外文翻譯---通過廣告打造品牌資產(chǎn)

1、<p>　?。ǘ祟}：Building Brand Equity Through Advertising</p><p>　　原文：Learning from Brand Equity Research to Build Ads That Build Brands</p><p>　　Years of research have shown that consumer perc

2、eptions and attitudes - measured collectively, and commonly described as consumer Brand Equity - have a direct relationship to a brand's market position and business results. Marketers rely on advertising as one prim

3、ary tool to develop and nurture Brand Equity. This paper will share some findings that look at advertising, as a contributor to Brand Equity - specifically, how Brand Equity measures can contribute to the development and

4、 evaluation of ad</p><p>　　Short-Term Impact and _ Long-Term Brand Equity</p><p>　　Historically, pretest (copytest) measures are designed primarily to evaluate an ad's potential impact in th

5、e short term. We use standardized measures of the ad's potential to be noticed and remembered; to register the brand name and convey its message or image; to reinforce loyalty or preference among current buyers; and

6、to persuade consumers to buy or use the brand. Previous studies, many of them presented at the ARF over the years, have validated these pretest measures in relation to inmarket </p><p>　　But marketers also w

7、ant advertising to build their brands in the long term. Some studies have focused on the long-term effects of advertising, a year or more beyond the ad's run. They show that some ads are effective in the short term a

8、nd the long term, while some are effective only while they run. However, we have yet to see any evidence of ads that contribute to business results in the long term without any measurable short-term impact. So we could s

9、ay that short-term effectiveness is necessar</p><p>　　This raises the obvious question, how can we measure an ad's potential to build the brand in the long term - to develop or reinforce Brand Equity? On

10、e approach comes from our learning about Brand Equity. To show how that applies to copytesting, we have to start at the other end: with measures of consumer Brand Equity, in market.</p><p>　　Measuring Brand

11、Equity</p><p>　　Our measure of Brand Equity comes from a model that uses a handful of standardized attitude measures that are generalizable across brands, business sectors, and markets. In a study representi

12、ng 200 different brands from 40 different product and service categories, comprising over 12,000 consumer interviews for over 200,000 individual brand assessments, these measures have been validated in relation to market

13、 variables and business outcomes - what we like to call "Brand Health."</p><p>　　It is important to understand how the model works to measure Brand Equity. The overall construct that we call "

14、Brand Health" depends on three major factors: Brand Equity perceptions, Consumer Involvement with the category, and Price/Value perceptions. These are derived measures, based on a series of standard rating scales.&

15、lt;/p><p>　　The Brand Equity measure summarizes consumer perceptions on five dimensions: Familiarity, Uniqueness, Relevance, Popularity, and Quality. Involvement reflects consumers' reported sensitivity to

16、brand differences, how much brands matter to them in this category; and Price represents the perceived price/value relationship. To line up these ratings with business results, we also need to account for brand size.<

17、/p><p>　　The derived measure of Brand Health shows a strong correlation with consumers' reported brand loyalty, commitment, purchase intent ratings, and price sensitivity. At the brand level, we also find a

18、 strong relationship to market share, and to five-year trends in share and profitability.</p><p>　　Advertising and _Brand Equity</p><p>　　This begs the question: "If Equity drives the Brand

19、, what drives Equity?"</p><p>　　We went looking for answers in a follow-up study, that we reported at last year's Week of Workshops3. This study was more focused than the first one, concentrating on

20、 79 brands from 20 different categories of FMCGs with a relatively high penetration - in all, over 2,700 consumers gave more than 10,000 brand assessments.</p><p>　　Each brand was rated on our five Equity di

21、mensions, and also on several factors that we thought should contribute to Brand Equity - including perceptions of the advertising. Specifically, we asked whether they recalled advertising for the brand and if so, whethe

22、r they felt the advertising had a favorable impact on their opinion of the brand.</p><p>　　Advertising was not the biggest factor contributing to Equity; product and package performance, the "look and f

23、eel" of the brand, and the brand name itself, each had a stronger correlation to Equity than advertising had. But favorable ad awareness also had a significant relationship to Equity. In particular, it contributed t

24、o ratings for Familiarity and perceived Uniqueness - qualities that have a logical relationship to advertising. </p><p>　　But why is advertising correlated with Equity at lower levels than these other variab

25、les? One possibility is that advertising influences these other perceptions indirectly, but more strongly than consumers think it does. And of course, the brands would vary in the level and quality of their advertising s

