Understanding andManaging the Brand SpaceA brand can be closely

associated with, or independent

from, a specific product or

service; it can focus on what the

product or service can do, or on

what it means. Together those

two dimensions define a brand

space, a conceptual tool for

better brand management.

Pierre Berthon, Morris B. Holbrook

and James M. Hulbert

any companies have made costly mistakes in managing their

brands. Arthur Andersen, Martha Stewart Living Omni-

media. Ford Motor Co. and Eirestone are but some of the

more infamous examples. Less dramatically, many firms have

faltered badly in their attempts to extend their brands by moving them

into different product categories, resulting in damage to the parent

brands.' The root cause of these kinds of missteps is, at least in part, the

lack of a timdamental understanding of brands and their changing nature.

Part of the problem is that brands have become increasingly difficult

to manage. As they have become more global, for instance, they have

come to characterize more than merely the relationship between manu-

facturers and customers. Tbeir influence now extends to employees, the

investment community, the media, suppliers, governments and even

competitors. The ineaning oi a brand is no longer tbe result of a dia-

logue between buyer and seller, but of a intiltilogtie. A company that

wishes to extend its brand must therefore negotiate that transition

among all the various parties involved. This process has become even

more difficult because the widespread availability of information over

the Internet and other media has weakened the influence that marketers

have over their own hrands.

To manage their brands effectively, companies must not only take a

much iiKM'e customer-centric view,- they must also have the appropriate

tools. To that end, we have developed a theoretical framework based on our

proposed concept of a brand space. Two dimensions define the brand

space: the degree of abstraction (whether the brand has become independ-

ent Irom its associated product) and tbe degree of enactment (whether the

brand focuses more on the meaning of a product or its functionality).

Companies that understand where their brands are in that space, and

where they need them to be, will be more successRii brand managers in an

environment of escalating competition and rapidly changing markets.

Pierre Berthon is a professor of marketing at Bentley College in Waltham,Massachusetts. Morris B. Holbrook is the W. T. Dillard Professor of Marketingand James M. Hulbert is the R.C. Kopf Professor of International Marketing atthe Columbia Business School in New York. They can be reached at pberthon@bentley.edu. mbh3@columbia.edu and jmh10@columbia.edu.

WINTER 2003 MIT SLOAN MANAGEMENT REVIEW 4 9

Companies have traditionally taken a minimalist view ofbrands as an effective means of identifying and differentiatingtheir products and services.^ In contrast, we favor the broaderview of a brand as a symbol around which a relationship andexperiences can evolve. Such a symbol both mediates and em-bodies — rather than merely denoting — the buyer-seller rela-tionship. As such, brands carry connotations and associationstliat are rich with meanings to customers, company managersand employees, and others. They have a life and meaning be-yond — and, to some extent, independent of— that intendedby their initiators.

A high-level approach to conceptualizing brands can be de-veloped on the basis of the three-worlds hypothesis of Karl R.Popper, which distinguishes between three different realms:physical objects, subjective experience and culture.' Using thatwork as a foundation, we propose the dimensions of abstractionand enactment, which we believe provide a broad and useful per-spective on the novel developments taking place in brandingtoday. We define abstraction as the process of moving from thephysical, tangible or concrete to the realm of thoughts, ideas orfeelings. The term enactment is drawn from the social psychologyliterature and refers to the process by which individuals createtheir environments.^ Here, we employ the term to denote thepurposeful act of creating or making, rather than the passiveprocess of sensing or receiving. An enacted brand, then, is one forwhich consumers themselves help construct the customer-braudrelationship and experience.

AbstractionOriginally, brands tlmctioned at a very low level of abstraction.They were simply signifiers of specific products and manufactur-ers. Over time, however, many manufacturers have attempted tostretch or extend their brands, iiiitially through the introductionof variations (color, flavor or size, for example) within the sameproduct category but later seeking to encompass new categoriesunder the same brand umbrella (Honda's move from motorbikesto automobiles, for example). The arguments in support of thatapproach were originally driven by the rising costs of establishingnew brands.'' But after many brand extensions failed and com-panies became aware of the approach's full risks and potentialcosts,** enthusiasm for them waned,'

Among manufacturers, brands have tended to be product-ori-ented, partly because such corporations typically have organiza-tional structures that are product-focused. Johnson & Johnson,for instance, has nearly 200 operathig companies for its numer-ous product brands: Band-Aid, Acuvue, Tylenol, Mylanta,Stayfree and so on. Nevertheless, some brands have clearly madethe jump to become product themes. A few have even becomevirtually product-independent, tending rather to embody an idea,concept or image, and functioning at a high level of abstraction.

