to be seen as energetic and differentiated.
 8

3.0 Brand Analysis

3.1 Brand Identity

3.1.1 What is Brand Identity

Chernatony (2010) describes brand identity as the “distinctive or central idea of a brand and how the
brand communicates this idea to the stakeholders”. Kapferer (2004) agrees with this and adds that
brand identity stems from the brands heritage, and all factors that give it its “unique authority and
legitimacy within a realm of precise values and benefits”. The key assumption of the identity
approach is that all activities and communications should be “integrated, aligned and elevated” from
a product and tactical level to a strategic and corporate one (Heding, Knudtzen and Bjerre, 2009).

Figure 3.1: Hedging, Knudtzen and Bjerre (2009) state that Brand Identity is a bridging facet to
induce a relationship between the corporation and consumer.

Nissan’s brand identity can be categorised into five components, highlighted by Keller (2013) shown
in Fig 3.2 below.
 9

Fig 3.2 – Keller’s (2013) Five components of a brand applied to Nissan

3.1.2 The Brand Identity Prism

Kapferer (2005) identifies the Brand Identity Prism, in which he states that brand identity is
composed of 6 facets; Physique, relationship, reflection, self -image, culture and personality (Fig 3.3).
The prism itself communicates that all six facets are inter-related and are an echo of one another
(Kapferer, 2005). This means they must communicate a consistent message in order to create an
effective brand identity that will create brand equity, the end goal of building a strong brand (Keller,
2013).

There are several facets of the prism that Nissan use more than the others, for example the
‘personality’ facet. Nissan aims to be exciting, urban, innovative and stylish. They do this firstly
through the products they create; Nissan is one of the UK’s leading brands in, in-car technology with
an 83% score for their innovation within their vehicles (Auto Express Driver Power, 2014). This is also
conveyed in their 2014 television adverts for the Nissan Juke for example (Youtube, 2014), where
the in-car technology is used in different and exciting ways in order to overcome certain obstacles,
usually within an urban environment. It is also possible to personalise a new Nissan Juke (Nissan,
2015). You can do this by choosing the vibrant colour you wish for interior and exterior features of
the car. This is all aimed at building a personality to the brand. These features are incorporated
within the brand and help define who the ‘sender’ is (Kapferer, 2005).
 10

The ‘self-image’ facet is also prominent in the case of Nissan. Nissan’s communications are focused
on projecting the emotions you feel when driving your Nissan. They do this by centring the
campaigns around the word (or feeling) ‘thrill’, for example ‘Built to Thrill’, ‘Tested to Thrill’ and
‘Personalise your Thrill’ (See appendix 3.0) (Nissan, 2015). The communications aim to encourage
the viewer to visualise themselves driving the Nissan and build an image of what this might be like.
This form on brand communication builds a recipient, who belongs to the brands identity (Kapferer,
2015).

The ‘culture’ facet of the prism can also be applied to Nissan, this form of communication builds the
gap between the sender and receiver. Each product should derive from the brands culture, be a
representation of their culture and a means of communicating this too (Kapferer, 2005). Nissan
draws heavily on their Japanese heritage, not just with the brand name ‘Nissan’ (which is a
combination of its Japanese parent company’s abbreviated name, NiSan (Nissan, 2015)), but with its
innovation and business vision, a pillar of Japanese business culture; Nissan has partnered with
NASA in order to create a driverless car by 2016 (Mason, 2014). This is reinforcing their identity as
innovation leaders, which is one of the pillars within Nissan that gui de its outward signs (Kapferer,
2015).

Fig 3.3 – Kapferrer (2005) Brand identity prism applied to Nissan

 11

3.2 Brand Image

3.2.1 What is Brand Image

The AMA defines brand image as “the perception of a brand in the minds of person”. Franzen and
Moriarty (2009) support this however elaborate to describe brand image as the “mirror reflection of
the brand personality or product being. It is what people believe about the brand - their thoughts,
feelings and expectations”. Creating a positive brand image involves linking the brand to strong,
favourable and unique brand associations (Rosenbaum-Elliott, Percy and Pervan, 2011). These brand
associations are ‘brand attributes’ and ‘brand benefits’. The aim of developing a positive brand
image is to create customer-based brand equity, built by inducing a differential response in the mind
of the consumer. In order for this differential response to occur, the brand must make sure that the
brand associations held, are not only favourable but unique, and not shared with competing brands
(Keller, 2013).