26、upport. In any case, perceptions of the advertising are correlated with Equity. This confirms our belief that advertising contributes to Brand Equity, or at least, that it can - which points to t</p><p>　　Co

27、py Test Measures for_Brand Equity</p><p>　　At around the same time as this study, we began to include the five Equity ratings in the Diagnostic segment of our copy test. Of course, "equity" is not

28、a property of an individual ad; it's a property of the brand. But in a copy test that measures consumers' perceptions and reactions to an ad execution, we should be able to measure its potential to enhance or rei

29、nforce brand perceptions. Equity studies typically reference attributes specific to a brand or category, to identify the unique "equit</p><p>　　Here's a quick summary of the copytest methodology tha

30、t we call Next*TV: A nationally distributed sample is recruited to the survey by telephone, in the guise of a "program evaluation study." Qualified recruits get a packet in the mail with a VHS tape that has a h

31、alf-hour sitcom, with commercials embedded in the program, and instructions for the study. The next day we contact them again by phone to ask questions about the program, and to collect day-after recall measures for the

32、test ads.</p><p>　　After the recall measures, we administer a monadic exposure to selected test ads, which are "hidden" at the end of the tape. From this monadic exposure, we collect communication

33、and reaction measures, Purchase Intent, and Brand Attribute Ratings. Purchase Intent and Attribute Ratings are also collected for a matched Control group that answers the same question about the brand, but without exposu

34、re to the test ad. We get ratings for the Equity*Builder items developed in our Brand Equity research-</p><p>　　First, we see that individual ads do tend to produce a positive change in these ratings, compar

35、ed with Control group data collected for each brand without test ad exposure. Second, we see that the average ratings on these items, across all brands, are similar to the average ratings we've seen in our Brand Equi

36、ty database. And if we apply the Equity*Builder model to calculate an Equity Index, the copytest Control groups show the same distribution as the brands in our Equity database.</p><p>　　Calculating the same

37、index for each test ad, we see a lot of variation across executions - but of course a lot of that variation is due to differences in the brands, to begin with. If we take the difference, the increment above Control group

38、 levels, for each ad test, we find consistent discrimination between Test and Control - that is, most ads do produce a positive change from their starting levels. And we see a wide range of variation across ads: some do

39、a lot more than others to enhance Equit</p><p>　　These results confirm our expectations. The data show that:</p><p>　　1Validated Brand Equity measures can be transferred to the copytest;</p&

40、gt;<p>　　2Data distributions indicate we are measuring substantially the same things; so </p><p>　　3We can evaluate and discriminate between individual ads, based on their potential to enhance or re

41、inforce perceptions that drive Brand Equity. </p><p>　　This is useful in itself, because it provides an added dimension to the pretest assessment. For individual ads, however, thetraditional measures of imme

42、diate impact remain the primary criterion for evaluation. How are these related to the Brand Equity measures?</p><p>　　Equity Measures and Ad Recall</p><p>　　First, let's take a look at our

43、measures for Recall. If we divide the ads into thirds (high, middle, and low), based on their Equity Index, we see that brandassociated Related Recall is higher for ads that get higher Equity ratings.</p><p>

44、;　　This is day-after Related Recall, on a brand-aided basis, and validation studies tell us it's associated with awareness, or "rate of delivery." There's less difference in Measured Attention, our aide

45、d recognition of the creative execution; the difference in overall Recall is mostly due to higher Brand Linkage, a derived measure that represents brandassociated recall among those who notice and remember the ad itself.

46、</p><p>　　It's interesting, also, to see how these test measures relate to the individual "components" of Brand Equity. In particular, higher levels of ad Recall and Brand Linkage are associate

47、d with higher ratings for perceived Uniqueness, Familiarity, and (to some extent) Relevance of the brand.</p><p>　　These are not extremely strong relationships; they are statistically significant, but not pr

48、imary drivers of Recall. But it's clear that brands that have higher Equity ratings also enjoy at least a small advantage for their ads in being noticed, remembered, and especially, branded. Now let's look at Per

49、suasion.</p><p>　　Equity Measures and Persuasive Impact</p><p>　　We already know, from our Brand Equity studies, that the Equity Index and its components are directly correlated with Purchase In

50、tent (PI) for the brand. In our copytest, we turn Purchase Intent into a Persuasion measure by evaluating the change in PI for the ad, compared to its matched Control group with no ad exposure. Since the Equity measures

51、are already correlated with PI in the Control group, we need to take the Equity ratings for each ad as a change score too, relative to its Control grou</p><p>　　This relationship holds for each of the compon

