8th Global Conference on Business & Economics
ISBN : 978-0-9742114-5-9
8th Global Conference on Business & Economics
Sponsored by: Association for Business & Economics Research
International Journal of Business & Economics
University of Florence, Florence, Italy
October 18-19, 2008
Florence, Italy
Retail innovation across retail brands and product brands
Gaetano Aiello
Full Professor
Department of Business and Management – University of Florence
Via delle Pandette, 9 - 50127 Florence - Italy
gaetano.aiello@unifi.it
tel. +39055/4374726
Raffaele Donvito
Assistant Professor
Department of Business and Management – University of Florence
Via delle Pandette, 9 - 50127 Florence - Italy
raffaele.donvito@unifi.it
tel. +39055/4374726
October 18-19th, 2008
Florence, Italy
1
8th Global Conference on Business & Economics
ISBN : 978-0-9742114-5-9
Retail Innovation Across Retail Brands and Product Brands
ABSTRACT
The focus of this paper is to analyse the relationships between brand strategies, formats, and
assortment innovation processes as regards retailers.
The first part of this work takes into account the concepts of “product brand” and “retail brand.”
Traditionally, the former refers to the brand linked to a specific product-service unit, while the
latter is the brand through which retailers sell their assortment (which may be made up of one or
more product brands). The authors emphasize that the contemporary concept of brand could be
defined on a more general level as this traditional distinction fades.
Based on this perspective, the second part of the paper analyses the possible set of interactions
and integrations between retail and product brands, identifying the framework of the “vertical
brand,” that is, a brand directly perceived by consumers as both a retail and product brand.
The third part of the paper considers and explores in depth vertical brand innovation patterns
starting at the retailing stage. In particular, the authors attempt to underscore how retail
innovation does not necessarily follow hierarchical patterns, but rather (under specific
conditions) seems to assume a circular path.
Finally, the paper empirically analyses a set of international retailers. The method used is
founded on qualitative secondary research and is mainly based on business databases, firm
reports, and investor reports. This empirical section seeks to offer a first examination of the
reliability of the vertical brand concept and to test the circular retail innovation patterns found in
the set retailers analysed in this study.
Keywords: retailing, retail brand, vertical brand, retail innovation, secondary data research
October 18-19th, 2008
Florence, Italy
2
8th Global Conference on Business & Economics
ISBN : 978-0-9742114-5-9
1. THE FRONTIERS OF THE BRAND CONCEPT
In order to analyse the convergence process of the conceptual categories of “product brand” and
“retail brand,” it is useful to consider the general characteristics of the concept of “brand” as it
has evolved in modern times. In particular, the brand - which at the abstract level is constructed
as the recipient and point of confluence of the variations of product brand and retail brand - will
be examined in regards to three specific areas: a) the basic components of the brand, b) the
concept of brand personality and the brand’s relational dimension, and c) the concept of brand
experience.
The basic components of the brand. Much of the established literature holds that the brand
represents a firm’s memory and effectively embodies its history (Deichmann, 1991; Collesei,
2000). At the same time, however, the brand is a device for customers to express their own
individuality and attitudes, as well as for manifesting the needs they are experiencing (Keegan,
Moriarty, Duncan 1992). According to Zara (1997), the brand is composed of three fundamental
components: a) the identificational component (signs of recognition); b) the perceptual
component (cognitive associations and perceptions) (Peter, Olson, 1987); and c) the trust
component (confirmation of expectations). Furthermore, the reinforcement of the brand’s
strategic dimension (Aaker, 1997; Aaker and Joachimsthaler, 2003), and of its impact on
perceptions and purchasing intentions, also springs from the fact that the contemporary customer
is less and less in search of primary, tangible, and objective elements in products-services.
Rather, customers seek emotional elements (Fabris, 1999; Fornari, 1995). These elements are
destined to become the real basis for differentiation, and they are encapsulated in the brand.
October 18-19th, 2008
Florence, Italy
3
8th Global Conference on Business & Economics
ISBN : 978-0-9742114-5-9
Thus, firms seek to create a “symbolic” universe around their products in order to reinforce
consumer brand loyalty (Marzili, 1979).
Brand personality and brand relational dimension. Any analysis of the relational
characteristics of a brand must begin with an investigation of the concept of “brand personality.”
According to Cook (1992), the relation between the brand and the customer exhibits some
features similar to those of an affective relationship between individuals, suggesting that a
veritable personality can be ascribed to the brand. Grandi (1987) underlined that a consumer’s
perception of a brand is that of a personified image, built up in a symbolic manner partly by the
firm’s own communicative efforts. Therefore, what the consumer wants and purchases is the
global personality of the product, which consists not only of its material composition, but also of
the idea of the product that has taken shape in the mind of the public (Dogana, 1976). For
Blackstone (1992 and 1993), the complexity of relations between brand and customer is such
that it extends over a multiplicity of dimensions that go beyond the brand image or personality.
Adopting this approach, the important aspects lie not merely in gathering information on what
consumers think about the brand, but also on what consumers believe the brand “thinks” about
themselves. Consequently, this calls for an analysis of the interaction between the consumer’s
attitude towards the brand and the brand’s “attitudes” towards the consumer. Following
Blackstone’s contribution, Manaresi (1999) developed the theory of relational bases which,
although founded on the metaphor of the interpersonal relationship between consumer and brand,
endeavours to integrate the measurement of the rational and emotional aspects as well as to
extend the scope of brand personalisation. The customer shows a tendency to anthropomorphise
products and brands, considering them to be endowed with typically human personalities and
with human characteristics and qualities (Codeluppi, 1992 Aaker, 1997).
October 18-19th, 2008
Florence, Italy
4
8th Global Conference on Business & Economics
ISBN : 978-0-9742114-5-9
The brand experience as a relational frontier. The extent of the relational dimension leads to a
broadening of the brand’s symbolic implications, towards the frontier of experiential branding. In
the 1970s, King (1970) already suggested that brands are, at least in part, the result of consumer
interaction and response, and that brand perceptions are, in fact, based upon experience. Thus, it
is the responsibility of the organisation to effectively manage that experience. Goodyear (1993)
emphasizes that the greater the ability and willingness of consumers to interact with and
experience the brand, the greater their level of involvement with the organisation becomes.
Experience with the brand assumes the role of a new means for value creation (Pine, Gilmore
1999), with the brand itself acting as the “pool” that gathers together the multifaceted levels of
experience. In branding strategies, experience deriving from product use is supplemented by the
overall experiential knowledge of the brand (brand experience), with the aim of reinforcing the
link between the brand and the customer. Adopting this perspective generates a strong influence
on brand identity characteristics, transforming brands into “experience providers” (Schmitt
1999a, 1999b), which extend their influence to a wide range of aspects of customers’ lives.
Therefore, experience becomes the gateway allowing the relational content of the relationship
between brand and purchaser to spread and increase: the experience generated by the brand
becomes a basis for competitive positioning and also a factor shaping the customer’s perceptions
and purchasing intentions. Thus, the brand may be variously described (Doyle et al., 2008) as a
set of mental associations (Keller, 1998), a dynamic interface, or a complete experience (Keller,
2003).
2. PRODUCT BRAND AND RETAIL BRAND
If, therefore, the concept of brand is understood in the broad sense described above, the
constructs of product brand and retail brand represent specific derivations (Table 1). The
October 18-19th, 2008
Florence, Italy
5
8th Global Conference on Business & Economics
ISBN : 978-0-9742114-5-9
principal characteristics of the two brand typologies are presented below, in order to clearly
represent the reciprocal interaction processes which run between them, and which are the main
focus of this study.
