BRANDING A VEHICLE FOR COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE Richard Gilbert,

BRANDING A VEHICLE FOR COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE Richard Gilbert, Ph.D., H.E., OIA American University of Health Science

Brands are all about trust … The reason consumers flock to some brands and ignore others is that behind the brand stands an unspoken promise of value. That is why brands are becoming even more important drivers of growth.

Brand is an experience A brand is essentially a container for a custumer’s complete experience with the offer and the company. (Sergio Zyman)

What is a Brand? Attributes Benefits Values Culture User Personality

The Brand as an Open System. .Scope .Attributes .Uses .Quality/ Value .Functional Benefits Organization’s associations Personality Symbols Origin User Imagery Relationships with customers Self-expressive benefits Emotional benefits (Core) Offer (Tangible Products & Services) Codes/Tone Competition Skills Name Corporation Economy … Chanels, contacts … Tribes Cultures Groups …

This Brand System interacts AS ... 1) .. A SOCIO-ECONOMIC AGENT 2) .. A CORPORATE ASSET 3) .. A STRATEGIC MARKETING TOOL 4) .. A COMMUNICATION & SELLING AGENT

THE BRAND AS A SOCIO-ECONOMIC AGENT PART OF EACH INDIVIDUAL’S AND SOCIETAL GROUPS ’ SET OF REFERENCES A POWERFUL SOCIAL DRIVER A GLOBAL CEMENT A VALUE ADDING ECONOMIC AGENT

Brand Strategic Role Brand Equity Cash flow booster Consumer Response Booster

THE BRAND AS A CORPORATE ASSET A PROTECTED PROPERTY (owner's right to use) BOOK VALUE, GOODWILL. - ASSET that can be sold and bought MARKETING « NON TANGIBLE » ASSET precisely measurable and valuable (when brand is on sale) : STRENGTH , LEADERSHIP & EQUITY, ie capacity to justify price.

Y&R ’s « Brandasset Valuator » PowerGrid

Building Brand Equity Brand Equity (Name & Symbol) Value To Customer Info Processing Confidence in Buying Use Satisfaction Value To Firm Helps Programs Brand Loyalty Prices Brand Extensions Trade Leverage Competitive Advantage Name Awareness Perceived Quality Brand Associations Other Brand Assets Brand Loyalty Preference

THE BRAND AS A COMMUNICATION & SELLING AGENT * A RELATIONSHIP ACTOR/BUILDER * AN INFLUENCER * IT GIVES MEANINGS TO PRODUCTS/SERVICES ... * ... AND A CREATOR OF « NEW » WORLDS

A modern brand is A « persona » that overlays and includes the physical products/services the sum of fundamental values and attributes ascribed to it by people the entity that the consumers construct from the products’ meanings, symbols and images that they perceive as defining the brand.

From Traditional to Experiential Branding From Brands as identifiers Names, logos, slogans build awareness and image TO Brands as experience providers Names, logos, slogans, events, customer contacts which build sensory, affective, creative relations and ways of being (lifestyles) with the brands

Implications on Higher Education

New Demands on Higher Education Changing landscape of competition in HE Two university models: Do-it-All versus Do-it Different & Well Branding as a vehicle for competitive niche marketing.

THE CHANGING LANDSCAPE OF COMPETITION IN HIGHER EDUCATION (many countries) BEFORE: HE SECTOR nationally organised & regulated Funding centralized Competition limited & structured: e.g. polytechnics versus universities National (do-it-all) model for the university sector vis-à-vis job spec., pay scales, nominal standards, pension schemes, balance teaching/research

THE CHANGING LANDSCAPE OF COMPETITION IN HIGHER EDUCATION EMERGING (DIRECTION) Competition increasing National (new universities), Europe, Anglophone international (USA, Canada, Australia, …India?) Pressures towards diversification of funding regimes Competition within many countries less structured/less limited: e.g. new universities, RAE, Russell Group, internationalization of Oxbridge & LSE, Bifurcation between teaching & research National models under pressure (pay differentials, limited term teaching contracts, international headhunting, overseas students

THE CHANGING LANDSCAPE OF COMPETITION IN HIGHER EDUCATION CHARACTERIZATION: Place versus space: plight of cities in a global economy Place bound cities can’t move and follow mobile capital IMPERATIVE: To divert capital flows through particular cities To embed economic activity To develop economic activity less vulnerable to the vagaries of capital flight

CHANGING COMPETITION IN HIGHER EDUCATION Implications for urban economic strategy? Higher value-added activities less vulnerable Headquarter & R&D functions less prone to relocation LESSON: Do not produce high-volume, low value products. Go for higher value, lower volume knowledge intensive, products.