3.2.2 The Brand Love Curve

Nissan are the 6th most popular car manufacturer in the UK, with 14% of respondents stating either
Nissan is ‘their favourite car brand’ or they ‘preferred Nissan over others’ (Mason, 2014). Mason
(2014) also states that although Nissan does not have a brand image as well established as Audi or
Volkswagen, their reliability score means that consumers are likely to consider them when
purchasing. For this reason, Nissan can be placed at the ‘Like It’ stage of The Brand Love Curve (Fig
3.4). The strategic suggestion at this point is “drive rational and emotional benefits to close the sale”
(Robertson, 2015). This is something that Nissan is already doing; its new campaigns are emphasising
the emotional benefits of driving a Nissan, for example, “built to thrill” and “innovation that excites”
(Appendix 3.0). The target in this model is to get to the ‘Beloved Brand’ stage, at this stage “demand
becomes desire, needs become cravings, thinking is replaced with feelings and consumers become
outspoken fans” (Robertson, 2015).
 12

Fig 3.4 – The Brand Love Curve (Robinson, 2015)

3.2.3 Self-image and Image Congruence Hypothesis

The concept of a brand image is discussed in Section 3.2.1, however, it is developed further to
include the notion of ‘self-image’. This is the thought that an evaluation of Nissan for example, might
not be the result of just the brand image, but also of the consumer’s self -image and the image they
hold about the type of person who buys a Nissan (Harris, 2009). Lantos (2011) describes self-image
as “how consumers view themselves or think they really are”. De Chernatony and McDonald (2011)
state, the sole purpose of buying and using particular brands is either to maintain or enhance the
individuals ‘self-image’. This is supported by Franzen and Moriarty, 2009) who adds, consumers are
naturally drawn to brands that have a similar self-image to themselves (Franzen and Moriarty, 2009).

The Image Congruence Hypothesis postulates that “an evaluation of a product will be influenced by
the degree of congruence between brand image and self-image (Harris, 2009) .This can be achieved
by either creating an image that consumers can identify with (actual self-image) or one that
consumers can aspire to (ideal self-image) (Lantos, 2011).

The Nissan Qashqai brand for example, is said to be economical, classy and refined (What Car, 2015)
and was voted WhatCar? Car of the Year 2014. It achieved 5 stars for ‘quality and reliability’ and a
top 20 place, with an 80% score in JD Powers customer satisfaction survey (Auto Car, 2013). The
combination of the above ratings demonstrate the achievement of Nissan in the crafting of a close
 13

relationship between the Nissan Qashqai brand and the consumer which has led to a positive brand
evaluation; this is depicted in Fig 3.5 below.

Fig 3.5 – Image Congruence Hypotheses – Adapted from Heath and Scott (1988)

3.3 Brand Equity

3.3.1 What is Brand Equity

There are many differing opinions on the definition of brand equity (Keller, 2013) however, a widely
accepted definition is “the set of assets and liabilities linked to a brand’s name and symbol that adds
to or subtracts from the value provided by a product or service to a firm and/or that firm’s
customers” (Aaker, 1996). Brandt and Johnson (1997) agree with this and develop it further to
specify the range of assets that make up brand equity, highlighted in fig 3.6. The aim is to create
positive customer-based brand equity, which Keller (2013) describes is when consumers react more
favourably to a product when the brand is identified than when it is not.
 14

Fig 3.6 – Brandt and Johnson (1997) “Brand equity is the unique set of real or perceived
distinctions attached to a brand by consumers”

3.3.2 Nissan’s Brand Equity and The Customer-Based Brand Equity Pyramid

Full line automotive car brands have been benefitting from an improved economy, pent-up demand,
attractive loan rates and easing credit restrictions, and as a result, brand equity is at an all-time high
for the industry (Chadsey, 2015). Nissan placed in 5th in the Equitrend Brand Equity Index for all full
line automotive brands (Harris Interactive, 2014), shown in Fig 3.7 They have shown sustained and
improving brand equity and have ranked above the category average for nine of the last ten years
(Harris Interactive, 2014). This could be as a result of marketing activities such as their LinkedIn
Sponsored Updates campaign, which aimed to reach a high-value audience by appearing in
members’ news feeds alongside organic content. The campaign reached a senior-level audience
across the globe, gained instant feedback on which content gained the most engagement and
created broad global impact for brand messages. It drove engagement and built relationships with a
key audience (Nissan Case Study, 2015) which is a vital part of building positive customer-based
brand equity (Keller, 2013).
 15