52、ents of the Equity Index: Familiarity, Uniqueness, Relevance, Popularity, and Quality.</p><p>　　Conclusions</p><p>　　We've demonstrated an ability to evaluate and differentiate ads on the ba

53、sis of their potential to enhance or reinforce Brand Equity. But more than that, the relationship between sales - validated measures of short-term advertising impact, on the one hand, and market-validated measures of Bra

54、nd Equity, on the other, is both compelling and useful.</p><p>　　It shows that immediate and long-term objectives are compatible, and may be mutually supportive. It means the Equity ratings add a new Diagnos

55、tic dimension to the copytest, to help advertisers understand and optimize performance on the short-term measures. As some of these tested ads find their way into media schedules and the brands are measured again in our

56、longitudinal studies, we expect to see that ads that move these Equity ratings, in the copytest, will build Brand Equity in the long term.</p><p>　　出處：Dave Walker. Building Brand Equity Through Advertising.

57、ARF Week of Workshops, 2002, 8 .</p><p>　?。ǘ祟}：通過廣告打造品牌資產(chǎn)</p><p>　　譯文：從品牌資產(chǎn)研究中學習建立廣告、打造品牌</p><p>　　多年的研究表明，消費者的觀念和態(tài)度- 通過全體測量，并通常被描述為消費者品牌資產(chǎn)-直接關系到提高到一個品牌的市場定位和經(jīng)營成果。市場主體依靠廣告為主要的途徑來發(fā)展

58、和培育品牌資產(chǎn)。本文將分享一些成果，將廣告作為品牌資產(chǎn)的貢獻者--特別是如何測量品牌資產(chǎn)才能在副本測試的預試階段來促進廣告的發(fā)展和評估在預試階段副本測試。</p><p>　　短期碰撞和長期品牌價值</p><p>　　過去，從短期來說，預測方法只要被用來評價一個廣告的現(xiàn)在影響力。我們用標定廣告的潛力來告知和記住，注意品牌名字和傳達它的信息或圖片，加強忠誠或偏愛其中當前的買方，說服消費者購

59、買或用牌。</p><p>　　短期效應和長期品牌資產(chǎn)</p><p>　　以往，預測評估是用來初步評估一個廣告的短期潛在影響。我們用標準化的方式來評估廣告潛在的吸引力；注冊品牌名及傳播信息和影像；在現(xiàn)有買家中加強忠誠度和表現(xiàn)；以及說服消費者購買使用品牌。在以往的許多研究中顯示ARF歷經(jīng)多年，證實了這些預測評估與市場結(jié)果的關聯(lián)性–一般與在廣告播放后短期內(nèi)的營業(yè)額或者市場份額，及知曉度相關。

60、所以預測評估能實際確定量化獨立廣告的短期效力。</p><p>　　但是，市場同時要求廣告建立他們長期的品牌。有些研究著眼與廣告的長期效力，一年或者超出廣告的運行時間。研究顯示，有些廣告在短期和長期都有效力，有些只在廣告的運行時間內(nèi)有效力。但是，如果不對短期影響做出評估，我們還沒有發(fā)現(xiàn)任何證據(jù)證實廣告對商業(yè)結(jié)果的長期有利影響。所以我們可以說短期的效力是必要的，但對產(chǎn)生長期效益不是不是充分條件。</p>

61、<p>　　這產(chǎn)生了一個明顯的問題，我們要怎樣評估一個廣告是否有潛力建立長期品牌–發(fā)展和加強品牌資產(chǎn)。有一個解決方法來自我們學習品牌資產(chǎn)。顯示如何應用于廣告原稿測試，我們必須從另一頭開始：在市場中評估測量消費者的品牌資產(chǎn)。</p><p><b>　　評估品牌資產(chǎn)</b></p><p>　　一種評估品牌資產(chǎn)的方式來自一個普遍應用于品牌，商業(yè)部門，和市場

62、中使用少數(shù)標準化態(tài)度測量模式。在一個囊括了40多個產(chǎn)品和服務的200多個不同品牌，包含對200000多個品牌評定的12000多個消費者采訪的研究中，這些評估被證實與市場變量和商業(yè)成果有關–即我們常說的“品牌健康”。這對我們理解模式怎么工作評估品牌資產(chǎn)非常重要。我們所說的品牌健康的整體概念取決于三個主要因素：品牌資產(chǎn)觀念，消費者的參與度，價格/價值觀念。這些是衍生的評估測量方法，以一系列標準化比例為基礎。</p><p