Table 1: The concepts of brand, product brand, and retail brand
Concept
Brand
Product brand
Retail brand
Characteristics
 The memory of a firm that embodies the
its history.
 Device for customers to express their
own individuality and attitudes.
 Means to activate an interpersonal
relationship with consumers.
 Experience provider.
Meaning of the brand, connected to:
 the products developed by the (national)
manufacturers (manufacturer product
brand or industrial brand).
 the products developed by the retailers
(private label, store brand, distributor
brand, own brand, or house brand).
Main theoretical references
Deichmann, 1991; Collesei, 2000; Keegan,
Moriarty, Duncan, 1992; Aaker, 1997; Aaker
and Joachimsthaler, 2003; Cook, 1992;
Blackstone, 1992 and 1993; Manaresi, 1999;
Goodyear, 1993; Schmitt, 1999a-b; Keller, 2003.
Meaning of the brand:
 linked to the points of sale, understood as
“retail products” of the retailers.
 which incorporate the “personality” of the
retail store.
Martineau, 1958; Baker et al., 1994; Mazursky
and Jacoby, 1986; Lindquist, 1974; Martineau,
1958; Zimmer and Golden, 1988; Porter,
Claycomb, 1997; Lugli, Pellegrini, 2006;
Ailawadi and Keller, 2004; Pappu, Quester,
2006; Davies, 1992; Burt, Mavrommatis, 2006.
Levitt, 1960; Kapferer, 2004 and Keller, 2003;
Beldona, Wysong, 2007; Scott Morton,
Zettelmeyer, 2004; Aaker, 1996; Keller, 1998;
Meyers and Lubliner, 1998; Semeijn et al., 2003;
Veloutsou et al., 2004; Morris, 1979; Baltas,
1997; Lybeck et al 2006; Fornari, 1999; Cristini,
1992; Lugli 1998, Lugli, Pellegrini, 2006;
Sbrana Gandolfo, 2007; Burresi, Aiello,
Guercini, 2006.
Source: author’s elaboration
Product brand. Levitt’s (1960) in-depth analysis of the differentiation theme emphasized that
the product may be considered to be an amalgam of assets (tangible and intangible) aimed at
satisfying the buyer’s needs. Among the intangible elements of differentiation is included the
brand. In this sense, the literature has begun to distinguish between the product, on the basis of
its physicality, and the brand, which is, in essence, intangible (see the review proposed by de
Chernatony, 2002). In recent times, Kapferer (2004) and Keller (2003) have also stressed the
interrelatedness that exists between product and brand; the product may, in fact, be considered
“the physical embodiment or a tangible dimension of the brand.” However, as discussed in the
October 18-19th, 2008
Florence, Italy
6
8th Global Conference on Business & Economics
ISBN : 978-0-9742114-5-9
preceding paragraph, the contents of the concept of brand have increasingly been enriched,
rendering the boundaries of this concept extremely more complex and articulated. Indeed, the
brand goes well beyond the product, serving as a relational interface between the company and
its stakeholders (Keller, 2003). Given this, Kapferer (1992) and Keller (1993) have argued that
the brand is an entity that is embedded in the organisation, rather than viewed as a “final” (end
line) decision related to the naming of products (King, 1984). On the basis of these
considerations, we will consider the concept of “product brand” to be that derivation of the brand
(that is, the part of the concept) which is linked to both the products developed by the national
manufacturer (manufacturer brand or industrial brand) and to those developed by the retailers
(See: Beldona, Wysong, 2007; Scott Morton, Zettelmeyer, 2004). Moreover, from a
terminological viewpoint, a variety of terms have been used to describe retailers’ product brands
(i.e., private label, store brand, distributor, own or house brand). (See: Aaker, 1996; Keller, 1998;
Meyers and Lubliner, 1998; Semeijn et al., 2003; Veloutsou et al., 2004; Morris, 1979; Baltas,
1997; Lybeck et al 2006; Sbrana Gandolfo 2007.) For the sake of simplicity, such brands will be
referred to as “private label” in this study.
Retail brand. The concept of retail brand is linked, at least originally, to the personality and
image of the retail store. Pierre Martineau (1958) referred to the “personality” of the retail store,
emphasizing how some consumers feel uncomfortable in particular retail stores. This personality
may be discerned from the store image, understood in its turn as an overall impression of the
store as perceived by consumers (Keaveney and Hunt, 1992). More broadly, one of the
commonly accepted formal definitions of retail store image is an individual’s cognitions and
emotions that are inferred from perceptions or memory inputs attached to a particular store, and
that represent what that store signifies to an individual (Baker et al., 1994; Mazursky and Jacoby,
October 18-19th, 2008
Florence, Italy
7
8th Global Conference on Business & Economics
ISBN : 978-0-9742114-5-9
1986). In addition to developing definitions of retail store image, researchers have also identified
multiple dimensions of the concept (Lindquist, 1974; Martineau, 1958; Zimmer and Golden,
1988; Porter, Claycomb 1997). In such studies, objective factors were generally used to measure
image, including variables such as price and quality of merchandise, sales personnel, location
convenience factors, services, sales promotions, and store atmosphere (Lindquist, 1974; Berry,
1969; Whelan, Davies 2007). Moreover, such variables may be considered attributes of the
“retail product,” that is, of the point of sale. (Lugli, Pellegrini, 2006). Doyle and Broadbridge
(1998) have stressed the relevance, across all retail sectors, of the retail store environment to
retailer image. They suggest that the store environment and the retail experience are the interface
between the customer and the company, and subsequently represent the company itself. As such,
the store exists less as a transactional device and more as a device for brand communication
within which transactions occur. Consequently, the perceptions that consumers have of store
image are central to establishing the “retailer as a brand” (Jacoby and Mazursky, 1984). Based
on this premise, some scholars (Ailawadi and Keller, 2004; Pappu, Quester, 2006) have asserted
that brand management principles can also be applied at the retail level. In recognition of this,
retailers have invested heavily in managing and projecting the store image, with the goal of
becoming viewed as brands (Davies, 1992; Burt, Mavrommatis 2006). Therefore, the retail brand
may be defined as that derivation, or specific part, of the brand which is connected to the points
of sale - understood as the “retail product” of the retailers – and which is able to incorporate the
“personality” of the retail store and of the retailer as a whole.
October 18-19th, 2008
Florence, Italy
8
8th Global Conference on Business & Economics
ISBN : 978-0-9742114-5-9
3. THE INTERACTION PROCESSES BETWEEN PRODUCT BRAND AND RETAIL
BRAND
An analysis of the interaction processes between product brand and retail brand may be achieved
by considering three specific areas: the mutual influence of the product brand and the retail brand
upon each other, the interaction between brand loyalty and store loyalty, and the paths of vertical
branding.
Reciprocal influence between product brand and retail brand. The subject of the reciprocal
influence between product brand and retail brand is emerging as a theoretical area of significant
interest. Baker et al. (1994) revealed how the assortment (as regards its quality and the brands
referenced) has a direct impact on the retail brand image. The perception of the assortment in the
mind of the consumer does not just reverberate through the various products and the product
brands of which it is composed, but also reflects on the store as a whole. By the 1990s, empirical
research had established that the retail store image could be improved by linking it with brands
that are evaluated favourably and damaged by association with brands that are evaluated less
favourably (Jacoby and Mazursky, 1984). As emphasized by Ailawadi and Keller (2004), in
order to understand the influence of the product brands on the retail brand, one must bear in mind
their possible combination in terms of (national) manufacturer brands and store brands.
