Ingredient Branding of Industrial Goods

section muging of Industrial Goods A case machinery of machinedinal unequivocal different self-propelling suppliers Waldemar Pfoertsch1 / Johannes Rid2 / Christian Linder3 Abstract This paper concerns gene mark more specifically, comp integritynt reproaching for industrial goods. Although search in division s caring has been quite intensive in the argona of fast unintellectual consumer goods, watchably less research has been autoried out for industrial goods. In this paper, the authors yield insight into whether flourishing atom markinging git be groundworkalisered to industries whither it has non been a unwashed phenomenon self-propelled suppliers.Two major companies in the automotive manufacture argon analyzed in this paper Autoliv, a major fake in car- preventive supplies and equipment equal do-nothing belts and airbags, and Bosch, manufacturing businesss of a large variety of car components, like diesel and gasoline injection systems, braking c omponents (e. g. ABS and ESP), and starting motors and alternators. The findings include fantastic potential for B2B companies in the field of chemical element disfigurementing. Car suppliers, for instance, fox r atomic number 18ly apply the option of grimeing their components at the finished result.The authors give a historical perspective, show e. g. that ABS braking system, invented by German supplier Bosch would piddle been a perfect candidate for stationing to the net customer. In the purchasing decisiveness of potential car buyers, the fixings ABS, provided by a bullocky ingredient manufacturing business (e. g. Bosch) could squander led to a preference of buying a specific car, and in the end, added to the suppliers news report and revenue. 1. supplement the fire tarnish We now live in a world whither consumers receive thousands of impressions and messages either day.Ever change magnitude competition recognizes it more difficult for a message to overhaul the audience and fag group, with the consequence that it takes harder for a consumer to differentiate amidst filths. Furthermore, as competitive advantages and transitions are copied at a higher speed, convergences and redevelopments be get along more alike. In this kind of environment, it is heavy for producers to find a military post for their product or service in order to focus and crystalise the attri just nowes that make their product unique to the customer.In response to this current business environment, research and best practice show that more and more pie-eyeds throw off come to the veridicalization that one of their closely valuable as get dresseds is the nock name associated with their products or services. (Keller,2003, Pfoertsch/Mueller, 2006). Producers understand that powerful instigants are beneficial to the fraternity Brands, therefore, are unfeigned assets and, like other forms of asset, they can appreciate considerably as a result of careful management and outgrowth. (Blackett, in Murphy, 1989).Kotler/Pfoetsch (2006) throw proved that B2B stationing offers strong competitive advantages, by implementing a holistic filth glide path companies can accelerate and increase their overall mastery compared to companies that do non go the path of B2B bluring. Brands should be seen in a holistic modality where all activities of a companionship should be integrated to get the ut close to advantage (Kotler/Pfoertsch, 2006). Strategic success force be achieved by supplement the patsy, because the grime is one of the almost strategic and worthy assets a firm declares.Possibilities to leverage the tell on include line extensions, stretching the fool vertically, trade name extensions, and co- cross outing (Pfoertsch/Schmid, 2005). Co- crisscrossing means that two makes form an alliance in one or several theaters that lead to a new product mark offed with some(prenominal) brands. Ingredient stigmatisation, on t he other hand, is a brand that is solely used as a component of a branded article (Riezebos, 2003). check to Norris (1992), there are two relevant criterias that must(prenominal) be execute for ingredient stigmatisation. First, the component can that be bought and consumed by consumers as a part of the branded article.Second, the brand name of the component is and used for much(prenominal) an ingredient (and not for normal branded articles as well). 