63、>　　品牌資產(chǎn)評估總結(jié)概括消費者觀念于五個規(guī)格：熟悉，獨特，相關，普及，質(zhì)量。參與度反應了消費者對不同品牌的敏感度，在一定范圍內(nèi)他們對多少品牌在意；價格代表了認知到的價格/價值的關系。排列這些等級與商業(yè)結(jié)果，我們還需要考慮品牌尺寸。</p><p>　　品牌健康的衍生評估顯示了消費者報告的對品牌的忠誠，認同，購買意圖等級，及價格敏感度之間一種強烈的關聯(lián)。在品牌水平上，我們也發(fā)現(xiàn)了市場份額與份額利潤五年內(nèi)的趨

64、勢的強烈的相關性。</p><p><b>　　廣告和品牌資產(chǎn)</b></p><p>　　這要求我們回答一個問題：如果資產(chǎn)效應推動品牌，什么推動資產(chǎn)效應？</p><p>　　我們在上一年周工作報告的跟蹤調(diào)查中尋找答案。這個研究比第一個更加集中，集中注意于20個FMCGs不同分類的79個品牌，有著相對高的突破力–總共有超過2700個消費者給出

65、了超過10000份的品牌評估。</p><p>　　每個品牌都按我們標準評分，還有幾個我們認為應該考慮的其他因素–包括廣告的角度。特別是，我們問到消費者是否在見到品牌時會回想起廣告，如果是，廣告是否對他們對品牌的印象有有利的影響。</p><p>　　廣告并不是對品牌資產(chǎn)影響最大的一個因素；產(chǎn)品和包裝，品牌的“看和感覺”，還有品牌的名稱，這些都與品牌資產(chǎn)的關系都比廣告強。但是，好的廣告認知

66、度與品牌資產(chǎn)仍舊有很大的關系。尤其是，廣告對熟悉和獨特認知的評分有積極影響–質(zhì)量與廣告有著邏輯上的關系。</p><p>　　但是為什么廣告比其他因素對品牌資產(chǎn)的影響小呢？一種可能性是廣告間接的影響著其他因素，但比消費者認為的要強。當然，品牌會在廣告支持的水平和質(zhì)量上有差異。在任何情況下，廣告的認知與品牌資產(chǎn)都有著密切的聯(lián)系。這使我們更加確信廣告有助于品牌資產(chǎn)的累計，或者可以說，至少，它能指出在預測中一種評估廣告

67、潛在的對品牌資產(chǎn)的有利影響的途徑。</p><p>　　品牌資產(chǎn)的廣告原稿測試實驗</p><p>　　在進行這個調(diào)查的同時，我開始包含五個資產(chǎn)排列在圖標了部分。當然，資產(chǎn)不是個人廣告的必有因素，這是一個品牌的必有因素。但是在評估顧客的感知能力和對廣告的反應能力的廣告原稿測試中，我們應該評估它能提高和增強品牌感知能力的潛在性。資產(chǎn)特別地研究了品牌或者類別的特性參考屬性，并來定義特殊的在“資

68、產(chǎn)”的位置，區(qū)分個體品牌。我們也總是評估廣告原稿測試。但是在資產(chǎn)建立模型中增加了有用的總體性質(zhì)的向量，我們可以預先估計廣告對建立品牌資產(chǎn)的內(nèi)在性。</p><p>　　在這里，我們對廣告原稿測試方法論做一個小小的總結(jié)：在以評估實驗的外衣下，通過電話進行全國性的隨機分配樣本。先通過郵件發(fā)送一個錄像，里面帶那有一個半小時情景喜劇，同時包含廣告內(nèi)容，這個不知作為實驗框架。第二天，我們電話聯(lián)系之前的用戶，并對之前的實驗內(nèi)

69、容進行提問，手機反饋信息來進行測量。反饋測量以后，我們對選擇性的廣告進行曝露實驗，這將在錄影帶的末尾進行。對這個曝露，我們可以收集溝通反應的測試，購買的意愿和品牌的定位。購買意愿和品牌的定位會通過一個控制組來進行測量，這個測試組沒有進行廣告曝露但將會大關于品牌的問題。我們得到了資產(chǎn)模型里面每個項目的定位，無論測試組還是控制組。通過這些現(xiàn)成的資料，我們將可以分析他們之間的關系。</p><p>　　首先，通過比較控