According to Grewal et al. (2004), the corporate image of the store is defined as a combination
of the store as a brand and the selection of store brands and manufacturer brands offered by the
store. Thus, if “consumers like how the retailer operates as a retailer and the choice of brands in
the store, they are assumed to be satisfied with the store” (Marterson 2007). In particular,
Pettijohn et al. (1992) found that having a low-image product brand (in the case of clothing) does
not negatively impact the store image (the image of the retail brand) significantly, but having a
October 18-19th, 2008
Florence, Italy
9
8th Global Conference on Business & Economics
ISBN : 978-0-9742114-5-9
high-image brand has a significant positive impact on the store image. Again in the clothing
sector, Porter and Claycomb (1997) discovered that the presence of an anchor brand generates a
positive influence on the store’s image.
On the other hand, the image of the product brand is in turn influenced by the retail brand’s
image, although in some cases the influence is less direct than vice versa. (Jacoby and Mazursky,
1984). This suggests that brand image, especially for multi-brand retailers, plays a major role in
the development of consumer perceptions of the retail image (Zimmer and Golden, 1988). The
reflection (or aura effect) of the retail brand on the entire assortment, and therefore on all of the
product brands, appears much more difficult for multi-brand retailers, which do not shape and
control every aspect of the merchandise they sell (Henderson, Mihas 2000). This dynamic, which
will be discussed in greater depth below, is radically changed when applied to single brand
retailers, where the two typologies of brands overlap.
The interaction between brand loyalty and store loyalty. Any analysis of the interaction
processes between product brand and retail brand necessarily implies a consideration of
phenomena that are traditionally defined as “brand loyalty” and “store loyalty,” and which in this
study acquire the meaning of product brand loyalty and retail brand loyalty. The theme of loyalty
has become important in low growth markets given that the customer relationship becomes more
profitable over time (Reichheld and Sasser, 1990). In the literature, loyalty is viewed and defined
from two perspectives: behavioural and attitudinal (Dick and Basu, 1994). Behavioural
indicators represent the external results of a dynamic, internal process (Oliver, 1999). On the
contrary, attitudinal loyalty, being strongly influenced by situational variables, is focused on the
consumer’s internal attachment to a brand and is a possible indicator of the affective component
of attitude.
October 18-19th, 2008
Florence, Italy
10
8th Global Conference on Business & Economics
ISBN : 978-0-9742114-5-9
If product (brand) loyalty is the loyalty demonstrated by customers to a certain product brand,
then store (retail brand) loyalty is linked to the customer’s choice of store (Doyle and Fenwick,
1974; Burns, 1992). According to Wallace et al. (2004), retailer loyalty can be explained by
learning processes (reinforcement in instrumental conditioning processes) or on the basis of a
simplified decision-making process, with brand or company loyalty as a frequently utilized form
of habitual behaviour (Blackwell et al., 2001; Swoboda et al., 2007).
However, despite the mutual influence that exists between retail brands and product brands, store
loyalty and brand loyalty must not be exclusively considered in an oppositional framework
(Castaldo, 1994; Corstjens, Corstjens, 1995). Indeed, the two loyalties do not necessarily imply
reciprocal opposition but, in fact, manifest levels of integration (Busacca, Castaldo, 1996). Two
types of reasons support this not entirely antagonistic interpretation. The first regards the
constituent characteristics of loyalty to the point of sale which, although acquiring greater
content, is still strongly determined by the ability of a commercial space to offer the products and
brands that the clientele is most inclined to purchase. The second reason, which compliments the
first, derives from a recognition of the fact that the brand experience is largely realized in the
store. In this sense, one must consider how the relationship between brand loyalty and store
loyalty is becoming increasingly close. This occurs because, from the experiential perspective,
product brand and retail brand appear as a single vessel for the distinctive and emotional
characteristics of what the business has to offer, be these traceable to a specific product or to the
point of sale.
The concept of vertical branding. An observation of the competitive behaviour of businesses
(particularly those in the clothing sector) reveals that numerous industrial enterprises, and
retailers as well, seek to control the supply chain at many levels, putting into place paths of
October 18-19th, 2008
Florence, Italy
11
8th Global Conference on Business & Economics
ISBN : 978-0-9742114-5-9
vertical integration (Hisey, 2002). In particular, this dynamic sees, on the one hand, industrial
enterprises intent on opening single-brand points of sale (company owned, franchises, or other
similar formulas), through which to sell their own product brands, and on the other, retailers
committed to creating private labels to add to the assortment of their own points of sale (Smith,
2000; Carpenter et al., 2005; Birtwistle, Freathy, 1998). On the basis of these dynamics, it seems
useful to refer to the concept of “vertical brand,” which may in the first instance be defined as
the intersection between product brand and retail brand (Aiello, Donvito, 2005). The notion of
vertical brand may be traced to the ability of each actor, industrial or retail, to position itself
competitively based on the control of both derivations, or typologies, of brand (product and retail
brand) and on the possibility of deciding their optimal level of integration. The strategy of
developing a vertical brand is aimed at generating an integrated, total experience of the brand,
conveyed by the product, communication through the media, and the point of sale. In other
words, the demographics which the enterprise targets are subjected to multiple cognitive,
emotional, and behavioural experiences deriving from that brand that has both a “product”
component and a “brand name” component. As asserted earlier in this study, a successful brand
experience in large part depends on the firm’s ability to harmonize brand strategy with the
communication (and distribution) strategy, which in turn finds the point of sale to be the most
effective relational and experiential platform.
Figure 1 graphically summarizes the three levels of interaction that may be identified between
product brand and retail brand, given the reciprocal influence between product brand and name
brand, the interaction between brand loyalty and store loyalty, and vertical branding, defined as a
form of intersection between product brand and retail brand.
October 18-19th, 2008
Florence, Italy
12
8th Global Conference on Business & Economics
ISBN : 978-0-9742114-5-9
Figure 1: Interaction processes between product brand and retail brand
Product brand
Vertical
Brand
Retail brand
Mutual influence between product brand and retail brand.
Interaction between product loyalty and store loyalty.
Source: author’s elaboration
4. INNOVATION AT THE RETAIL LEVEL
This section of the paper considers and explores vertical brand innovation patterns beginning
with the retailing stage. In particular, the authors attempt to underline how retail innovation does
not necessarily follow hierarchical patterns, but (under specific conditions) seems to assume a
circular path. The innovation model proposed here takes into consideration the concepts of
product brand and retail brand, and is based on the theoretical contributions of the study of
market based innovation in retailing.