2. Can you ingredient brand where mark is not a popular phenomenon? The reason companies start to co-operate is due to technological and psychological changes of the business environment. there are two reasons why this occurs (Uggla, 2000) First, technology and new distribution patterns unmannerly up new possibilities for cooperation where brand extension and brand alliances become more interesting from a strategic point of view.Second, consumers look for risk reduction, and brand extension and brand alliances efficacy be th e proper(ip) strategies to reduce consumer risk. Strategies to fit the demands of a changing world are co- mark and ingredient branding. There are some good examples of ingredient branding of durable goods on the market, such as Shimano as a component supplier of cycles, and Intel in the reckoner application. Intel, for instance, positioned itself to be the heart and soul of personal computers.The outline was to create a brand, and it subject areaed for PCs (Karolefski, 2001). In other industries that produce industrial goods, like the car industry, ingredient branding has not been a harsh schema. The primary question that guides us through this paper is Is it realizable for industrial goods industry like the automotive industry to adopt an ingredient brand when ingredient branding is not a common phenomenon? 3. Analyzing with real world data In this paper, real world data from two different companies were collected and compared.A qualitative flack was chosen, which enab les us to analyze, understand and interpret the situation rather than giving exchangeable results. The aim was to understand the system of ingredient branding as a whole. Research was mainly seatd on collecting data through interviews with close makers (respondent interviews), which implies that the interviews are of a strategic nature. A case study approach gives the possibility of getting deeper insight into a certain task or situation and to ascertain how interviewees perceive their situations.The presented cases are Bosch and Autoliv, two companies representing the car SUPPLIER manufacturing industries. Since this study aims to help understand why and under what stack companies claim an ingredient brand strategy, the case study approach was seen as the most appropriate. The Robert Bosch GmbH, Stuttgart offers a wide range of products to the market, both as a supplier to different kinds of manufactures, as well as a producer of consumer goods. It had 2007 a turnover of 46, 7 billion and employs over 271,000 people in about 50 countries.Today, 70% of Bosch turnover is from the car industry it is a innovator in the automotive supplier industry, with products that include ABS and ESP, injection systems, brakes, starter motors and alternators. another(prenominal) major car supplier, Autoliv Inc. is headquartered in Stockholm, Sweden, the result of a merger mingled with Autoliv of Sweden, founded in 1953, and the American smart set Automotive Safety returnion, started in 1997. Autoliv of Sweden was the armorer of seat belts, which initiative came onto the market in 1956, and start outed the first airbag for cars in 1980.Autoliv has about 30% market share in its segment on a worldwide basis, and employs about 6,000 people, with sales in 2004 of $ 5 billion. 4. Leveraging the brand for industrial goods If a play along realizes that it cannot capitalize on its own brand alone, it might choose to capitalize on another brand. This implies that company A destinys to borrow standoff of a brand from company B. It follows that company B in turn must as well as want to have something from A, since B must alike benefit from its railroad tie with A.Generally speaking, three prerequisites must be fulfilled before company A and B join 1) Both companies must have sufficient brand fairness, otherwise they would not be able to borrow out any associations (Keller, 2003) 2) company A and B should have a common basis of associations, pith that A and Bs identicalness should have a certain arcdegree of fit (Riezebos, 2003) and 3) that company A should be able to offer associations which B does not have and vice versa (Park/Jun/Shocker, 1996). (1) Sufficient brand candor The first prerequisite in terms of brand identity is that both brands have ufficiently strong and unique associations that both of the brands (ingredient and host brand) separately have lavish brand equity (Keller, 2003, p. 362). In this study, the question is whether Autoliv and Bosch each offer nice brand equity so that they could be potentially interesting pardners for a host brand seeking to leverage its brand identity. The brand equity of Bosch can be rated as high. Bosch has in(predicate)ly leveraged its own brand with brand extensions and line extensions. Bosch, in its beginnings, was a producer of car parts like starting motors and alternators.Over time, Bosch began to capitalize and leverage its own brand by extending their product range, including the development and production of power tools, mobile telephones, security systems, and industrial backpacking machines. The other company in this case study, the car safety producer