Specific Group of ProductProduct Products Theme

Low Abstraction

Value,Concept or

Image

High Abstraction

The Virgin brand provides an example of a progressionalong this spectrum. Originally tied to the production of rockmusic recordings, the brand soon encompassed record shopsselling a wide range of popular music products. As the level ofabstraction grew, the Virgin brand became entirely uncoupledfrom its original product-category origins. Indeed, the com-pany recently sold its record business and branched out intoInternet services, financial services, mobile-phone services andother businesses. However, although the Virgin brand hasbecome independent from its product-category origins, it stillarticulates the abstracted characteristics of those origins -—namely, fun, hip and subversive. Virgin Atlantic, for example,has challenged the status quo of British Airways and olhertrans-Atlantic carriers, and Virgin Coia has taken on the well-entrenched Coca-Cola and Pepsi.

Other brands have progressed along this continuum of ab-straction yet remain primarily product-related. For example.Land Rover has successfully broadened the line of products cov-ered by its brand through its thematic accessories program. Firstlaunched in the United Kingdom and recently expanded inlo theUnited States, the program introduced a line of products includ-ing rugged outdoor clothes, shoes, car accessories and mountainbikes. In effect. Land Rover moved its brand along the abstract di-mension from a specific product to a group of them — whilekeeping the brand anchored by its core product. U.S. brewing andtobacco industries have used a similar strategy, as witnessed byMiller's Plank Road Brewery (Miller-owned brewers) and R.J.Reynolds' Moonlight Tobacco Co. (innovative tobacco brandingfor the style conscious}.'"

EnactmentThe second dimension, enactment, deals with functional per-formance: What a product can do versus what the brand meansto consumers or buyers. At tbe low-enactment extreme, a brandcan be very strongly linked to purely functional considerations.WD-40, the mechanical lubricant, is a case in point. At the high-enactment extreme, brands can be minimally tied to function butnonetheless carry tremendous meaning for the consumer. De-signer brands, such as Ralph Lauren or Calvin Klein, and retailbrands, like Harrods or Neiman Marcus, fall into that category.

PurelyFunctional-

Product

Low Enactment

GenericProduct

DifferentiatedProduct

High

EnactedProduct

Enactment

50 MIT 5L0AN MANAGEMENT REVIEW WINTER 2003

Our distinction between function and enactment is related to

tbe work of several other researchers, and we agree with those

who contend that brand concepts may in some cases oiler both

functionality (in(/enactment," In such cases, we focus primarily

on the relative importance between the two.'"

Understanding the Brand SpaceTogether tbe dimensions of abstraction and enactment lorm a

two-dimensional matrix called a brand space. (See "Tbe Brand

Space.") All brands may exhibit different shades o[ meaning in

different contexts; however, some cautious generalizations can

be made when discussing relatively homogeneous groups ot con-

sumers. I'here are four archetypal positions in the space:

The Reified-Functional Brand This low abstraction, function-

focused position is the typical starting point for a hrand man-

ager at a packaged-goods nianufacturer, and the rules of this

game are generally helieved to be well understood. Nevertheless,

many companies have made costly mistakes in managing such

brands, and as a result a number of them have been busy repair-

ing tbe subsequent damage.'"' Procter & Gamble, tor instance, has

reportedly adopted the marketing mantra of "Make It Simple" in

an effort to reduce confusion among its customers. A few years

ago, a Business Week article on P&C asked the pointed questions,

"Does the world really need 31 varieties of Head & Shoulders

shampoo? Or 52 versions of Crest?"''*

The advantage of a reified-functional position is that, because

the brand is closely tied to a product, marketers have a relatively

high degree of control. They can change a hrand by iiltering some

of the cbaracteristics of tbe product, sucb as its quality, design,

packaging and so on. Nonetbeless, tbere are disiidvantages. For

example, one attribute of brands is that they have traditionally

reduced a consumer's search costs, but today that function can he

performed by Web-based recommendation systems sucb as Fpin-

ions, Tbus, a highly fimctional brand is more susceptible to sub-

stitution by alternative products.'-''

The Reified-Enacted Brand This is the position that a fortunate few

product manufacturers such as Harley-Davidson, laguar, Ferrari

and Rolex have attained and that many others envy. The marketer

still retains a relatively high degree of control, but because the

brand is enacted, it can command a premium price, over and

above its functional worth.

