Hede, A., Kerrigan, F., & Thyne, M. (2022). Re-thinking brand extension theory: Parents, siblings and off-spring or landlords and tenants?

Question 1

What is “Hede, A., Kerrigan, F., & Thyne, M. (2022). Re-thinking brand extension theory: Parents, siblings and off-spring or landlords and tenants? “ about?

Answer 1

This article critically examines the brand family metaphor, traditionally used in brand extension theory, where relationships between parent brands and extensions are hierarchical and linear. It questions the metaphor’s relevance in the age of liquid modernity—a time marked by fluidity, impermanence, and less rigid structures.
The authors propose the “brand for rent” metaphor as a better framework to conceptualize contemporary brand-to-brand relationships, particularly for experiential brand extensions like literary film adaptations. The study explores:
1. How brand-to-brand relationships are evolving in fluid, distributed environments.
2. Theoretical implications of viewing brands as “rented” assets rather than family members.
3. Practical insights into managing brand value in modern, networked contexts.

Question 2

What are the conclusions of “Hede, A., Kerrigan, F., & Thyne, M. (2022). Re-thinking brand extension theory: Parents, siblings and off-spring or landlords and tenants? “?

Answer 2

The brand-for-rent metaphor provides a novel lens to understand brand extensions in the age of liquid modernity, where traditional, hierarchical relationships are increasingly irrelevant. By emphasizing fluidity, collaboration, and distributed value creation, the framework captures the complexities of modern branding, particularly in experiential contexts like literary adaptations.

Question 3

What are the limitations and future research of “Hede, A., Kerrigan, F., & Thyne, M. (2022). Re-thinking brand extension theory: Parents, siblings and off-spring or landlords and tenants? “?

Answer 3

1. Context-Specific Insights:
   o Findings are rooted in literary adaptations. Future research should explore broader industries, like fashion or video games, to validate the metaphor’s applicability.
2. Consumer Perspectives:
   o Additional studies could examine how consumers perceive and value brands within a “rented” framework.
3. Quantitative Validation:
   o Incorporate quantitative methods to measure the financial and cultural impact of fluid brand relationships.

Question 4

What are the theoretical contributions of “Hede, A., Kerrigan, F., & Thyne, M. (2022). Re-thinking brand extension theory: Parents, siblings and off-spring or landlords and tenants? “?

Answer 4

1. Challenging Dominant Metaphors:
   o Replaces the brand family metaphor with the brand for rent framework, better suited for fluid and collaborative branding contexts.
2. Focus on Experiential Extensions:
   o Highlights unique dynamics in industries like entertainment, where brand value is co-created across diverse modalities.
3. Distributed Power in Branding:
   o Explores how control and ownership shift in liquid modernity, reshaping traditional notions of brand management.

Question 5

What are the managerial implications of “Hede, A., Kerrigan, F., & Thyne, M. (2022). Re-thinking brand extension theory: Parents, siblings, and offspring or landlords and tenants? “?

Answer 5

1. Adopting the Brand for Rent Framework:
   o Recognize that brand extensions may have temporary and fluid relationships with the parent brand.
   o Allow creative freedom to tenants (extensions) while maintaining contractual safeguards.
2. Leveraging Distributed Ownership:
   o Collaboration across multiple stakeholders (e.g., authors, filmmakers, production companies) can enhance value creation.
   o Example: Curating cross-platform narratives (books, films, games) for transmedia storytelling.
3. Protecting the Brand’s Core:
   o Ensure that extensions align with the parent’s core essence to avoid diluting brand equity.
   o Use agents or curators to manage brand consistency while enabling adaptability.

Question 6

Explain the Brand Family Metaphor.

Answer 6

A. The Brand Family Metaphor
* Traditionally, brand extensions are viewed as offspring of parent brands, inheriting traits like identity, visual elements, and values.
* Assumes hierarchical and solid relationships, with the parent controlling and benefiting from the extension.

Question 7

What is the Brand for Rent Metaphor?

Answer 7

C. Brand for Rent Metaphor
* Suggests brand extensions operate like tenants occupying a landlord’s property:
o The landlord retains ownership (original brand).
o Tenants (extensions) temporarily use and adapt the brand to create value.
o The relationship is contractual rather than familial.

Question 8

What is Liquid Modernity?

Answer 8

B. Liquid Modernity
* Introduced by Bauman (2000), liquid modernity describes a world of flux, where societal structures, including family, are less stable.
* In branding, this translates to non-hierarchical, fluid relationships, with value co-created across multiple, often temporary actors.

Question 9

What are the key findings regarding the limitations of the Family Metaphor?

Answer 9

1. Linear Control Is Obsolete:
   o Unlike the parent-offspring dynamic, brand extensions often operate outside the parent’s direct control.
   o The metaphor fails to capture the distributed power in modern brand relationships.
2. Cultural and Structural Irrelevance:
   o Family structures have diversified in liquid modernity, reducing the metaphor’s resonance in contemporary contexts.

Question 10

What are the key findings regarding the Brand Relationships as Temporary and Contractual?

Answer 10

1. Role of Literary Agents:
   o Agents act as intermediaries, negotiating terms for renting the brand.
   o Rights can be resold, with landlords (original authors) often reaping value from successive renters.
2. Fluid Ownership and Influence:
   o Brand extensions operate independently:
    Screenwriters and directors inject their unique styles and identities into adaptations.
    Example: Different directors adapting the same novel (e.g., Spielberg vs. Fincher) produce vastly different films.

Question 11

What are the key findings regarding Breaking Ties to Create Value?

Answer 11

1. Breaking Ties to Create Value:
   o Adaptation practitioners emphasize letting go of the original brand’s rigid structure to enable creativity.
   o For example, a screenwriter restructured the plot of Absolute Power after feedback from Clint Eastwood, creating a more compelling story.
2. Selective Value Extraction:
   o Adaptations involve “cherry-picking” valuable elements from the source material while leaving irrelevant parts behind.
   o Example: Adding acts or characters to novels that lacked cinematic completeness.
3. Maintaining the Core Essence:
   o Despite creative liberties, practitioners aim to retain the tone, themes, and emotional impact of the original brand.