Autoliv, is a well- cognize brand among B2B customers. Autoliv wants to work together with the best automotive companies in the field of car safety The identity of Autoliv is a company that always has the technical drawship in the area of car safety equipment like airbags and seat belts.Autoliv strives to al ways be the first with technical development in their area. (Mats Odman, Autoliv). (2) Common basis of associations The second prerequisite is that the companies working together should have a certain degree of similarity in their brand identity (Riezebos, 2003). According to Keller (2003), the logical fit (image and product) between the two brands is the most important requirement for a successful collaboration between two brands.That means a) that both companies brand identities (host and ingredient brand) should be in proportionateness with each other, and b) that the ingredient offers complementary brand associations. Main associations connected with Bosch are shade and innovation. Most car manufacturers have these associations as well, therefore, a common basis of associations does exist. Bosch representatives say that products from Bosch contribute key set to the brand such as a promise from Bosch about product caliber. Bosch products are also innovative in the car indust ry which is reflected in their slogan We confer innovation, e. . Bosch was first to introduce engine injection systems with 1600 bar military press (Stefan Seiberth, Bosch). On the negative side, Bosch has the problem of being a supplier to close every car manufacturer in the world, and these car manufacturers have wide different brand identities (e. g. the brand identity of BMW is totally different than that of Volkswagen). Autoliv can be more precise in common associations. Autoliv aims to develop projects with car manufacturers that are striving for the latest technology in car safety, most likely with car manufacturers in the premium segment.A logical fit exists here because Autoliv has the same aim of technical attractionship as the car manufacturers they choose to work together with. (3) Offering complementary associations Finally, cooperation between brands will all work if the render brand offers complementary associations, which the host brand does not have, and vice versa (Park/Jun/Shocker, 1996). The concept of brand identity system is central here (Aaker, 1996), and includes the following definition Brand identity is a unique set of brand associations that the brand strategist desires to create or maintain.These associations represent what the brand stands for (Aaker, 1996). Brand identity consists of twelve dimensions organized around four perspectives the brand-as-product (product scope, product attributes, quality/value, uses, users, country of origin), brand-as-organization (organizational attributes, local versus global), brand-as-person (brand personality, brand-customer relationships), and brand-as-symbol (visual imagery/metaphors and brand heritage). Though not all perspectives might be appropriate for every brand, it should help firms to consider different brand elements to be able to enrich and differentiate their brand identity.The brand identity good example is structured into nerve centre and extended identity. The pump iden tity is the timeless and central essence of the brand. Therefore, it will most likely remain constant while the brand is stretched to new markets and products. The extended identity consists of brand identity elements, which complete the heart identity, such as a slogan, sub-brands, and the brand personality (e. g. reliable, American, German engineering, friendly). pic realize 1 Aakers model for brand identity modified with results from the case studyTo be able to recognize and analyze what the case companies Bosch and Autoliv have to offer to their supplys (host brands) in terms of preferable attributes, the above figure beastlyd on Aakers (1996) model summarizes the most important advantages of the dated cases. The reader should note that this paper is pedestald on a study from the suppliers perspective ( attendant brand). Therefore, spill-over effects which the case companies might receive from the producer side are not examined. Bosch offers associations which the partne r brand possibly does not have.Attributes like German engineering, reliable and innovation could be easily used and benefited from by car manufacturer twist middle and lower-class cars. Autolivs contribution to collaboration is technical leadership. one could say that Autoliv is a premium brand in their field of competence, frankincense offering strong associations in quality. To summarize, we can conclude that brand equity is one of the most, if not the most, valuable assets a company has. The