Fig 3.7 Harris Interactive (2014) Equitrend Rankings

Nissan is currently ranked 56th biggest (revenue) brand in the world and over 2014 has earned the
title of a ‘top riser’, increasing profit by 23% (Global Brands, 2014). This coupled with Nissan’s brand
equity ranking (Harris Interactive, 2014) places them at the ‘customer brand resonance’ stage of
Keller’s (2001) customer-based brand equity pyramid, shown in Fig 3.8. At this stage Nissan are
achieving loyalty, attachment, community and engagement also (Keller, 2001).

Fig 3.8 – Customer-Based Brand Equity Pyramid (Keller, 2001)

 16

3.4 Brand Loyalty

3.4.1 What is Brand Loyalty

A still widely accepted definition by Jacoby and Chestnut (1978) defines brand loyalty as “the biased,
behavioural response, expressed over time, by some decision making unit, with respect to one or
more alternative brands out of a set of such brands, and is a function of physiological (decision-
making, evaluative) processes” (Anandan, 2009). Kotler and Pfoertsch (2010) agree, however
simplify this as; “brand loyalty generally entails a strong commitment to a particular brand on the
part of the consumer”.

3.4.2 Percy and Elliott Brand Loyalty Model

This model is effective in assessing the loyalty of Nissans customer base. It is based upon how
‘involved’ a person is with a brand and illustrates the ‘perceived risk’ in switching brands
(Rosenbaum-Elliott, Percy and Pervan, 2011). Involvement with a brand is a key dimension in
determining brand attitude and in turn, brand loyalty (Rosenbaum-Elliott and Percy, 2007).

Plotted on the model is Nissan 1 and Nissan 2. Nissan 1 represents the majority of Nissan customers
(approx. 65%, shown in the larger bubble) and Nissan 2 represents the minority of Nissan customers
(approx. 35%).

This has been approximated based on the research conducted in the UK Car Review (Mason, 2015)
states that 72% of customers who have ever used a Nissan automobile would recommend it. It also
found that 63 % of Nissan owners rated their satisfaction with the products from ‘good’ to ‘excellent’
(Mason, 2015). Due to the price paid for a car, the perceived risk in switching is naturally going to be
higher (Rosenbaum-Elliott and Percy, 2007). It is for these reasons that ‘Nissan 1’ (Fig 3.9) has been
plotted as ‘Loyal’. For these customers Nissan have to do very little other than maintain a positive
brand attitude. Nissan must be alert to shifts in positive brand attitude to competitor brands that
could lead to a change in brand attitude towards Nissan (Rosenbaum-Elliott and Percy, 2007).

In another survey, Mason (2015) found that 30% of respondents rated their satisfaction towards
Nissan as ‘average’, along with another 75% of respondents stating they have no preference for
Nissan over other brands (Mintel, 2015). In this situation, it could be assumed that although they are
not dissatisfied with Nissan, perceived risk in switching is lower as they show little preference
between brands. These customers are classed as ‘vulnerable’ (Rosenbaum-Elliott, Percy and Pervan
2011) and represented by Nissan 2 (Fig 3.9). For this group it is important to reinforce the already
positive brand attitude, this should strengthen brand equity, reducing the likelihood of switching to
other brands (Rosenbaum-Elliott and Percy, 2007).
 17

Fig 3.9 – Percy and Elliott Brand Loyalty Model (Rosenbaum-Elliott and Percy, 2007) applied to
Nissan. Plotted using Mintel (2015).

Aaker’s Brand Loyalty Pyramid can also be used to asses Nissans customer base, however identifies
five levels of brand loyalty. This is shown below in Fig 3.9.1, highlighting where Nissan 1 and 2 are
positioned currently.

Fig 3.9.1 - Aaker Brand Loyalty Pyramid applied to Nissan

 18

3.4.3 Rosenbaum-Elliot, Percy and Pervan (2011) Steps to Brand Loyalty

This model (Fig 3.9.2) sets out the steps that a brand goes through in order to create brand loyalty
(Rosenbaum-Elliot, Percy and Pervan, 2011). The underlying message the model carries is that a
strong, positive brand attitude (after the brand awareness stage) is essential in building brand loyalty
(Rosenbaumn-Elliott, Percy and Pervan, 2011). The Brand Loyalty Model (Rosenbam-Elliott and
Percy, 2007) has been discussed to a greater degree as it is an effective way of assessing Nissans
customer base and offers a basic strategic outcome, depending on where the brand is plotted.