The Ahstract-Functional Brand Increasing numbers of packaged-

goods companies have tried to attain this position. They wish to

move beyond reified brands and extend them to new categories

of products. But, as mentioned earlier, many of those leveraging

attempts have failed, leading companies to rethink their strate-

gies. Subsequently, one approach that has gained favor is the use

of an encompassing brand architecture that describes an explicit

set of relationships within a fomily of products. For example,

most consumers recogni/e the Walkman and Discman as the off-

spring of the parent brand Sony, The architecture helps minimize

confusion among the suhbrands in a market. By understanding

and capitalizing on such associations, companies can attain a sig-

nificantly higher batting jverage on brand extensions than has

traditionally been the case.

The functional aspect of an abstract-functional brand pro-

vides companies with some degree of control over the brand,

Fiowever, the logistics are more complex than in the reified case,

Beciuise the brand is abstracted over a number of product cate-

gories, poor quality in one product class can easily taint the rep-

utations of other offerings under the brand's umbrella. For ex-

ample, the spillover effect of the problems with the Ford Explorer

SUV is likely to have affected consumers' perception of Ford and

its suhbrands.

The Abstract-Enacted Brand This position might appear to offer

companies the greatest llexibility, hut abstract-enacted brands

have their own dniwhacks because consLimers feel greater "own-

ership," There is perhaps no better illustration of the hazards

posed by sucb a position than the experience of Coca-Cola when

it tried to launch "new Coke." "Don't mess with our Coke" be-

came the imiversal battle cry ot outraged loyal consumers, who

eventually forced the company lo back down in a clear demon-

stration of proprietorship.

Despite SLich difficulties, the world's most valuahle brands will

likely continue to occupy this quadrant of the brand space. That

said, companies that manage these hrands — such as IBVl, Disney

The Brand Space

The brand space has four quadrants that are defined by two

axes: The horizontal axis represents the degree to which a

brand is associated with a product, and the vertical axis de-

notes vuhether the brand focuses on functionality or meaning.

ENACTED(focus on what it

means rather thanwtiat it can do)

REIFIED(brand closely

identifiedwith product)

ABSTRACT(brand almostproduct-independent)

FUNCTIONAL(tccus on what itcan do rather than

what it means)

WINTER 2003 MIT SLOAN MANAGEMENT REViFW 51

Archetypal Brand Positions

The current locations of a number of well-known brands are shown in the

brand space, but these positions could — and probably w\\\ — change in

the future.

THE REIFIED-ENACTED BRAND• Harley-Davidson• Ben and terry's(brand is strongly linkedto the material product/service and is used togenerate meaning andidentity)

ENACTED(focus on what it

means rather thanwhat it can do)

REIFIED(brand closely

identifiedwith product)

THE REIFIED-FuNCTioNAL BRAND• WD40• Crest• Life Savers• Copperslip(brand is strongly linked tothe material product/service and is primarilyutilized for its functionality}

THE ABSTRACT-ENACTED BRAND• Tiffany• Virgin• Harrods(brand is independent ofproduct, or even groups ofproducts, and is used togenerate meaning andidentitv)

ABSTRACT(brand almostproduct-independent)

FUNCTIONAL(focus on what itcan do rather than

what it means)

THE ABSTRACT-FUNCTIONAL BRAND

independent of prodeven groups of products

and Sony —- must continue to nurture them witb great delicacy,remaining always sensitive and responsive to consumer concerns.The same is true for brands aspiring to the abstract-enacted posi-tion. For example, Harley-Davidson bas a fairly extensive licens-ing program, offering the manufacturers and sellers of noncom-peting products (clothing, accoutrements and even cafes) theopportunity to utilize the Harley brand name. If successful, thatmaneuver would move Harley from the reified-enacted classifica-tion into the abstract-enacted category. At the same time, it wouldgready complicate the company's brand management because ofthe wide range of offerings.

Each quadrant of the brand space is occupied by many oftoday's well-known brands. (See "Archetypal Brand Positions.")As noted earlier, however, the positions of those brands could —and probably will — change in the future.