companys brand identity is the most important factor in creating or pushing the companys brand equity.Companys management should continuously try to leverage the brands identity. Our case companies Bosch and Autoliv prove that supplement is fully possible in the area of industrial goods 5. Fit between brands So far, the authors have analyzed whether the examined companies and the industrial goods sector could offer bountiful brand equity and possibilities to leverage. In other words, up until this part of the abbreviation, we have looked upon whether our case companies would be interesting partners for the producers in their industries, and if the case companies fulfill the prerequisites to make co-branding successful.Now lets look closer into the fit of brands and the field of brand association base. Image transfer What does theory say about the transferring act upon? Riezebos (2003) defines image transfer through the term deductive inference, which is the deduction of results/conclusions from brand images already in existence. Deductive inference is important when associations from one brand or entity is carried over to another brand/entity.For the transfer process, a etymon, which consumers must have certain associations with in terms of where it comes from, and a target (inductive inference, meaning that the associations load the image of the target) is wanted. In summary, image transfer is a corroboratory transfer from bloodline to target, and similarly a positive feedback from target to source (Riezebos, 2003). For transferring associations, it is both necessary that source and target have something in common (e. g. common brand name), and that the target evokes certain brand associations.Ingredient branding and co-branding are brand-stretching strategies based on image transfer. Critical success factors for image transfer are 1) the sources level of brand-added value, 2) how the products are related to each other (target and source should only to a minor degree differ from each other), 3) the target group similarity (Park, 1991), and 4) family resemblance (different packages sharing the same facings). Brand association base Simonin and Ruth (1998) stress the fit between brands (and between the products), which significantly affects the attitudes towards the alliance.Leading researchers agree that companies should integrate the brands they cooperate with within their overall brand architecture. The authors have used the brand as sociation base described by Uggla (2003) to examine the question of fit. The result can be seen in the figure downstairs where the association base model has been modified with the findings from the case studies. The association base is a relevant tool for this purpose to organize brand alliances and the brand structure from a leader brand perspective and intention.The association base describes how brands can be organized together. The model contains four different result components leader brand associations, partner brand associations, institutional associations and the customers brand image. In a cooperation of brands, the advantage for the leading brand is that it adds values and positive associations to the product. The partner brand gets access to the distributions channels leading to the end-consumer market. The collaboration between the leader brand and the partner will determine an association base.The customer will evaluate the perceived equity from the association base and shape a specific brand image (Uggla, 2001). Figure 2 Modified brand association base (Uggla, 2003) Bosch, as a car part producer with German quality and innovation as their base of associations, could definitely contribute to the car manufacturers base of associations as for Mercedes-Benz Enduring rage. Autoliv has valuable associations for a potential host brand in terms of car safety. On the other hand, Autoliv does not build brand value, Autoliv would be a weaker partner brand harmonize to the collaboration theory.The partner brand should help to expand the base of associations of the leader brand, and the partner brands core identity should lead into the direction the leader brand wants to go to, and the direction should be defined by the leader brand. The partner brand should also help to strengthen the base of associations while manner of speaking in exclusivity and differentiation. Once more, Bosch has proven to be a valuable partner when tested against this theory. Au toliv stands weaker in this respect because the company is not actively construct brand equity towards the final customer.To summarize, Uggla (2003) suggests that a less familiar leader brand should be connected to a strong partner brand with high brand familiarity. A lesser-known and/or unfamiliar car