Brand‐Specific Design Effects: Form and Function

Product design is inherently a key component of brand strategy. Accordingly, significant resources are invested to improve product and brand performance; however, foundations for understanding the role product design plays in influencing actual consumer opinions from the marketplace have not been fully explored in the literature. This paper develops a conceptual framework illustrating how two critical design factors�form and function�impact consumer opinion and delineate brand-specific effects. Nonmonotonic effects are identified, as well as the interaction effects of the individual factors among the dimensions. A longitudinal model based on objective measures of form and function is tested with a data set developed from models available in the U.S. automotive market from 1999�2007; it includes 16 firms, 32 brands, and 137 products. The results indicate the relationships between factors of form and function are multifarious and complex, but clearly play a significant role in forming consumer opinions, although they do exhibit diminishing returns. The findings further indicate brand-specific effects exist, and consumer opinions vary by brand. The findings provide foundations for understanding the interplay between product development and brand management. Overall, this research supports the notion that brand strategies can be supported through the management of design dimensions.

[1]  Jung-Chae Suh,et al.  The role of consideration sets in brand choice: The moderating role of product characteristics , 2009 .

[2]  K. Scott Swan,et al.  Perspective: The Emergence of Product Design as a Field of Marketing Inquiry† , 2011 .

[3]  David Godes,et al.  Firm-Created Word-of-Mouth Communication: Evidence from a Field Test , 2009, Mark. Sci..

[4]  J. Horn.  A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis , 1965, Psychometrika.

[5]  B. Wansink.  Can Package Size Accelerate Usage Volume? , 1995 .

[6]  Antoaneta P. Petkova,et al.  When Is a New Thing a Good Thing? Technological Change, Product Form Design, and Perceptions of Value for Product Innovations , 2007, Organ. Sci..

[7]  Peter H. Bloch.  Seeking the Ideal Form: Product Design and Consumer Response: , 1995 .

[8]  W. Velicer,et al.  Comparison of five rules for determining the number of components to retain. , 1986 .

[9]  P. Nedungadi.  Recall and Consumer Consideration Sets: Influencing Choice without Altering Brand Evaluations , 1990 .

[10]  M. R. Solomon.  The Role of Products as Social Stimuli: A Symbolic Interactionism Perspective , 1983 .

[11]  Marjorie B. Platt,et al.  The Impact of Industrial Design Effectiveness on Corporate Financial Performance , 2005 .

[12]  Roland T. Rust,et al.  Feature Fatigue: When Product Capabilities Become Too Much of a Good Thing , 2005 .

[13]  R. Batra,et al.  Measuring the hedonic and utilitarian sources of consumer attitudes , 1991 .

[14]  D. Norman.  Emotional design : why we love (or hate) everyday things , 2004 .

[15]  Karl T. Ulrich,et al.  Research Note: User Design of Customized Products , 2007 .

[16]  David M. Szymanski,et al.  Why Some New Products are More Successful than Others , 2001 .

[17]  T. Ambler,et al.  How Advertising Works: What Do We Really Know? , 1999 .

[18]  Allan D. Shocker,et al.  Brand equity : a perspective on its meaning and measurement , 1991 .

[19]  Rachel Cooper,et al.  Characterizing the Role of Design in New Product Development: An Empirically Derived Taxonomy* , 2005 .

[20]  Bernard J. Jaworski,et al.  Strategic Brand Concept-Image Management , 1986 .

[21]  V. Mahajan,et al.  Form versus Function: How the Intensities of Specific Emotions Evoked in Functional versus Hedonic Trade-Offs Mediate Product Preferences , 2007 .

[22]  Chris Janiszewski,et al.  A Meta-analysis of the Spacing Effect in Verbal Learning: Implications for Research on Advertising Repetition and Consumer Memory , 2003 .

[23]  R. Calantone,et al.  Determinants of New Product Performance: A Review and Meta-Analysis , 1994 .

[24]  Anthony S. Bryk,et al.  Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods , 1992 .

[25]  Scott B. MacKenzie,et al.  An Empirical Examination of the Structural Antecedents of Attitude toward the Ad in an Advertising Pretesting Context , 1989 .

[26]  Joseph A. Cote,et al.  Guidelines for Selecting or Modifying Logos , 1998 .

[27]  Marvin Berkowitz,et al.  Product shape as a design innovation strategy , 1987 .

[28]  Priya Raghubir,et al.  Ratios in Proportion: What Should the Shape of the Package Be? , 2006 .

[29]  Ulrich R. Orth,et al.  Holistic Package Design and Consumer Brand Impressions , 2008 .

[30]  D. Raghavarao,et al.  Design for synergy with brand or price information , 2010 .

[31]  Subhash Sharma.  Applied multivariate techniques , 1995 .

[32]  Shih-Wen Hsiao,et al.  Applying the semantic transformation method to product form design , 1998 .

[33]  Jaap E. Wieringa,et al.  What about design newness? Investigating the relevance of a neglected dimension of product innovativeness , 2009 .

[34]  Dominique M. Hanssens,et al.  New Products, Sales Promotions, and Firm Value: The Case of the Automobile Industry , 2004 .

[35]  Andrew Hargadon,et al.  When Innovations Meet Institutions: Edison and the Design of the Electric Light , 2001 .

[36]  E. Hirschman,et al.  The Experiential Aspects of Consumption: Consumer Fantasies, Feelings, and Fun , 1982 .

[37]  Ming H. Hsieh,et al.  Identifying Brand Image Dimensionality and Measuring the Degree of Brand Globalization: A Cross-National Study , 2002 .

[38]  Karl T. Ulrich,et al.  USER DESIGN OF CUSTOMIZED PRODUCTS , 2007 .