Fig 3.9.2 – Rosenbaum-Elliot, Percy and Pervan (2011) Steps to Brand Loyalty Model.

3.4.4 Nissan’s Brand Pyramid (De Chernatony, 2010)

The brand pyramid describes the ‘essence’ or the ‘core’ of the brand (De Chernatony, 2010). It
summarises the identity and the positioning of a brand by relating, values, personality , benefits,
emotional awards and attributes (Kapferer, 2004). This “enables effective internal communication
and encourages staff within the organisation to pull together in the same direction” (De Chernatony,
2010).
 19

Fig 3.9.3 – Nissan’s Brand Pyramid (De Chernatony, 2010)

Nissan begin building their brand with products that have ‘attributes’ such as being technologically
advanced, or eco-friendly. They convey this firstly through the products they produce and also
through their advertising they use for example, demonstrating the various different types of
technology within the car (See Appendix 4.0). However, customers are less concerned with the
attributes, than the benefits. As they experience the brand, the benefits the customer is
experiencing (as a result of the attributes) lead to emotional rewards (Baker, 2003). Applied to
Nissan, customers may be ‘safe’, as a result of some of the safety technology within th e car
(Appendix 5.0), which then lead to a feeling of ‘confidence’. Nissan’s aim is that this eventually may
lead to a feeling of being ‘tech- savvy’ for example (See Fig 3.9.3).
 20

4.0 Special Interest

4.1 Corporate and Ethical Branding
Wolf, Issa and Thiel (2015) define corporate branding as “developing and managing the relationship
between the organisation and its customers, its stakeholders and the general public”. It is important
to recognise the distinction between a corporate brand and a product brand. Keller (2013)
distinguishes between the two by saying corporate brands can carry a much wider set of
associations, for example, “associations of common products and their shared attributes or benefits,
people and relationships, programs and values, and corporate credibility”.

The field of corporate branding involves concepts of morality, ethics and social responsibility
(Podnar, 2015). These issues are becoming increasingly prominent for organisations to address due
to relative prosperity in developed countries, affording the consumers the luxury of worrying about
these such issues, coupled with the ease of communicating their approval or disapproval to a wide
audience (Proctor, 2008). Their ‘corporate reputation’ being a primary concern (Keller, 2013).

4.2 The Aim of Corporate and Ethical Branding

As with product branding, one of the main aims of corporate branding is to create ‘corporate brand
equity’ this time as oppose to ‘product brand equity’. This occurs when a “relevant constituency
responds more favourably to a corporate ad campaign, a corporate -branded product or service, or
corporate-issued PR release, and so on, than if the same offering were attributed to an unknown or
fictitious company” (Keller, 2013). Morely (2009) agrees with this and states also that a strong
corporate brand allows for expansion with new products, variations and sub-brands, which is
particularly beneficial in Nissans case when releasing a new car model for example.

As a result of corporate branding, a corporate brand image, personality and reputation is built
(Keller, 2013).

4.3 Nissan as a Corporate and Ethical Brand

Firstly, when discussing corporate branding, it is important to acknowledge Nissan Motor
Corporation as a whole brand that includes ‘Nissan’, ‘Datsun’ and ‘Infiniti’.
“Blue Citizenship” is Nissans corporate social responsibili ty strategy. Its main aim, along with
generating sustainable profits, is to contribute to the sustainable development of society (Nissan,
2015). Nissan describes sustainability as a cornerstone of their business and a driver for innovation.
 21

This is shown firstly and most obviously in their product offering, for example the Nissan LEAF 0%
emissions electric car (Nissan, 2015). According to Keller’s (2013) corporate image associations,
Nissan is achieving ‘common product attributes or benefits’ such as innovativeness through
promoting their Safety Shield technologies and their vision of bringing the first autonomous
automobile to market (Nissan, 2015). They achieve “values and programs” (Keller, 2013) such as
concern with the environment by prioritising ‘the environment’ as 1st in their three sustainability
strategies (Nissan CSR Report, 2014), the other two being ‘safety’ and ‘philanthropy’, both aimed at
achieving “corporate credibility” (Keller, 2013).