manufacturer (e. g. Asian car manufacturers who want to enter new markets outside Asia) victimization Bosch in-car equipment, for example, would be a positive example of this guideline. available and ruttish incentives for brand collaboration A way of defining the motives for collaboration is given by Uggla (2001). He suggests a model based on a matrix, which is dual-lane into horny and useful benefits, to be able to understand why brands hire in co-operation.The model is based upon Aakers theory about the brands identity, but focuses on how the components of the value proposition are shared and shared among partners. The model divides the brands engaged in co-operation to a le ader brand and (one or more) partner brand(s). The leader brand can choose to develop own associations or choose to capitalize on other brands associations. The partner brands contribution should be to expand to the leader brands base of associations and add critical physical and/or emotional attributes.Two different incentives for collaboration are functional and emotional benefits (Uggla, 2001). An example for a functional alliance is Intel because Intel contributes with a product (the processor for a computer) for which they have core competence. With emotional incentives, the aim of the leader brand is to endorse reputation (Cooke, 2000), which is the aim to get a better image and/or quality association with the help of the partner brand. On the other hand, the partner brand can profit from the leader brands functional attributes. pic Figure 3 Applied incentive model from leader and partner brand perspectiveThe authors have modified this model in respect to the case analysis (se e Fig. 3). As mentioned above, a brand that wants to lend associations to another brand strong must have strong incentives that can be either functional or emotional. For car producers, working together with Bosch could gain core competence and expand the value proposition (e. g. Bosch as a technology leader in ESP, ABS and diesel technology). This is according to the theory (Uggla, 2003), which says that collaboration based on functional incentives implies that the one brand contributes with core competence.Bosch would also profit from brand collaboration through shared costs in R&D. Bosch might expand the legitimate territory for their products if the car manufactures allow Bosch to brand their ingredients. Accentuating emotional attributes are also a possibility for Bosch It is our strategy to position Bosch as an innovative, international, modern company (Stefan Seiberth, Bosch). A car producer might also want to work together with Autoliv based on functional motives because Aut oliv has core competency and is a leading manufacturer of car safety equipment (intelligent seat belts, irbags, etc. ). The focus for Autoliv is choosing partners who have a commitment to actively work with the development of safety in cars. As it is the case with Bosch, Autoliv would gain from collaborations by sharing costs for R&D. Emotional incentives are also important for the company and play a certain role in choosing partners for a new project, according to Autoliv. The image of the car manufacturer is important therefore, the company strives to share development with car manufacturers in the premium segment (Mats Odman, Autoliv).To summarize, according to the incentive model, both Bosch and Autoliv offer sufficient incentives, both from partner brand as well as from the leader brand perspective. 6. Results Transferring successful ingredient branding to the car industry The authors have taken into account the findings from the subaltern sources of Moon (2002), Aaker (1996), and Keller (2003), all of which present a deeper analysis of ingredient branding strategies, and have compared these findings with the information from the car suppliers Bosch and Autoliv.We first want to emphasize that successful companies invest in and put the brand first. Moreover, the most effective strategy for a company is to become a brand-driven organization (Kotler/Pfoertsch, 2006). These companies not only differentiate themselves through their technology, but also through their level of service and through all employees working effectively towards the success of the brand, and thus, the company. In addition, ingredient branding is a form of multi-stage branding (Baumgarth, 2001). Therefore, the whole value chain, from (ingredient) producer to the final customer, needs to be considered.In the case of Bosch or Autoliv, the retailer, the producer of the final good, and the final customer need to be connected. This implies that all downstream markets need to be part of the s trategy. Hillyer/Tikoo proved that consumers are cognitive misers (Hillyer/Tikoo, 1995). This means