The field of market based retail innovation. The study of market based retail innovation
(Dupois, 2000 and 2001) is specifically focused on the analysis and interpretation of all those
innovations that are aimed at improving relations with the end client.1 In particular, this paper
1
Theories of market based retail innovation are founded on three principal approaches (Barile, 1996; Grandi, 2004):
the descriptive (static) approach, the mechanistic evolutionary approach, and the multiple criteria evolutionary
October 18-19th, 2008
13
Florence, Italy
8th Global Conference on Business & Economics
ISBN : 978-0-9742114-5-9
refers back to the innovation pyramid model in retailing (Cardinali and Pellegrini, 2003), in
which three levels of market based innovation are distinguished: primary, secondary, and tertiary
innovation. Primary innovation coincides with the appearance on the market of a new
distribution format, and is realized through the supply of one or more services not present in the
previously existing forms of distribution. The new format is characterized by the fact that it
generates discontinuity and causes a modification of the existing structural and competitive
frameworks, for example, by offering different (lower) prices or by acting upon the retail mix
(especially the assortment). Secondary innovation, instead, coincides with the appearance on the
market of a format which proposes a new combination of the services offered in pre-existing
formats, without altering the core business of the commercial enterprise. Finally, tertiary
innovation represents that hidden aspect of brand policy that implies an ongoing microcalibration of the retail mix (the assortment at the micro level, merchandising, communication,
environment, auxiliary services) which allows the brand to maintain its promise consistently over
time. One may observe that this model, in turn, has its referents in the more general perspective
of radical and incremental innovation in the service sector (Eiglier and Langeard, 1988,
Noemann, 1996). More specifically, Normann has identified two alternative innovation
principles in the service sector. The first, radical principle, predicts the supply of a service which
is entirely new in its components – both in terms of the outcome (basic nucleus of services,
peripheral services) and of the delivery system (contact personnel, environment and physical
approach. The descriptive approach analyses the various forms of retailing and the type of innovation possible,
identifying certain classification criteria (Copeland, 1923; Buclkin, 1963; Gist, 1968). In the mechanistic
evolutionary approach, innovation is determined by the entry into the market of new distributive organizations
whose characteristics are such that they create an imitative process on the part of other operators. The innovative
force provokes market disequilibrium which unbalances the system’s order, which gradually realigns itself. The
theories of the “big disturbance” (Schumpeter, 1960), of the “wheel of retailing” (Hollander, 1960; McNair, 1931),
of the “retail accordion” (Hollander, 1966), and the model of the “vital cycle” (Davidson, Bates, Bass, 1976) all
belong to this approach. The multiple criteria evolutionary approach analyses the innovation process by considering
together both the demand characteristics and the characteristics of the commercial supply (Filser 1992).
October 18-19th, 2008
14
Florence, Italy
8th Global Conference on Business & Economics
ISBN : 978-0-9742114-5-9
support, service network, client participation, internal organization, relations with other clients).
The second, incremental, principal implies the addition of new peripheral services or of changes
which reconfigure and improve the existing service on offer, while leaving its basic nucleus
intact.
The retail brand – product brand – vertical brand innovation path. With the abovementioned theoretical contributions as referents, this study identifies a circular path for
innovation at the retail level, in order to explain the process of the creation of vertical brands.
Ideally, this path is subdivided into three phases: 1) the originating phase; 2) the development
phase of a new product brand; 3) the development phase of a new vertical brand (see Figure 2).
Figure 2: The retail brand – product brand – vertical brand innovation path
Step 1
Existing Retail Brand
Step 2
Existing Vertical Brand
New
Product Brand
Innovation at the
Assortment Level
Step 3
Vertical Brand (New Retail Brand
Coinciding with New Product Brand)
Innovation at the Retail Brand Level
Source: author’s elaboration
The first (originating) phase is the starting point of the hypothesized innovation path. Indeed, the
process originates with an existing retail or vertical brand, which by their very nature already
directly sustain the retail activity. The second phase implies the appearance of innovation at the
October 18-19th, 2008
Florence, Italy
15
8th Global Conference on Business & Economics
ISBN : 978-0-9742114-5-9
assortment level through the creation of a new product brand developed by the owner of the
original retail or vertical brand. In other words, this actor, the owner of the brand, creates and
inserts a new product brand into the assortment. The third phase foresees the evolution of the
product brand to the level of new vertical brand. After being added to the assortment, in fact, the
new product brand acquires its own autonomy, to the point that it generates a new vertical brand
with its own points of sale characterized by the same name as the product brand under
consideration. This final phase shapes the planned convergence of the product brand and retail
brand categories into the framework of a vertical brand. From here, the cycle may begin again,
with the possible addition of a new product brand and the potential unfolding of the successive
phase. It is important to stress that this model is not assumed to be mechanistic, rather, it is
intended to support the interpretation of a possible alternative for innovation at the retail level. In
other words, this contribution seeks to present a research tool which is useful for understanding
the genesis of vertical brands at the retail level.
5. RETAIL INNOVATION ACROSS RETAIL BRAND AND PRODUCT BRAND: SOME
EMPIRICAL RESULTS OF A QUALITATIVE SECONDARY RESEARCH
Finally, this paper empirically analyses the case of two international retailers: Coin (Luca
D’Altieri) and Zara (Zara Home). This empirical sections seeks to achieve a preliminary
verification of the reliability of the vertical brand concept and attempts to test retail innovation
patterns in the set of retailers under analysis.
Methodology. This research is founded on qualitative secondary research and mainly adopts a
case analysis approach (Yin 1994). More specifically, the research process is conducted in three
phases: 1) selection of the operators to be analysed; 2) the development of an appropriate
database of secondary sources, composed of investor reports, corporate websites, industryOctober 18-19th, 2008
Florence, Italy
16
8th Global Conference on Business & Economics
ISBN : 978-0-9742114-5-9
related magazines, and the AIDA economic business database2; 3) an in-depth study of the
companies’ profiles and of their strategic behaviour using the secondary sources; 4) an
examination of the innovation dynamics at the retail brand – product brand – vertical brand level;
5) organization and presentation of the results. The two cases under study here were specifically
chosen because they allow the proposed innovation model to be tested with the two possible
variations of the originating phase: existing retail brand (Coin) and existing vertical brand (Zara).
5.1 Case study: Coin – Luca D’Altieri3
The Gruppo Coin profile. The Gruppo Coin (Coin Group) Is an Italian international retailer
which operates in the clothing, accessories, cosmetics, and housewares sectors. Gruppo Coin
owns two principal retail brands: OVS industry and Coin. Over time, other retail brands have
been added to these two main brands: Young Villane, Coin Casa, and Luca D’Altieri. Each of
these retail brands is positioned in a different market segment. Gruppo Coin is the distributor of
both manufacturer product brands and its own private labels. In 2007, the group had revenues of
€1,172 million (up +5% over 2006), a gross operating margin of €144.6 million (up +26% over
2006), with net profits of €43.5 million (up +322% over 2006). The group is consolidating a
foreign expansion programme through new store openings; starting in 2007, the group initiated a
plan to franchise abroad with the opening of pilot stores. During the initial phase of the project,
2
3
Bureau Van Dijk (2005), www.aida.bvdep.com, AIDA database, Bureau Van Dijk – Electronic Publishing.
This paragraph is based on data contained in:
Gruppo Coin (2007), Relazione annuale 2006, Gruppo Coin S.p.A., Venezia – Mestre.
Gruppo Coin (2008), Annual report 2007, Gruppo Coin S.p.A., Venezia – Mestre.
Gruppo Coin (2008), Company Presentation, Gruppo Coin S.p.A., Venezia – Mestre.
Gruppo Coin (2008), http://www.gruppocoin.it/, Gruppo Coin S.p.A., Venezia – Mestre.
Nosari A. (2008), “Gruppo Coin, l’Ebitda margin sale di un punto al 13%,” Il Sole 24 Ore, 08-03-2008. pp. 30-31.