4.4 Nissans CSR Model

Nissans CSR model (Fig 4.1), guided by their corporate vision, “to enrich people’s lives”, aims to
“contribute to sustainable societal development through all its activities, globally” (Nissan CSR
Report, 2014). Nissan is uniquely positioned in order to pursue actions under three strate gies,
‘Environment’, ‘Safety’ and ‘Philanthropy’. The five strategies placed at the bottom of the pyramid,
‘Quality’, ‘Value Chain’, ‘Employees’, ‘Economic Contribution’ and ‘Corporate Governance & Internal
Control’ are strategies aimed at ensuring Nissan remain “trusted and needed by society” (Nissan CSR
Report, 2014), which Proctor (2008) highlights as one of the primary goals of corporate and ethical
branding.
 22

Fig 4.1 – Nissans Eight Sustainability Strategies aimed at achieving the CSR vision (Nissan CSR
Report, 2014)

4.4.1 Carroll’s (1991) CSR Pyramid vs Nissan’s CSR Approach

Carroll’s (1991) Pyramid of CSR (Fig 4.2) highlights the ‘Economic’ layer as the base, and the
foundation for the three other layers to be built. It states that these layers should not be fulfilled in
sequential fashion but each layer is to be filled at all times (Madu and Kuei, 2012). The model
generally agrees with Nissan’s CSR strategy (Fig 4.1) as it holds ’Philanthropy’ and the ‘Ethical
Responsibilities’ at the heart of its CSR approach. However, it differs in the sense that Nissan do not
agree that everything is built from a platform such as ‘Economical Responsibilities’ in Carroll’s (1991)
model. Instead, Nissan has five strategies placed at the bottom, of equal importance that aims to
build trust around Nissan as a corporation.
 23

Fig 4.2 – Carroll’s (1991) CSR Pyramid (Madu and Kuei, 2012)

4.4.2 Schwartz and Carroll’s (2003) Intersecting Circles Model vs Nissan’s CSR Model
The Intersecting Circles model of CSR (Fig 4.3) would agree with Nissan’s CSR approach in a sense, as
it rejects the hierarchical structure of importance that Carroll’s (1991) model emphasises, and
highlights that the different CSR domains are interrelated (Zu, 2009). Nissan agree and place
importance on these interrelationships by stating that the separate strategies they employ need to
be pursued together in order to achieve maximum efficiency (Nissan CSR Report, 2014).

Fig 4.3 - Schwartz and Carroll’s (2003) Intersecting Circles Model of CSR

4.4.3 Quazi and O’Brien’s (2000) Two-Dimensional Model of CSR

Quazi and O’Brien’s (2000) Model of CSR (Fig 4.4) may argue that Caroll’s (1991) Pyramid takes a
‘classic view’ of CSR as its main focus, or its base is ‘economic factors’ that hold profit maximisation
 24

as its primary goal (Zu, 2009). It could be argued that Nissan on the other hand takes a ‘modern
view’ to CSR, as it holds society at the heart of its operations and focus largely on the benefits of CSR
action rather than the cost (Zu, 2009).

Fig 4.4 - Quazi and O’Brien’s (2000) Two-Dimensional Model of CSR

 25

5.0 Recommendation
It is recommended that Nissan create an online, impartial customer review platform
in order to improve customer service quality, to in turn build brand trust.

5.1 Rationale
It has been highlighted in this report that Nissan’s brand trust is low in comparison to some
competitors. Clarke and Flaterly (2005) state that improving customer satisfaction is an effective way
of building brand trust. Currently Nissan’s customer service ratings are very poor, with only 3.9% of
overall comments being positive (Customer Service Scoreboard, 2015), see appendix 6.0 for full
report. This could be a reason that Nissan’s brand trust is lower than its key competitors (20% of
customers trusted Nissan – See appendix 7.0). Davies (2015) found that customer reviews have been
shown to be extremely important when looking at purchasing products, for example, 30% of
consumers write online product reviews while 50% read them regularly before making a purchase
decision (Mintel, 2015).

5.2 The Recommendation

It is recommended that Nissan create an online, impartial customer review platform. This would be
platform where customers can leave uncensored reviews categorised by the different product s
Nissan offer, with no intervention from Nissan themselves. The reviews should be correlated with
each other and presented in an easy to read format, car-by-car. It is imperative there is no
intervention from Nissan as this suggests transparency and honesty, a key driver of brand credibility
(Bergh and Behrer, 2011).