Managing the Dynamics of the Brand SpaceBrands take their embodied meanings from a dialogue amongcustomers and various other stakeholders. Because language andmeaning are continuously evolving, what a brand signifies canchange over time. That has two important implications. First, themeaning of a brand can never be static. Second, a brand is neverunilaterally created; it always arises from the interactions of

stakeholders in a wide community with certain lin-guistic and cultural characteristics. Consequently,companies cannot so much manage a stable brandimage as negotiate an evolving one. Moreover, thenegotiation must involve the relevant internal andexternal stakeholders. Stakeholders' perceptions of abrand arise from information they receive about itfrom the company, other customers and third parties(brand communications} and from direct interac-tions they have with it (brand embodiments) — in-chiding myriad interactions among the product,consumers, employees, suppliers, intermediaries andother ihird parties. Some of these factors are directlyunder an organization's control (internal), whereasothers are not (external).

Negotiating the meaning of a hrand has becomemore complex because contemporary marketershave a variety of constituents. Brands have hecomemore visible internationally, and their role has ex-panded far beyond the interface between companyand customer, encompassing other parties such asthe investment community, governments, suppliersand employees around the world. All these stake-holders have differing motives and interests thatvastly compiicale brand management.

For every brand there is an existing pattern of as-sociations that constitutes its heritage. Any company

trying to evolve its brand must ensure that it retains some of thatheritage or else risk losing its existing customer hase. The com-pany has to find ways to interpret the brand's future in terms ofits past or reinterpret its past in terms of its future. Consider thebrilliant marketing maneuver of Guinness. When the companywanted to hroadeii its appeal to reach younger international con-sumers, it did so by evoking the brand's rich legacy. Specifically,Guinness helped set up more than 2,000 drinking establishmentsaround the world, all replicating the Irish pub experience.

Volvo's recent repositioning is another case in point. Tradi-tionally, the Volvo hrand was associated with safety, but duringthe 1990s tbe company placed a greater emphasis on sportinessand attractive appearance. It did so, however, by building on thebrand's traditional heritage, designing cars that combined speedand elegance wilh safety. This raises an important point. As addi-tional associations are created with a brand, the brand necessa-rily becomes more abstract.

Trying to migrate a brand from reified-functional to higherlevels of abstraction may not be the easiest way for companies tominimize the entry costs of future brand extensions and leverag-ing. British retailers such as Tesco and Sainsbury's have employeda different strategy, investing considerably in developing theircorporate hrands, which have enabled them to more easily ex-

5 2 MIT SLOAN MANAGEMENT REVIEW WINTER 2003

pand the range of products they sell from food items to con-sumer electronics and fmancial services.

Another reason for the growing potency of abstract brands isthe 21st century consumer's shrinking handwidth. Today's con-sumers are incomparably rich in the numbers and types ofproducts available to them, hut that abundance places limita-tions on the number of additional branding associations theycan store and access in their long-term memories. y\bstractbrands belp U) streamline the number ol brand associations thatpeople must process.

After a brand has been established, its managers may wish tomove it across the brand space along one of the migration paths.(See ''Dynamics of the Brand Space.") CMioices among the alter-natives depend greatly on managers' obiectives and strategies.Nonetheless, a few generalizations are in order. Eirst, any reposi-tioning must be considered very carefully because of the risk olalienating core users and the difflcnlty of altering positions inconsumers' minds. The days when a new brand manager felt treeto change a marketing campaign or ad agency at whim are longgone. Second, movement along a single dimension is usuallymuch easier to accomplish than diagonal moves, which are morecomplex and likely to confuse customers, not to mention sales-people and intermediaries. Third, reifying an abstract brand orfunctionalizing an enacted one is much easier than the reverse.

Consider [ell-0, which appears to be descending in the brandspace, hi the past, Jell-O could have been considered a reifled-enacted hrand, but today it may be moving toward becominga reified-fmictional brand, as Kraft Foods repositions it awayfrom the concept of "family fun" and toward the more heaith-conscious message of "no fat, no cholesterol." |ell-O's exampleshows how a brand's link with a physical product can remainstrong while the consumer's level of enactment changes.

Often societal changes cause brands to move in the brandspace. Eor the househonnd female of the ]95Us who had few ca-reer prospects, keeping house carried a very different connotationthan it does for either adult member of a busy two-earner house-hold in the 21st century. Thus, the brands of many householdproducts that previously played an important role in consumers'lives, whether they were detergents, shoe polishes or instant coifee,are becoming solely functional brands, rather than retaining theenacted aspects that their promoters might prefer. Examples hereinclude such brands as Kiwi Shoe Polish, Clorox and Tide.