Pasqualetto, C. (2007a), “Il numero uno Beraldo: premiati gli sforzi di rinnovamento dei marchi. Coin torna in utile
nel semestre,” Il Sole 24 Ore, Finanza & Mercati, 10-10-2007, p. 43.
Pasqualetto, C. (2007b), “Abbigliamento. L'azienda veneta punta a espandersi e firma un accordo con Elio
Fiorucci,” Il Sole 24 Ore, Economia e Imprese, 28-02-2007, p. 23.
October 18-19th, 2008
17
Florence, Italy
8th Global Conference on Business & Economics
ISBN : 978-0-9742114-5-9
the new openings were primarily in Eastern Europe and the Middle East. At this time, Gruppo
Coin has over 20 points of sale outside of Italy.
The Coin retail brand. This study focuses on the retail brand – store brand – vertical brand
innovation paths involving the Coin retail brand. Coin is an Italian department store chain,
founded in 1926, and dedicated to the clothing, home decoration, accessories, and beauty sectors.
In 2007, after eighty years of activity, Coin realized €351 million in net sales, had a workforce of
2,283 employees, and counted 35 million visitors per year, of whom 341,000 in possession of a
loyalty card. Coin operates through 65 stores in Italy - of which 43 are company owned and 22
are “indirect” points of sale (franchises and outlets) – and eight indirect (franchised) points of
sales internationally. Coin points of sale follow two main formats: three-floor department stores
and two-floor department stores, both located in the historical town centres and most important
shopping areas of the principal cities. In the first case, point of sale dimensions range between
1,200 and 1,400 square metres, with an average surface area of 2,800 square metres. The twofloor points of sale vary more broadly in their dimensions, ranging from 200-2,500 square
metres. In contrast to these two formats, the flagship store in Milan has nine floors and a total
commercial area of 6,600 square metres. Coin management has decided to emphasize the
characteristics of its retail brand precisely on the basis of the Coin mission (“to offer the client
the best shopping experience in the city in an open, multi-experiential space”), reformulating the
attributes of the points of sale. Coin’s purpose is, in fact, to transform its stores into “pleasure
and shopping spaces.” This radical transformation, aimed at generating a new shopping
experience, is being realized on the basis of three factors: the products in the assortment, the
store, and the personnel. Regarding the products in the assortment, we are witnessing a reduction
of the space dedicated to private labels and the accompanying increase in the space given over to
October 18-19th, 2008
Florence, Italy
18
8th Global Conference on Business & Economics
ISBN : 978-0-9742114-5-9
manufacturer brands, with an ongoing search for emerging brands and products. The store, for its
part, aspires to a new, modern, and attractive image in which the products are not the sole
protagonists: the point of sale must be a “Coin destination,” experienced as a stage upon which
events and encounters take place. This place must be open in a way that allows the client to shop,
relax, and move around freely, discovering and choosing products for his/herself and his/her
home. It is Coin’s intention, furthermore, that the point of sale must possess a multi-experiential
nature by virtue of the broad spectrum of brands and selected services, like a beauty salon,
hairdresser, bar, and restaurants. And, in the final analysis, according to the Coin strategy, people
represent the key element for improving the overall shopping experience.
The innovation process of the Luca D’Altieri brand: from product brand to vertical brand.
As mentioned above, along with the manufacturer product in its assortment, Coin adds and
stands by its own private labels. In regards to the latter, Coin began a process of drastically
reducing the number of private labels, which has dropped from eleven to only three: Luca
D’Altieri, Jct, and Koan. This study focuses in particular on the Luca D’Altieri brand due to its
recent evolution, which has led it to assume a significant role in the strategies Coin has adopted.
Gruppo Coin has branded the predominately men’s but also women’s clothing collections through which it hopes to establish a place in the segment perceived as “tasteful, with the
attention to detail, … quality, and sartorial craftsmanship typical of the Italian style” - with the
Luca D’Altieri label. Specifically, in the Luca D’Altieri case, the path that begins with the
existing retail brand and foresees the development of a product brand, which in turn evolves into
a vertical brand, has been taking shape. In fact, after having developed and inserted the Luca
D’Altieri brand into their own assortment, at the end of 2007 Gruppo Coin opened single-brand
franchised stores in Belgrade and Beirut, which are exclusively dedicated to the brand’s men’s
October 18-19th, 2008
Florence, Italy
19
8th Global Conference on Business & Economics
ISBN : 978-0-9742114-5-9
collection. A short time later, the first Italian single-brand store was inaugurated in Rome.
According to the openings scheduled in the group’s strategic plan, this is to be the first in a series
of store openings, using the formula of franchising in partnership with entrepreneurs who wish to
exploit their locations in downtown areas. In brief, Gruppo Coin has embarked on an innovation
path at the retail level in line with the model proposed in this paper (see Figure 3). It took as its
point of departure an existing retail brand, Coin, then followed with innovation at the assortment
level (the addition of private labels, among which Luca D’Altieri; the re-evaluation of the private
labels and strengthening of the Luca D’Alieri brand) and, finally, developed new points of sale,
generating a vertical brand (i.e., Luca D’Alieri, which becomes both a retail brand and a product
brand).
Figure 3: The retail brand – product brand – vertical brand innovation path in the COIN case
study – Luca D’Altieri.
Existing Retail Brand:
COIN
New Product Brand:
Luca D’Altieri
Innovation at the Assortment Level
Vertical Brand:
Luca D’Altieri
Innovation at the Retail Brand Level
Source: author’s elaboration
October 18-19th, 2008
Florence, Italy
20
8th Global Conference on Business & Economics
ISBN : 978-0-9742114-5-9
5.2 Case study: Zara– Zara Home4
The Inditex Group profile. The Inditex Group (Industrias de Diseño Textil Sociedad Anónima)
is one of the world’s largest fashion distributors, and operates through nine retail brands: Zara,
Pull and Bear, Massimo Dutti, Bershka, Stradivarius, Oysho, Zara Home, and Uterqüe. The
group is present in more than 70 countries, has 69,240 employees, and operates a total of 3,691
stores, all located in the most important shopping districts of more than 400 cities in Europe, the
Americas, Asia, and Africa. The Inditex Group is composed of more than 100 enterprises
associated with the business of textile design, manufacturing, and distribution. Its management
model is based on innovation and flexibility, and the Inditex fashion philosophy, in particular, is
based on creativity and the quality of design as well as a rapid response to market demands. The
first Zara shop opened in 1975 in La Coruña (Spain), where it still has its central offices. This
was followed by the launching of, in order, the retail brands Pull and Bear (1991), Massimo
Dutti (1991), Bershka (1998), Stradivarius (1999), Oysho (2001), Zara Home (2003), and
Uterqüe (2008). Inditex views its stores as “true fashion laboratories” – it is in their stores that
Inditex listens to what clients want to wear, and gleans their opinions and tastes in order to direct
the company in its new offerings each week. In 2007, the groups net sales were €9,435 million,
up +15% over 2006, with gross profits of €5,349 million (up +16% over 2006), and an EBIT
(earnings before interest and taxes) of €1,652 (+22%). In terms of the breakout by retail brand,
4
This paragraph is based on data contained in:
Grupo Inditex (2003), Annual Report 2002, Inditex, La Coruna
Grupo Inditex (2004), Annual Report 2003, Inditex, La Coruna
Grupo Inditex (2005), Annual Report 2004, Inditex, La Coruna
Grupo Inditex (2006), Annual Report 2005, Inditex, La Coruna
Grupo Inditex (2007), Annual Report 2006, Inditex, La Coruna
Grupo Inditex (2008), Annual Report 2007, Inditex, La Coruna
Grupo Inditex (2008), http://www.inditex.com/en, Inditex, La Coruna.