Through the platform, a customer service team should be available to respond to customers with
problems regarding Nissan’s products which should improve customer service ratings. Studies show
good quality customer service leads to favourable customer responses such as repurchase
intentions, positive word of mouth, customer loyalty, customer satisfaction, brand trust, and price
insensitivity (Zhang, 2009). These responses would be extremely desirable to Nissan.

Dues to Nissan’s products being classed as large ticket items, an ‘Ask An Owner’ section will be
included where potential customers can ask current Nissan owners questions about their car. Since
88% of consumers trust online reviews as much as personal recommendations (Bright Local
Consumer Review Survey, 2014), this will be an effective way of alleviating some of the insecurities
associated with the purchase decision and encourage sales (Clarke and Flatherly, 2005).
 26

A disadvantage to uncensored customer reviews is that Nissan have little control over the ratings, or
what is being posted. However, Kia Motors implemented a similar activity in 2013 where they
created a platform that aimed to provide verified and authentic customer reviews via a platform on
the Kia website (The Drum, 2015). It gained 10,000 independent reviews within the first 12 months,
monthly visits to the Kia website exceed 1 million and car sales rise 8% year-on-year (E3, 2015).
 27

Bibliography
Adamczyk, A. (2015). Nissan Teams With NASA. [online] Forbes.com. Available at:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/aliciaadamczyk/2015/01/10/nasa-nissan-partnership-driverless-
vehicles-earth-space/ [Accessed 7 Apr. 2015].
Auto Car, (2013). 2013 JD Power customer satisfaction survey. [online] Available at:
http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/2013-jd-power-customer-satisfaction-survey-full-car-
model-results [Accessed 9 Apr. 2015].

Baker, M. (2003). The marketing book. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Batey, M. (2008). Brand meaning. New York: Routledge, p.3.

Bergh, J. and Behrer, M. (2011). How cool brands stay hot. London: Kogan Page.
Bright Local, (2014). Local Consumer Review Survey 2014. [online] Available at:
https://www.brightlocal.com/2014/07/01/local-consumer-review-survey-2014/ [Accessed 24 Apr.
2015].
Chadsey, M. (2015). Harris Interactive: Press Releases > Brand Equity for Many Luxury and Full Line
Automotive Brands at 10-Year High, Finds 2014 Harris Poll EquiTrend® Study. [online]
Harrisinteractive.com. Available at:
http://www.harrisinteractive.com/NewsRoom/PressReleases/tabid/446/mid/1506/articleId/1449/ct
l/ReadCustom%20Default/Default.aspx [Accessed 10 Apr. 2015].
Chitty, W., Luck, E., Barker, N., Valos, M. and Shimp, T. (2011). Integrated marketing
communications. Melbourne: Cengage Learning.

Clarke, I. and Flaherty, T. (2005). Advances in electronic marketing. Hershey PA: Idea Group Pub.
Customer Service Scoreboard, (2015). Nissan customer service complaints, reviews, ratings and
comments. [online] Available at: http://www.customerservicescoreboard.com/Nissan [Accessed 24
Apr. 2015].

Dahlén, M., Lange, F. and Smith, T. (2010). Marketing communications. Chichester, U.K.: Wiley.
Davies, P. (2015). Digital Trends Spring. [online] Mintel. Available at:
http://academic.mintel.com/display/715847/?highlight [Accessed 24 Apr. 2015].
De Chernatony, L. (2010). From brand vision to brand evaluation. Amsterdam: Butterworth-
Heinemann.

Dibb, S. and Simkin, L. (1996). The market segmentation workbook. London: Routledge.
E3, (2015). Ground breaking campaign for Kia drives further awards success for e3. [online] Available
at: http://www.e3.co.uk/news/awards/2014/the-digitals-2014 [Accessed 24 Apr. 2015].

Franzen, G. and Moriarty, S. (2009). The science and art of branding. Armonk, N.Y.: M.E. Sharpe.
 28

Harris, D. (2009). Engineering psychology and cognitive ergonomics. 8th ed. Aldershot: Ashgate.

Harris Interactive, (2014). 2014 EquiTrend Rankings. [online] Available at:

http://www.harrisinteractive.com/Insights/EquiTrendRankings/2014EquiTrendRankings.aspx
[Accessed 10 Apr. 2015].