CHANGING COMPETITION IN HIGHER EDUCATION Implications for urban economic strategy? Importance of place-branding and place-marketing – image /liveability Imperative: Need to attract mobile, metropolitan middle classes Importance of good living environment, good food, good schools, liberal metropolitan activities and values

CHANGING COMPETITION IN HIGHER EDUCATION HOW DOES THIS APPLY TO UNIVERSITIES? Place-bound communities (like cities) Need to divert capital & embed economic activity

CHANGING COMPETITION IN HIGHER EDUCATION What kinds of capital? HUMAN CAPITAL: Better undergraduate students Better post-graduate students More international students Better academic staff

CHANGING COMPETITION IN HIGHER EDUCATION What kinds of capital? FINANCE CAPITAL Capital investment (block funding, private sector) Discretionary research funding (research councils) Ancillary revenue streams Short courses, Commercial management of estates Commercial management of other assets [merchandising?] IPR/patenting/commercialisation of research Private benefactors (alumni schemes etc)

CHANGING COMPETITION IN HIGHER EDUCATION Key strategic problem: How to divert flows and attract these different forms of capital? Solution SENSE OF PLACE /COMMUNITY (PLACE-MARKETING, IMAGE, LIVEABILITY, AUTHENTICITY) HIGHER VALUE-ADDED NICHE PRODUCT, LESS VULNERABLE TO COMPETITIVE PRESSURES. Do something other universities don’t and preferably can not do. Do-it-Different and Do-it-Well

CAMPUS MICRO-ECONOMY AS NODAL LEVER FOR ACCESSING WIDER NATIONAL & GLOBAL CAPITAL FLOWS CAMPUS ECONOMY & COMMUNITY CURRICULUM RESEARCH LOCATION & LANDSCAPE BRAND FINANCE CAPITAL Capital investment Research funding Benefactors Ancillary revenue streams HUMAN CAPITAL World class staff Students

TWO MODELS: DO-It-ALL or DO-it-Different and Do-it-Well The traditional model: Do-it-All Universities ‘Renaissance man’ Enlightenment universalism Shared perception of a ‘proper university’: Full suite of science and humanities departments Commitment to uneconomic, high prestige subjects (philosophy, classics , chemistry) Medical school Highly centralised regulation and financing From polytechnics to new universities: A rush to join the high table

DO-It-ALL or DO-it-Different and Do-it-Well The traditional model: Do-it-All Universities ACHIEVEMENTS: “ British Education” as international brand/benchmark Standardized level of provision and quality

DO-it-Different & Do-it-Well American universities never like this. Expansion of mass higher education + globalizing competition brings new pressures for market differentiation

Do-it-Different & Do-it-Well Small – always struggled to ‘do it all’ Traded on difference (e.g. Agricultural vs. Business)

Do-it-Different & Do-it-Well Vulnerability: Small campus university, rural location. Too small to compete head-to-head Lacks large urban ‘home’ market Increasing competition from new universities Lacks access to exciting metropolitan life DANGER: Being pushed down, pushed mainstream

Do-it-Different & Do-it-Well Opportunity: Already primed by history & tradition + location for Do-it-Different & Well Possibility of creating a market niche for a higher value, low volume, and more locally embedded product. Possibility of deciding how and against which institutions to compete (or better still side-step competition) RESPONSE: Aggressive & concerted niche marketing and lateral competition

BRANDING: A VEHICLE FOR COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE Framework tying together: Place-marketing & liveability Higher value added product Specifically: Research Teaching Physical infrastructure and operations Sense of place & community

A= Interdisciplinary research focus B= Interdisciplinary focus on teaching, including innovative links with NGOs and industry. C= Liveability and ‘sense of place’ (e.g. cinema, cafes, live music, music festivals, quality of retail outlets, second hand bookshop etc) D = Architecture, localisation of food, energy, and material inputs BRANDING: A VEHICLE FOR COMPETITION ADVANTAGE

BRANDING: A VEHICLE FOR COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE Interdisciplinary research:

BRANDING: A VEHICLE FOR COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE Interdisciplinary research: Teaching: Collegiality, learning culture, participation, engagement

Campus community and social life Liveabilty – food culture, book shops, cinema, small bars, deli., farmers market, Economy – Keep the money on campus

Campus community and social life Economy – Keep the money on campus: short courses, training

Thank You