Orighi G.A. (2007), “Un blitz del signor Zara liquida l’alleato italiano. Amancio Ortega si libera dello storico socio
Percassi,” La Stampa, 02-01-2007.
Rubinelli L. (2008), “Zara-Inditex: un solo cliente ma con stili vestimentari diversi,” Mark Up, Aprile, p. 92-94.
October 18-19th, 2008
21
Florence, Italy
8th Global Conference on Business & Economics
ISBN : 978-0-9742114-5-9
Zara generated 66.4% of sales, while the remaining 33.6% came from the other “non-Zara
formats” (Bershka 9.8%, Massimo Dutti 7.4%, Pull and Bear 6.5%, Stradivarius 5.5%, Oysho
2.3%, Zara Home 2.1%). The Inditex Group operates 218 stores in Italy.
The Zara retail brand. Zara is an international retail clothing brand (men’s, women’s, and
children’s) specialized in the sale of reasonably priced (low, medium low, and mid range)
products for the “total look.” At this time, Zara is present in 70 countries with a network of 1,431
stores, most directly operated, and with net sales of €6,264 million (up +13% over 2006). The
stores are located in privileged locations in major cities. Its international presence “is a testament
to the idea that national borders are no impediment to sharing a single fashion culture” (Inditex
2008). Zara’s business model is the same as that which has characterized the Inditex Group’s
modus operandi. That model, as mentioned above, is characterized by the very quick design of
new products (approximately three weeks), a continual updating, based on sales data, of the lines
on offer, low levels of outsourcing in production, which is entrusted to Spanish businesses, as
well as an absence of publicity campaigns. With more than 200 designers, Zara is able to design,
produce, and distribute a collection to every store, anywhere in the world, twice a week.
The Zara retail brand: the Italian case. Compared to its founding date (1975), the appearance
of Zara on the Italian market is very recent, taking place in 2004 through a joint venture with the
Italian real estate group, Percassi. Inditex, which increased its share from 51% to 80% during its
first year, has been the sole shareholder since 2007. The arrival of Zara in Italy marked the
appearance of a new retail brand which had not previously been present in the country. The first
point of sale for the retail brand Zara was opened in Milan in a commercial space suitable for the
flagship store. Today, Zara operates 74 points of sale throughout Italy.
October 18-19th, 2008
Florence, Italy
22
8th Global Conference on Business & Economics
ISBN : 978-0-9742114-5-9
The innovation process of the Zara Home brand in Italy: from product brand to vertical
brand. In 2003, the Inditex Group launched Zara Home in Spain as its eighth retail brand. Zara
Home concentrates on the home furnishings sector. Its focus is on textiles, such as bed, table, and
bathroom linens, complemented by tableware, cutlery, glassware, and decorative items. Zara
Home offers customers several different decorative atmospheres, ranging from Contemporary to
Classic, Colonial, and White. Zara Home follows the same philosophy that Zara applies to
fashion, frequently renewing its range for the home and offering design products at attractive
prices. In 2007, this retail brand realized €201 million in net sales (up +45% over 2006) through
its 204 stores in 22 countries worldwide. In 2005, Zara Home opened its first point of sale in
Italy, where today it operates nine stores (three in Milan, one in Florence, one in Bergamo, one
in Verona, and three in Rome). It is in reference to the Italian market that this paper will analyse
the retail brand – store brand – vertical brand innovation path. In fact, between its 2003
launching in Spain and the opening of the Milanese store, Zara Home was present as a private
label in some Zara stores in Italy. Following this placement, the Inditex Group elevated the Zara
Home brand to the status of vertical brand, opening points of sale distinguished by the
convergence of product brand and retail brand (see Figure 4).
October 18-19th, 2008
Florence, Italy
23
8th Global Conference on Business & Economics
ISBN : 978-0-9742114-5-9
Figure 4: The retail brand – store brand – vertical brand innovation model in the case study of
ZARA – ZARA Home in Italy.
Existing Vertical Brand:
ZARA
New Product Brand:
ZARA Home
Innovation at the Assortment Level
Vertical Brand:
ZARA Home
Innovation at the Retail Brand Level
Source: author’s elaboration
Therefore, in regards to the Italian market, an international actor (Inditex), already the owner of
its own vertical brands (including Zara), undertook an innovation process based on the
development of a product brand (Zara Home) that had already been tested in the national market
of origin, upon which to superimpose the role of retail brand, with the end goal of strengthening
the company’s position in the market through the creation of an additional vertical brand.
6. LIMITATIONS AND FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF THE RESEARCH.
This study has sought to outline the relationship between product brand and retail brand along
the innovation paths leading to the affirmation of a vertical brand, that is, of a brand in which the
contents of product and name overlap.
A preliminary examination of the innovation path proposed in this study reveals that the energy
of the retailers who are protagonists of current competition is strongly oriented towards the
creation of vertical brands. However, the authors are aware that the their thesis requires further
October 18-19th, 2008
Florence, Italy
24
8th Global Conference on Business & Economics
ISBN : 978-0-9742114-5-9
empirical proof based on primary data and testing on a wider scale than was possible in this
study.
Furthermore, the authors believe that it would be useful to extend research on the paths
generating vertical brands to industrial enterprises, which are increasingly active in defining and
implementing descending vertical integrative strategies.
October 18-19th, 2008
Florence, Italy
25
8th Global Conference on Business & Economics
ISBN : 978-0-9742114-5-9
References
Aaker D. A. (1996), Building Strong Brands, The Free Press, New York.
Aaker D. A. (1997), Brand equity: la gestione del valore della marca, Franco Angeli, Milano.
Aaker D. A. Joachimsthaler E., (2003), Brand Leadership, Franco Angeli, Milano.
Aiello G., Donvito R. (2005), Comunicazione integrata nell’abbigliamento: strategie di marca e
ruolo del punto vendita nella distribuzione specializzata statunitense, Proceeding for the
Conference “Le Tendenze del Marketing in Europa,” Ecole Supérieure de Commerce de
Paris ESCP-EAP, Parigi, 21-22 Gennaio 2005.
Ailawadi K.L. and Keller K.L. (2004), “Retail branding: conceptual insights and research
priorities,” Journal of Retailing, Vol. 80, No. 4, pp. 331-42.
Ailawadi K.L. and Keller K.L. (2004), “Understanding retail branding: conceptual insights and
research priorities,” Journal of Retailing, Vol. 80, pp. 331-42.
Baker J., Grewal, D. and Parasuraman A. (1994), “The influence of store environment on quality
inferences and store image,” Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 22, No. 4,
pp. 328-39.
Baltas G. (1997), “Determinants of store brand choice: a behavioural analysis,” Journal of
Product and Brand Management, 6(5), pp. 315–324.
Barile S. (1996), Le formule distributive al dettaglio, Cedam, Padova.
Beldona S., Wysong S. (2007), “Putting the ‘brand’ back into store brands: an exploratory
examination of store brands and brand personality,” Journal of Product & Brand
Management, 16/4, pp. 226–235.
Berry L.L. (1969), “The components of department store image,” Journal of Retailing, Vol. 52,
pp. 17-32.
Birtwistle G., Freathy P. (1998), “More than just a name above the shop,” International Journal
of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 26, No.8.