Heding, T., Knudtzen, C. and Bjerre, M. (2009). Brand management. London: Routledge.
Kapferer, J. (2008). The new strategic brand management. London: Kogan Page, pp.10-11.

Keller, K. (2001). Building Customer-Based Brand Equity: A Blueprint for Creating Strong Brands.
[online] Marketing Science Institute. Available at: http://mktg.uni-
svishtov.bg/ivm/resources/CustomerBasedbrandEquityModel.pdf [Accessed 10 Apr. 2015].
Keller, K. (2013). Strategic brand management. 4th ed. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall.

Kotler, P. and Keller, K. (2012). Marketing management. 14th ed. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice
Hall.

Kotler, P. and Pfoertsch, W. (2010). Ingredient branding. Heildelberg: Springer.

Lantos, G. (2011). Consumer behavior in action. Armonk, N.Y.: M.E. Sharpe.

Lilien, G., Rangaswamy, A. and De Bruyn, A. (2013). Principles of marketing engineering. 2nd ed.
[Victoria, B.C.]: Trafford Publishing.
Madu, C. and Kuei, C. (2012). Handbook of sustainability management. Singapore: World Scientific
Pub. Co.

Mason, N. (2014). Car Purchasing Process - UK. [online] Mintel. Available at:
http://academic.mintel.com.ezproxy.leedsbeckett.ac.uk/display/679830/ [Accessed 31 Mar. 2015].
Mason, N. (2015). The UK Car Review: An Insight into Brand Preferences and Market Trends - UK.
[online] Mintel. Available at: http://academic.mintel.com/display/715753/ [Accessed 23 Mar. 2015].
Morley, M. (2009). The global corporate brand book. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Moss, G. (2014). Pharmaceuticals-Where's the Brand Logic?. Hoboken: Taylor and Francis.

Nissan.co.uk, (2015). Nissan Automobiles. [online] Available at: http://www.nissan.co.uk [Accessed

24 Mar. 2015].

Nissan Case Study. (2013). Marketing Solutions. [online] LinkedIn. Available at:
https://business.linkedin.com/content/dam/business/marketing-
solutions/global/en_US/site/pdf/cs/LinkedIn-Nissan-SU-CaseStudy%20-%20130919.pdf [Accessed 10
Apr. 2015].

Parameswaran, M. (2006). Building brand value. New Delhi: Tata McGraw-Hill.

Podnar, K. (2015). Corporate communication. London: Routledge.

Proctor, T. (2008). Strategic Marketing. 2nd ed. New York: Routledge.
 29

Riezebos, H. and Grinten, J. (2012). Positioning the brand. London: Routledge.

Robertson, G. (2015). The Brand Love Curve. [online] Beloved-brands.com. Available at:
http://beloved-brands.com/tag/brand-love-curve/ [Accessed 9 Apr. 2015].

Rosenbaum-Elliott, R. and Percy, L. (2007). Strategic brand management. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Rosenbaum-Elliott, R., Percy, L. and Pervan, S. (2011). Strategic brand management. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.

Shimp, T. and Andrews, C. (2007). Advertising, promotion, and other aspects of integrated marketing
communications. Mason, OH: Thomson/South-Western.
Temporal, P. (2010). Advanced brand management. Singapore: John Wiley & Sons.

The Drum, (2015). Kia Motors UK and Reevoo announce success and planned expansion of
partnership. [online] Available at: http://www.thedrum.com/news/2012/06/21/kia-motors-uk-and-
reevoo-announce-success-and-planned-expansion-partnership [Accessed 24 Apr. 2015].

Wolf, R., Issa, T. and Thiel, M. (2015). Empowering organizations through corporate social
responsibility. Pennsylvania: IGI Global.
Zhang, Z. (2009). Alliance paradox. Orlando, Fla.: University of Central Florida.

Zu, L. (2009). Corporate social responsibility, corporate restructuring and firm's performance. Berlin:
Springer.
 30

Appendices
1.0
Nissan emphasise style and fashion through their colour personalisation of the new Nissan Juke

2.0
Nissan uses innovative and exciting imagery in their communications such as the Nissan Juke advert

3.0
The majority of Nissans communications are centred around the word the word ‘thrill’.
 31

4.0
Nissan’s communications highlight the different technology contained within the cars.

5.0
Communications demonstrate different types of safety technology within the cars, aimed at making
the user feel safe.
 32

6.0
Nissan’s customer service scores (The Customer Service Scoreboard, 2015)