70、制組的信息，我們發(fā)現(xiàn)對產(chǎn)品的定位，廣告會產(chǎn)生正面的影響。第二，我們發(fā)現(xiàn)這些項目的平均定位和我們在品牌資產(chǎn)數(shù)據(jù)的資料是相一致的。如果我們運用資產(chǎn)模型去計算資產(chǎn)數(shù)值，廣告原稿測試的控制組將會展示和在資產(chǎn)數(shù)據(jù)一樣的分布。</p><p>　　通過每個測試廣告的指標計算，我們發(fā)現(xiàn)很多變量，但是在這些變量里，很多事因為品牌的區(qū)別造成的。如果我們考慮這些區(qū)別——控制組的水平增長量。我們將會得到測試組合控制組一致的差值。這就是

71、說，廣告對顧客的購買起點產(chǎn)生了正面的改變。我們是可以看到廣告造成的這些改變：一些人比另一些人更能增加資產(chǎn)的感知能力。這些結(jié)果加強了我們的推測；</p><p>　　1, 廣告原稿測試可以有效地測量品牌一致性</p><p>　　2, 樣本分布暗示了我們在測量同樣的東西</p><p>　　3, 通過個體廣告增強品牌資產(chǎn)的潛力， 我們可以評估和區(qū)別個體廣告的差別。&l

72、t;/p><p>　　這個實驗本身是有用的,因為它提供了預測評估的多樣性。然而對個體廣告而言，直接的傳統(tǒng)測試依然是評估的標準。那這些標準和品牌資產(chǎn)測試有多少相關性呢？</p><p><b>　　資產(chǎn)測量和廣告回顧</b></p><p>　　首先，讓我們回顧一下我們的測量。如果我把廣告分成三類（高，中和低頻）。我們發(fā)現(xiàn)有更高頻的資產(chǎn)定位的品牌和對

73、相關性的回顧更有一致性。</p><p>　　建立在品牌基礎上的，一天時間后對商品的回顧和實效性試驗告訴我們這是和意識相關的，或者說和“傳遞速率”相關。測量意識和我們的創(chuàng)造性感知幾乎沒有差別。即使有差別也是因為更高的品牌相關性，一種在看到和記牢廣告本身的實驗者展現(xiàn)品牌相關性的回顧測量。</p><p>　　有趣的是這些測試測量和品牌資產(chǎn)的個體組成相聯(lián)系。特別是，高頻的廣告回顧和品牌聯(lián)系度和

74、無意識的，熟悉的更相關性的品牌高定位有關。但很明顯的是，更高的資產(chǎn)定位賦予他們的廣告很多優(yōu)勢，這些廣告可以更加被注意，記牢和品牌效應化?，F(xiàn)在讓我們看啊看你說服性。</p><p>　　資產(chǎn)測量和說服力影響</p><p>　　我們已經(jīng)知道，在我們的品牌資產(chǎn)實驗中，資產(chǎn)指標和它的組成部分和品牌的購買意圖（PI）息息相關。在我們的復制實驗中，我們通過評估廣告的PI改變并比較沒有曝露的控制組，我

75、們把購買意圖歸為說服力測量。因為資產(chǎn)測量和控制組的PI相關聯(lián)，我們應該通過對每個廣告進行資產(chǎn)定位，并且算出相對應控制組的改變分值。</p><p>　　這樣的關系在每個資產(chǎn)指標來展現(xiàn)：熟悉程度，特殊程度，相關程度，流行程度和質(zhì)量程度。</p><p><b>　　總結(jié)</b></p><p>　　我們已經(jīng)展現(xiàn)了建立在增強品牌資產(chǎn)的潛力上的對聘雇

76、和區(qū)分廣告的能力。但除此之外，我們還展示了銷量和對短期廣告影響的有效測量的關系，同時品牌的市場有效性測量也是有效的。</p><p>　　這說明利己的并且長期目標是協(xié)調(diào)的，事實上是互利的。這意味著，資產(chǎn)定位對復制測試增加了新的圖畫性寬度，并且?guī)椭鴱V告商了解優(yōu)化短期測量的有效性。當這其中的一些測試廣告已經(jīng)升入了解，一些品牌已經(jīng)被長期調(diào)查，我們期盼推動資產(chǎn)定位的廣告在廣告原稿測試中可以建立長期的品牌資產(chǎn)。</p

77、><p>　　出處：戴維德·沃克. 通過廣告打造品牌資產(chǎn).[J] 東盟地區(qū)論壇研究周,2008,8.</p><p><b>　　三、指導教師評語</b></p><p>　　外文翻譯內(nèi)容與論文主題聯(lián)系緊密，譯文通暢且比較準確。符合要求。</p><p><b>　　建議成績：90</b>&l