Blackstone M. (1992), “Observations: building brand equity by managing the brand’s
relationships,” Journal of Advertising Research, May-June, pp. 79-83.
Blackstone M. (1993), “Beyond brand personality: building brand relationships,” in D.A. Aaker,
A.L. Biel (eds.), Brand Equity and Advertising, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale,
NJ.
Blackwell R.D., Miniard P.W., and Engel J.F. (2001), Consumer Behavior, The Dryden Press,
Fort Worth, TX.
Bucklin P.L. (1963), “Retail Strategy in the Classification of Consumer Goods, Journal of
Retailing, 56.
Bureau Van Dijk (2005), www.aida.bvdep.com, AIDA database, Bureau Van Dijk – Electronic
Publishing.
October 18-19th, 2008
Florence, Italy
26
8th Global Conference on Business & Economics
ISBN : 978-0-9742114-5-9
Burns D. J. (1992), “Image transference and retail site selection,” International Journal of Retail
& Distribution Management, 20(5), pp. 38–44.
Burresi A., Aiello G., Guercini S. (2006), Marketing per il governo d’impresa, Giappichelli,
Torino.
Burt S., Mavrommatis A. (2006), “The international transfer of store brand image,” International
Review of Retail, Distribution, and Consumer Research, Vol. 16, No. 4, 395 – 413,
September.
Busacca B., Castaldo S., (1996), Il potenziale competitivo della fedeltà alla marca e all’insegna
commerciale, Egea, Milano.
Cardinali M.G., Pellegrini D. (2003), Innovazione e comunicazione del valore d’insegna,
conferance “Le Tendenze del Marketing in Europa,” Università Ca’ Foscari, Venezia,
28-29 Novembre 2003.
Carpenter J.M, Moore M., Fairhurst A.E. (2005), “Consumer shopping value for retail brands,”
in Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, Vol. 9, No. 1,
Castaldo S. (1994), “La gestione delle risorse immateriali di marketing nelle imprese
commerciali,” Economia & Management, No. 1.
Codeluppi V. (1992), I consumatori. Storia, tendenze, modelli, Franco Angeli, Milano.
Collesei U. (2000), Marketing, Cedam, Padova.
Cook W.A. (1992), “Brand equity as a love story,” Journal of Advertising Research, NovemberDecember, pp. 7-8.
Copeland M.T. (1923), “Relation of consumer buying habits to marketing methods,” Harvard
Business Review, April, pp. 282-289.
Copeland M.T. (1923), A Theory of Consumer Goods, McGraw-Hill, London.
Corstjens J., Corstjens M. (1995), Store Wars: The Battle for Mindspace and Shelfspace, Wiley,
Chicester.
Cristini G. (1992), Le strategie di marca del distributore, Egea, Milano.
Davidson W.R., Bates A.D., Bass S.J. (1976), “The Retail Life Cycle Concept”, Harvard
Business Review, January-February.
Davies G. (1992) “The two ways in which retailers can be brands,” International Journal of
Retail & Distribution Management, 20(2), pp. 24–34.
de Chernatony L. (2002), “Would a brand smell any sweeter by a corporate name,” Corporate
Reputation Review, Vol. 5, No.s 2/3, pp. 114-32.
Deichmann M. (1991), “Introduzione all’edizione italiana,” in Kapferer J.N., Thoenig J.C., La
marca. Motore della competitività delle imprese e della crescita dell’economia, Guerini e
Associati, Milano.
Dick A. and Basu K. (1994), “Customer loyalty, toward an integrated conceptual framework,”
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 22, pp. 99-113.
Dogana F. (1976), Psicopatologia dei consumi quotidiani, Franco Angeli, Milano.
October 18-19th, 2008
Florence, Italy
27
8th Global Conference on Business & Economics
ISBN : 978-0-9742114-5-9
Doyle S.A., Moore C.M., Doherty A.N., Hamilton M. (2008), “Brand context and control: the
role of the flagship store in B&B Italia,” International Journal of Retail & Distribution
Management, Vol. 36, No. 7, pp. 551.
Doyle, P. and Fenwick, I. (1974), “How store image affects shopping habits in grocery chains,”
Journal of Retailing, 50(4), pp. 39–52.
Doyle, S.A. and Broadbridge, A. (1998), “Differentiation by design: the importance of design in
retailer repositioning and differentiation,” The International Journal of Retail &
Distribution Management, Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 72-83.
Eiglier P., Langeard E. (1988), Il marketing strategico nei servizi, McGraw-Hill, Milano.
Fabris G. (1999), “Verso nuovi modelli di consumo,” in Varaldo R. (a cura di), Il marketing
negli anni Duemila. Sfide per il nuovo secolo, Guerini e associati, Milano.
Filser M. (1992), I canali della distribuzione. Organizzazione, analisi delle formule di vendita,
metodi di gestione, EditoreEtas Libri, Milano.
Fornari D. (1995) “Le nuove dimensioni dei modelli di consumo in Italia,” in Trade Marketing,
No. 15.
Fornari D. (1999), Rivoluzione commerciale e trade marketing, Egea, Milano.
Gist R.R. (1968), Retailing, concept and decision, Wiley, New York.
Goodyear M. (1993), “Reviewing the concepts of brands and branding,” Marketing Research
Today, May, pp. 75-9.
Grandi R. (1987), “Come parla la pubblicità – Modelli comunicativi degli Spot pubblicitari”,
Edizioni Sole 24 Ore, Milano.
Grandi S. (2004), Marketing dell’innovazione commerciale, Egea, Milano.
Grewal D., Levy M., and Lehmann D.R. (2004), “Retail branding and customer loyalty: an
overview. Editorial,” Journal of Retailing, Vol. 80, pp. ix-xii.
Grupo Inditex (2003), Annual Report 2002, Inditex, La Coruna.
Grupo Inditex (2004), Annual Report 2003, Inditex, La Coruna.
Grupo Inditex (2005), Annual Report 2004, Inditex, La Coruna.
Grupo Inditex (2006), Annual Report 2005, Inditex, La Coruna.
Grupo Inditex (2007), Annual Report 2006, Inditex, La Coruna.
Grupo Inditex (2008), Annual Report 2007, Inditex, La Coruna.
Grupo Inditex (2008), http://www.inditex.com/en, Inditex, La Coruna.
Gruppo Coin (2007), Relazione annuale 2006, Gruppo Coin S.p.A., Venezia – Mestre.
Gruppo Coin (2008), Annual Report 2007, Gruppo Coin S.p.A., Venezia – Mestre.
Gruppo Coin (2008), Company Presentation, Gruppo Coin S.p.A., Venezia – Mestre.
Gruppo Coin (2008), http://www.gruppocoin.it/, Gruppo Coin S.p.A., Venezia – Mestre.
Henderson T.A., Mihas E.A.(2000), Building Retail Brands, McKinsey & Company, Chicago.
October 18-19th, 2008
Florence, Italy
28
8th Global Conference on Business & Economics
ISBN : 978-0-9742114-5-9
Hisey P. (2002), “The return of Sears and Penny,” Retail Merchandiser, Vol. 42, No.8.
Hollander S.C. (1960), “The Wheel of Retailing”, Journal of Marketing, July.
Hollander, S.C. (1966), “Notes on the retailer accordion”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 42.
Jacoby, J. and Mazursky, D. (1984), “Linking brand and retailer images - do the potential risks
outweigh the potential benefits?” Journal of Retailing, 60(2), pp. 105–122.