Demographic changes are another factor. Such familiarbrands as Old Spice, Cadillac, Guinness and Club Med have allfaced the aging demographics of their customers with mixedresults. Perhaps one of the most dramatic changes is exemplifiedby the Web site oldspice.com, which Procter & Ciamble estab-lished after it acquired the brand. In a clear attempt to reach amuch yoLuiger audience, the Weh site invites visitors to "spice itup" with Red Zone. Similarly, such traditional beaciins of retail

Dynamics of the Brand Space

Brands can migrate across the brand space over various path-

v\/ays. Vertical or horizontal movement is typically easier to

accomplish than diagonal moves. Also, the paths are asym-

metric: Migration downward (or to the right) is generally less

difficult than movement upward (or to the left).

ENACTED(focus on what it

means rather thanwhat Jt can do)

REIFIED(brand closely

identifiedwith product)

ABSTRACT(brand almostproduct-independent]

FUNCTIONAL(focus on what itcan do rather than

what it means)

snccess as Marks & Spencer, Sears, Dillard's and Kmart have facedcomparable challenges as the expectations, aspirations and afflu-ence of their core markets have changed. 'I he introduction ofSears Brand Central was in response to the growing affluence andsophistication of the company's customers in Middle America,who were increasingly seeking designer labels such as PierreC ardin, Seiko, Cnisinart and V'idal Sassoon instead of tbe safe andfamiliar Sears brand.

Technology has also had an impact. Specifically, the Internet,search engines and intelligent software agents have given con-sumers alternative ways to access the kind of information tradi-tionally provided by brands.'*" A prospective buyer of a name-brand product can now tise the Web lo llnd a comparable itemthat is cheaper. 'I'hat ability of sophisticated customers to tradedown in this way is far greater lor hrands located in the lower leftquadrant of the brand space. But when brands become enactedand abstract, they are much more likely to weather the effects ofthe VVeb-hased information explosion that enahles consumers toaccess multiple sources of data about products.'''

But enacted and abstract brands face a different problem. Asbrand meanings and associations increasingly become the prod-ucts of an ongoing multilogue amt)ng consumers, employees, themedia, suppHers, competitors and other parties, they are movingbeyond the sole control oi the marketers. The more enacted andahstract the brand, the more pronounced the phenomenon.Thus, the ability of marketers to control the meaning of brandsthat have successfully become enacted and abstract is limited —

WINTER 200.3 MIT SLOAN MANAGEMFNT REVIEW 5 3

a paradox with a pleasing if somewiiat perverse symmetry in that

the reward lor success is the diminished control over the "prop-

erty" that has been created. Perhaps that is why many managers

now approach brand repositioning with great trepidation.

Brands in the 21st CenturyCertainly, to derive commercial benefit from attempts at mass cus-

tomization, a company must integrate a sophisticated understand-

ing of its customers witb its operations and overall way of doing

business. As that goal of achieving consumer insight and i iitimacy

has eluded traditional approaches, companies have begun to focus

on the wider realm of consumption experiences'^ and have turned

increasingly to ethnographic and other qualitative research to get a

better sense of tbe complete lives of tbeir consumers.

Traditional market research may become even less useful as

customer-brand relationships and consumer-constructed brand

meanings become more inscrutable. Companies that want to make

their brands more enacted will face a difficult dilemtna: Although

an organization is much more likely to attain competitive advan-

tages from highly enacted brands, such brands also require much

greater eftbrt and resources — for one thing, a deeper understand-

ing on the part of marketers — than do functional brands.

The concept of brand spaces can help companies understand

and manage their brands more effectively in a number of ways,

providing a framework, for instance, within which to consider tbe

potential impact of brand extensions. Specifically, as brands move

to tbe upper rigbt quadrant of tbe brand space, they can encom-

pass an inclusive set of products and services, but that transition

means that multiple stakeholders will then link additional mean-

ings and associations to tbe brand. Managers must therefore at-

tain a sophisticated understanding of their brands in order to ex-

tend them successfully witbout damaging them in the process.

Similarly, when companies are faced witb adverse events,

whether initiated by competitors or by other external factors, they

could consider repositioning tbeir brands in the space. Sometimes,

for instance, a company facing a crisis might be wise to empha-

size the heritage of its brand, even if that means moving from an

abstract to a reified position in the brand space. Ford and Firestone

might have mitigated some of tbe damage suffered by their brands

during the crises invoiving tires on tbe Explorer had they imple-

mented such a defensive maneuver. WTiether Martha Stewart

Living Omnimedia will adopt tbat strategy to distance itself from

its beleaguered founder remains to be seen, but tbe company has

reportedly been developing a new magazine called Everyday Food

— its first pubhcation without her name in the title.