that consumers obviously trust that a well-known manufacturer would not allow itself to collaborate with a low quality supplier. This has been proven with the success of Intel. Customers simply transferred the decision making to the computer manufacturers by trusting that the manufacturers have chosen the flop microprocessor supplier, Intel.In terms of transferring these findings to the car industry, Autoliv could step into the shoes of Intel. Autoliv could act as a retrieval cue (Hillyer/Tikoo, 1995) for potential car buyers, where the car buyer trusts the car manufacturer to have picked a trustworthy brand in the area of car safety. Also, for a successful ingredient branding strategy, it is crucial that the right opportunity in time be identified. If we look at the success of Intel, oftentimes regarded as one of the most successful ingredient branders, one aspect that is differe nt between Intel and the automotive industry is the time of the ingredient branding.The computer industry matured during an era when computer sales were powerfully on the rise accompanied by a period of increasing sensitivity to the value of branding (Cook, 2003). The car industry is already mature, therefore, the timing is not optimal for an ingredient brand strategy It would be undischarged to replicate Intels success in the automotive industry, but its 80 years too late to do it (Klaus Deller, Bosch Group, in Cook, 2003). The authors want to stress though, that even the car industry will offer windows of opportunities, curiously when supplier come up with decisive inventions and innovations.Another factor to consider is that In contrast to the situation like Intel, where producers were actively looking for co-operations, car manufacturers often want to control their brand image and are currently not actively seeking brand collaboration with supplier. This fact makes the ingred ient branding strategy even more complicated to implement. A solution to this would be for suppliers like Autoliv and Bosch to adopt a rob strategy by creating consumer demand.The pull principle is also the basic underlying concept that is best conform to for ingredient branding, meaning that the ingredient manufacturer directly addresses the final customer (Pfoertsch/Schmid, 2005). Bosch is, through its automotive advertising campaigns in 2006 and 2007, on its way to utilizing such a strategy. Building strong association could even be enforced into the car industry. The OEMs in the car industry could effectively advertise their associations, which in the case of Bosch could be braking safety (ABS, ESP), and passenger safety (Airbags), in the case of Autoliv.The authors conclude that it is entirely possible for auto suppliers to establish an ingredient branding strategy. Bosch and Autoliv proved to have substantial possibilities for ingredient branding. This conclusion can be dr awn through congruence of findings of the empirical research with theory. It is vital to the success of the strategy, though, that the whole organization not only strives for the same objective, but also consistently delivers the brand promise. Only with this quality thinking in the organization, can an ingredient succeed in the final industrial good.And not to forget it is time-consuming to create and establish a brand. Therefore, the overall strategy needs to be a long-term engagement in the trade and branding investment. 7. Suggestions for future research This paper has examined the question of ingredient branding as a viable strategy for producers of industrial goods. In particular, we tested automotive suppliers Autoliv and Bosch (Norris, 1992 Keller, 2003 Riezebos, 2003). Since the scope of this paper could only cover the basics of this question, it would be interesting to go deeper into other aspects.A question for further research would be to find out how a model of the appropriateness of ingredient branding could be derived. Further research could cover even more industry segments in B2B marketing, thereby giving deeper insights into why certain industries have seen companies with successful ingredient branding, while others have not. Additionally, to discuss questions about an implementation strategy for ingredient branding needs more insight and research, including a possible guideline for companies that have decided to brand its ingredient.Examples from other industries could also be examined since the implementation process is very complex and many aspects need to be considered. Literature Aaker, D. A. , and Joachimsthaler, E. , Brand Leadership, The Fress Press, New York, 2000 Aaker, D. A. , and Keller, K. L. , Consumer Evaluations of Brand Extensions, ledger of Marketing, 54, January 1990, pp. 27-41 Aaker, D. A. , Building Strong Brands, The Free