Kapferer, J-N. (1992), Strategic Brand Management: New Approaches to Creating and
Evaluating Brand Equity, Kogan Page, London.
Kapferer, J-N. (2004), The New Strategic Brand Management – Creating and Sustaining Brand
Equity Long Term, Kogan Page, London.
Keaveney, S.M. and Hunt, K.A. (1992), “Conceptualization and operationalization of retail store
image: a case of rival middle-level theories,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 165-75.
Keegan W., Moriarty S., Duncan T. (1992), Marketing, Englewood Cliffs, Prentice Hall.
Keller K.L. (1993), “Conceptualizing, measuring, and management customer-based brand
equity,” Journal of Marketing, Vol. 57, pp. 1-22.
Keller K.L. (1998), Strategic Brand Management: Building, Measuring and Management Brand
Equity, Prentice-Hall, New York, NY.
Keller K.L. (2003), “Brand synthesis: the mulitidimentionality of brand knowledge,” Journal of
Consumer Research, Vol. 29, pp. 595-600.
King, S. (1970), What is a Brand?, J. Walter Thomson Company Ltd, London.
King, S. (1984), Developing New Brands, J. Walter Thomson Company Ltd, London.
Levitt, T. (1960), “Marketing myopia,” Harvard Business Review, Vol. 84, No. 3, pp. 2-20.
Lindquist, S.D. (1974), “Meaning of image,” Journal of Retailing, Vol. 50, p. 29.
Lugli G. (1998), Economia e gestione delle imprese commerciali, Utet, Torino.
Lugli G., Pellegrini L. (2006), Marketing distributivo, Utet, Torino.
Lybeck A., Holmlund-Rytkonen, M, Saaksjarvi M. (2006), “Store Brands vs. Manufacturer
Brands: Consumer Perceptions and Buying of Chocolate Bars in Finland,” International
Review of Retail, Distribution, and Consumer Research, Vol. 16, No. 4, pp. 471 – 492,
September 2006.
Manaresi A., (1999), “La competizione tra distributori per la relazione con il cliente: dalla
gestione di relazioni al recupero del paradigma transazionale,” Trade Marketing, No. 26.
Martenson R., (2007), “Corporate brand image, satisfaction and store loyalty: a study of the store
as a brand, store brands and manufacturer brands,” International Journal of Retail &
Distribution Management, Vol. 35, No. 7, 2007, pp. 544-555.
Martineau, P. (1958), “The personality of the retail store,” Harvard Business Review, Jan-Feb.,
p. 50
Marzili P.G. (1979), Nuovi orientamenti della funzione di marketing, Tipografia Capponi,
Firenze.
October 18-19th, 2008
Florence, Italy
29
8th Global Conference on Business & Economics
ISBN : 978-0-9742114-5-9
Mazursky D. and Jacoby J. (1986), “Exploring the development of store images,” Journal of
Retailing, Vol. 62, Summer, pp. 145-65.
McNair Malcolm P. (1931), “Trends in Large-Scale Retailing”, Harvard Business Review, 10
(1), 30-39.
Morris D. (1979) “The strategy of own labels,” European Journal of Marketing, 13(1), pp. 55–
78.
Normann R. (1996), La gestione strategica dei servizi, Etaslibri, Milano.
Nosari A. (2008), Gruppo Coin, “L’Ebitda margin sale di un punto al 13%,” Il Sole 24 Ore, 0803-2008, pp.30-31.
Oliver R. (1999), “Whence consumer loyalty?” Journal of Marketing, Vol. 63, No. 4, pp. 33-44.
Orighi G.A. (2007), “Un blitz del signor Zara liquida l’alleato italiano. Amancio Ortega si libera
dello storico socio Percassi,” La Stampa 02-01-2007.
Pappu R., Quester P (2006), “Does customer satisfaction lead to improved brand equity? An
empirical examination of two categories of retail brands,” Journal of Product & Brand
Management, 15/1, pp. 4–14.
Pasqualetto C. (2007a), “Il numero uno Beraldo: premiati gli sforzi di rinnovamento dei marchi.
Coin torna in utile nel semestre,” Il Sole 24 Ore, Finanza & Mercati, 10-10-2007, p.43
Pasqualetto C. (2007b), “Abbigliamento. L'azienda veneta punta a espandersi e firma un accordo
con Elio Fiorucci,” Il Sole 24 Ore, Economia e Imprese, 28-02-2007, p. 23.
Peter P., Olson J. (1987), Consumer Behaviour. Marketing Strategy Perspectives, Richard Irwin,
Inc.
Pettijohn L.S., Mellott D.W. and Pettijohn C.E. (1992), “The relationship between retailer image
and brand image,” Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 9, No. 4, pp. 311-29.
Pine B.J. II, Gilmore J.H. , (1999), The Experience Economy. Work is Theatre & Every Business
a Stage, Harvard Business Scholl Press, Boston, Massachusetts (trad. it. L’economia delle
esperienze, Etas, Milano, 2000).
Porter S. S., Claycomb C. (1997), “The influence of brand recognition on retail store image,”
Journal of Product & Brand Management, Vol. 6, No. 6, pp. 373.
Reichheld F. and Sasser E.W. (1990), “Zero-defections: quality comes to services,” Harvard
Business Review, Vol. 68, No. 5, pp. 105-11.
Rubinelli L. (2008), “Zara-Inditex: un solo cliente ma con stili vestimentari diversi,” Mark Up,
Aprile, p. 92-94.
Sbrana R., Gandolfo A. (2007), Contemporary retailing, Giappichelli, Torino.
Schmitt B., (1999a), “Experiential marketing,” Journal of Marketing Management, No. 15.
Schmitt B., (1999b), Experiential Marketing, The Free Press, New York.
Scott Morton F., Zettelmeyer F., (2004), “The Strategic Positioning of Store Brands in Retailer–
Manufacturer Negotiations,” Review of Industrial Organization, 24, pp. 161–194.
October 18-19th, 2008
Florence, Italy
30
8th Global Conference on Business & Economics
ISBN : 978-0-9742114-5-9
Semeijn J., van Riel A. C. R., and Ambrosini B. A. (2004), “Consumer evaluations of store
brands: effects of store image and product attributes,” Journal of Retailing and Consumer
Services, 11(4), pp. 247–258.
Smith B. (2000), “The store as a brand,” DSN Retailing Today, Vol.39, No.23.
Swoboda B, Morschett F.H.D., Schramm-Klein H. (2007), “An intersector analysis of the
relevance of service in building a strong retail brand,” Managing Service Quality, Vol. 17
No. 4, pp. 428-448
Wallace D., Giese J. and Johnson J. (2004), “Customer retailer loyalty in the context of multiple
channel strategies,” Journal of Retailing, Vol. 80, No. 4, pp. 249-63.
Whelan S., Davies G. (2007), “A comparative study of the corporate reputation of Irish versus
British retailers: lessons for retail brand practice,” Irish Marketing Review, Vol. 19, No.s
i&2
Yin R. (1994), Case Study Research, Sage, London.
Zara C. (1997), La valutazione della marca: il contributo del brand alla creazione del valore
d’impresa, ETAS, Milano.
Zimmer M.R. and Golden L.L. (1988), “Impressions of retail stores: a content analyses of
consumer images,” Journal of Retailing, Vol. 54, No. 3, pp. 265-91.
October 18-19th, 2008
Florence, Italy
31