Indeed, marketing in tbe 21st century will take place in a

world where so many of the rules have changed that traditional

approacbes may prove limited at best and, quite possibly, down-

right misleading. In such an environment, brand management

will become an increasingly complex and difficult undertaking.

REFERENCES

1. V. Swaminathan, R.J. Fox and S.K. Reddy. The Impact of BrandExtension Introduction on Choice," Journal of Marketing 65. no, 4(2001): M 5 .

2. N. Capon, P.R. Berthon, J.M, Hulbert and L.F. Pitt, '-Brand Custod-ian: Tbe New Role of Senior Management," European ManagementJoumal 19, no. 3 (2001): 215-227.

3. T. Ambler. "Do Brands Benefit Consumers?" International Journalof Advertising 16 (1997): 167-198; and P. Kotler, "Marketing Manage-ment" (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1996)-

4. P.R. Berthon, J.M Hulberl and L.F. Pitt, "Brand Management Prog-nostications," Sloan Management Review (winter 1999): 53-65.

5. K.R. Popper, "Knowledge and the Body-Mind Problem: In Defenseof Interaction." ed. M.A. Nottumo (London: Routledge. 1994).

6. K.E, Weick. "The Social Psyciiology of Organizing" (Reading, Mass-achusetts: Addison Wesley, 1979).

7. E. Tauber, "Brand Leveraging: Strategies for Growth in a Cost-Control World." Journal of Advertising Research 28 (August-September1988): 26-30; and D.A. Aaker, "Managing Brand Equity; Capitalizing onthe Vaiue of the Brand Name" (New York: Free Press, 1996).

8. S.K. Reddy, S.L. Holak and S. Bhat, "To Extend or Not To Extend:Sucoess Determinants of Line Extensions," Journal of MarketingResearch 31 (May 1994): 243-262.

9. "Software s Holy Grail: No-Fuss Choking Is What Consumers NeedMost," Business Week, June 24, 1996. 50-53.

10. R. Tomkins, "The Giant Who Lurks Behind a Smokescreen,"Financial Times, Feb. 3, 1997, 14,

11. J.A, Howard and J. Sheth, 'The Theory of Buyer Behavior" (NewYork: John Wiley S Sons. 1969): M.B. Holbrook and E.C, Hirschman,"The Experiential Aspects of Consumption: Consumer Fantasies, Feel-ings and Fun," Journal of Consumer Research 9 (September 1982):132-140; and A, Chaudhuri and M.B, Holbrook, "The Chain of EffeotsFrom Brand Trust and Brand Affeot to Brand Performance: The Roleof Brand Loyalty," Journal of Marketing 65 (April 2001): 81-93,

12. M. Addis and M,B, Holbrook, "On the Conceptual Link BetweenMass Customisation and Experiential Consumption: An Explosion ofSubjectivity," Journal of Consumer Behaviour 1 (June 2001): 50-66.

13. Berthon, "Brand Management'' (winter 1999),

14. "Make It Simple, That's P&G's New Marketing Mantra —And It'sSpreading," BusinessWeek, Sept, 9, 1996, 56-61,

15. Berthon, "Brand Management" (winter 1999).

16. P,R, Berthon, L,R Pitt and R,T Watson, "The World Wide Web asan Advertising Medium: Towards an Understanding of Conversion Effi-ciency," Journal of Advertising Research 36 (January-February 1996):43-53; and Berthon. "Brand Management" (winter 1999),

17. P.R. Berthon, J.M Hulbert and M.B. Holbrook, "Beyond Market Ori-entation: A Conceptualization of Market Evolution," Journal of Interac-tive Marketing 14 (summer 2000); 50-66.

18. M.B, Holbrook and E,C, Hirsohman, "The Experiential Aspects ofConsumption; Consumer Fantasies, Feelings and Fun," Journal ofConsumer Research 9 (September 1982): 132-140; J,B, Pine II andJ,H, Gilmore, "The Experience Economy: Work Is Theatre and EveryBusiness a Stage" (Boston; Harvard Business Sohooi Publishing,1999); and B, Schmitt, 'Experiential Marketing: How To Get Cus-tomers to Sense, Feel, Think, Act, and Relate to Your Company andBrands" (New York; Free Press, 1999),

Reprint 4426Copyright © Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2003. All rights reserved.

54 MIT SLOAN MANAGEMENT REVIEW WINTER 2003