Press, New York, 1996 Baumgarth, C. , Ingredient Branding. Begriff und theoretische Begrundung, in Esch, F. -R. modern Markenfuhrung, Wiesbaden 2001, p. 17-343 Blackett, T and Boad, B Co-branding, the Science Of Alliance, Macmillan trading, Interbrand, England, 1999 Blackett, T. , The Nature of Brands, in Murphy, John, Brand Valuation, Hutchinson line of credit Books, 1989, pp. 1-11. Cook, B. , Can Bosch spark its OEM brand? , www. brandchannel. com, 2003 Cooke, S. , and Ryan, P. , Brand Alliances From Reputation Endorsement to collaborationism on Core Competencies, Irish Marketing Review, Vol. 13, 2000, p. 36-41 Hillyer, C. , and Tikoo, S. , Effect of Cobranding on Consumer Product Evaluations, Advances in Consumer Research, Volume 22, 1995 Kapferer, J. -N. Reinventing the Brand, Kogan Page, London, 2001 Kapferer, J. -N. , Strategic Brand perplexity, Kogan Page, London, 1992 Karolefski, John, Intel Outside, www. brandchannel. com, 2001 Keller, K. L. , Conceptualizing, Measuring, and Managing Customer-Based Brand Equity, diary of Marketing, January 1993, pp. 1-29 Kell er, K. L. , Strategic Brand Management building, measuring, and managing brand equity, prentice-Hall international (UK) Limited, London, 1998 Keller, K. L. , Strategic Brand Management building, measuring, and managing brand equity, Prentice-Hall foreign (UK) Limited, London, second edition, 2003 Kotler, P. et al. , Principles of Marketing, Prentice Hall Europe, 1996 Kotler, P. , and Pfoertsch, W. , B2B Brand Management, Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg 2006 McCarthy, M. S. , and Norris, D. G. , Improving Competitive Position employ Branded Ingredients, ledger of Product & Brand Management, Vol. 8, Nr. 4, 1999, pp. 267-285 Moon, Y. , Inside Intel Inside, Harvard Business Review, October 15, 2002 Norris, Donald G. , Ingredient Branding A Strategy Option with Multiple Beneficiaries, The ledger of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 9, No. 3, 1992 Park, C. W. , Jun, S.Y. , and Shocker, A. D. , Composite Brand Alliances An Investigation of Extension and Feedback Effects, Journal of Marketing Rese arch, Vol. 33, 4, 1996, pp. 453-466 Pfoertsch, W. , and Schmid, M. , B2B-Markenmanagement Konzepte Methoden Fallbeispiele, Franz Vahlen, Munich, 2005 Pfoertsch, W. , and Mueller, J. Die Marke in der Marke Bedeutung und Macht des Ingredient Branding, Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg 2006 Riezebos, Rik, Brand Management A Theoretical and Practical Approach, Pearson Education Limited, 2003 Simonin, B. L. , and Ruth, J. A. Is the Company known by the Company it keeps? Assessing the Spillover Effects of Brand Alliances on Consumer Brand Attitudes, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 35, February 1998, pp. 30-42 Uggla, H. , The Brand Association Base A Model for strategically Leveraging Partner Brand Equity, Unpublished Paper, 2003 Uggla, Henrik, Managing the Brand-Association Base, Akademitryck AB, Edsbruk, 2000 Uggla, H. , composition av varumarken, Liber Ekonomi, Malmo, 2001 Uggla, H. , Varumarkesarkitektur strategi, teori och kritik, Liber Ekonomi, Malmo. 001 1 Waldemar Pfoertsch pr ofessor of Business Marketing CEIBS China Europe International Business domesticate Shanghai Hongfeng Road Shanghai 201206, China Tel +86(21) 28905662 emailprotected edu and Professor of International Business Pforzheim University Tiefenbronnerstrasse 65 75175 Pforzheim, Germany 2 Johannes Rid, National Sales Manager, Pirelli Tyre Nordic AB, Gustavslundsvagen 141, P. O. Box 14147, 16714 Bromma, Stockholm, Sweden,Tel +46. 8. 6220850, Fax +46. 8. 7550941, johannes. emailprotected et 3 Christian Linder Research Assistant Pforzheim Business School Pforzheim University Tiefenbronnerstrasse 65 75175 Pforzheim, Germany Tel +49 7231 28-6466, christian. emailprotected de Bosch Expand the legitimate territory Emotional incentives Functional incentives Bosch Expand value proposition, modify brand personality Bosch Engineering core com Autoliv Core competence in car petence safety Partner brand perspective Leader brand perspective Bosch Cost efficiency (R&D), laconic cut to awa reness and distribution. Autoliv Cost efficiency (R&D)Institutional Associations Image Transfer identity operator Transfer Customers image of the brand Leader Brand Associations e. g. Mercedes-Benz Enduring Passion pic*fgyzS? z? iO? i? i? i? hM8(emailprotectedzhuTCJOJ4QJ5J6emailprotectedzhuT5? 6? CJOJ7QJ8? ? J9emailprotectedzhuT5? CJ,OJ10QJ11J12aJ,mHsHemailprotectedzhuT6? OJ13QJ14J15emailprotectedzhuT0J6? OJ16QJ17UpicJ18emailprotectedzhuT5? CJ,OJ19QJ20J21aJ,emailprotectedzhuTCJ OJ22QJ23? J24aJ mHsH. emailprotectedzhuT5? CJ OJ25QJ26? Partner Brand Associations Bosch Innovation, quality Autoliv Safety Association base fit