Research papers Reimagining branding for the new B2B digital marketplace Received (in revised form ): 13th June, 2014 DEBRA ZAHAY is Full Professor of Marketing at Aurora University, IL. She holds her doctorate in marketing from the University of Illinois, her master's o f management from Northwestern University in Evanston, IL, her Juris Doctor from Loyola University in Chicago, IL and her undergraduate degree from Washington University in St Louis, MO. Her w ork has been published in such journals as the Journal o f Interactive Marketing,Journal o f Product Innovation Management, Decision Sciences, Industrial Marketing Management, Management, and in the Marketing Science Institute's working paper series. She co-authored the 3rd edition of the te xtb o o k'Internet Marketing: Integrating Online and Offline Strategies' with MaryLou Roberts. She is on the editorial board of the Journal o f Database Marketing and Customer Strategy Management and Industrial Marketing Management, and is editor-in-chief o f the Journal o f Research in Interactive Marketing. Debra Z a h a y DON E. SCHULTZ holds a BBA from the University o f Oklahoma and an MA and PhD from Michigan State University, and is Professor (Emeritus-in-Service) o f Integrated Marketing Communications at the Medill School, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL and President of Agora, Inc, a global marketing, communication and branding consulting firm. Professor Schultz consults, lectures and holds seminars on integrated marketing communication, marketing, branding, advertising, sales promotion and communication management worldwide. He has written/co-written numerous books and academic and professional articles, is a featured columnist in Marketing News and Marketing Insights, was founding editor of the Journal o f Direct Marketing, is associate editor o f the Journal o f Marketing Communications and co-editor of the International Journal o f Integrated Marketing Communication. Professor Schultz also holds o r has held appointments as an adjunct/visiting professor at Queensland University of Technology in Australia, Cranfield School o f Management in the UK.Tsinghua University and Peking University, China, and the Swedish School of Economics, Finland. ARCHANA KUMAR is an assistant professor o f marketing in the School of Business at Montclair State University, NJ. She has a PhD in retail and consumer services and an MS in statistics from the University ofTennessee, Knoxville,TN. She also has an MS in integrated textile and apparel science from Auburn University,AL. Her principal areas of research are in consumer behaviour, branding strategies, electronic and mobile commerce shopping and cross-cultural consumer behaviour. D r Kumar's research has been published in such journals as the Journal o f Services Marketing, International Journal o f Retail and Distribution Management,Journal o f Travel Research and the Journal o f Business Research. She is also the recipient of the 2007 Emerald Research Fund Award for Indian Management Research. D r Kumar is a member of the American Collegiate and Retailing Association and the Marketing Management Association. Archart a K u m a r Abstract As digital technology is increasingly used to facilitate the business-to-business (B2B) buying process, the role o f the salesperson in 828 branding appears to be diminishing. Instead o f leading sales, marketing and branding conversations, the field sales force now commonly respond to a customer who has used digital technology to replace the information-providing role he or she formerly provided.This paper reviews the literature in 828 branding and suggests a radically different 828 marketing and branding framework to understand and manage the emerging buyer-seller relationships and the issues they raise. D o n E. S c h u ltz , N o rth w e s te rn U niversity, 3-101 M T C , 1870 Cam pus D rive, Evanston, IL 60208, USA Recommendations for the new 828 interactive marketplace are made along with discussions on the reconceptualisation o f what 828 brands and branding mean in this new age. A comprehensive research agenda for 828 branding is proposed to meet the challenges o f this new marketplace. E-mail: d s c h u ltz @ n o rth w e s te rn . edu HENRY STEWART PUBLICATIONS 2045-855X JO URNAL OF BRAND STRATEGY V O L 3. N O . 4,357-372 W INTE R 2014-15 357 Z ahay, Schultz and Kumar Keywords branding, digital m arketplace, business-to-business m arketing, sales forces, 82B branding, custom er relationship m anagem ent INTRODUCTION There is increasing evidence that digi tal relationships are dominating today's branding processes.1 One implication of this trend is that digital interactions are rapidly replacing the individual salesper son contacts that have been the hallmark o f the business-to-business (B2B) mar keting and branding model for the past century.2The premise of this paper is that branding activities in a B2B setting, for merly conducted primarily through faceto-face interactions between salespeople and their clients, are now occurring at a different level. This dramatic change in sales, marketing and communication activities between various B2B organisa tions is the result o f the development and implementation of a multitude of digital and interactive technologies. This paper posits that the historic 'seller dominated' B2B marketplace, where the market ing organisation controlled the flow of information, has changed dramatically to one o f 'buyer control'. This shift in power means the seller must now respond to, rather than lead, many of the sales, mar keting and branding conversations. This paper suggests that a radically dif ferent B2B branding framework is needed to understand and manage these new buyerseller relationships and issues. To accomplish such a goal, a new research agenda for B2B branding is proposed one designed to meet the challenges of this new marketplace. The agenda is one that takes these new technologies and net work relationships into account and dem onstrates the dramatic changes currently facing many B2B organisations. 358 A BRIEF LOOK AT HISTORICAL PRECEDENCE B2B marketing has traditionally been based on an Industrial Age model, ie the firm developed products and services, produced them and then promoted them through various external resources. The goal o f that process was to find interested and viable purchasers for those products who would generate revenue and profits for the producer. In this approach, the rela tionship between the buyer and seller was essentially myopic, ie it used a 'sales and transaction' focus rather than a relationship-centred orientation.3'4 W ith such a transactional approach, the inherent belief was that persuasive selling was the key ele ment for success and that 'selling' was best done by a field sales force dealing directly with customers and prospects through face-to-face encounters.5 Thus, the sales person was the face and personification of the company's brand and the primary ele ment in any relationship which might be developed.6,7 Commonly, the salesperson has been considered the driving force in all the steps found in traditional B2B sales, mar keting and communication promotional models.7 Over time, a number of sales/ marketing models have been developed, ranging from the historic AIDA (aware ness interest > desire > action)8'9 to the hierarchical models such as that pro posed by Lavidge and Steiner10 to the more recent versions of various 'sales funnel' approaches.11 In almost all these approaches, marketing, communication and branding have been seen as providing supportive tools for the field sales force, H E N R Y S TEW A R T P U B L IC A T IO N S 2 0 4 5 -8 5 5 X J O U R N A L O F B R A N D S T R A T E G Y V O L . 3, N O . 4 .3 5 7 - 3 7 2 W IN T E R 2 0 1 4 -1 5 Reimagining that is, things that assisted them in gener ating leads and creating sales.12 Conventional wisdom in B2B market ing has also held that the salesperson was the essential factor in establishing, devel oping and maintaining the B2B market ing firm 's brand image. As recently as 2007, Lynch and Chernatony13 noted that personal selling was the primary way in which B2B organisations communicated with their business customers. Therefore, the salesperson was the 'brand ambassador' for the business. This traditional approach assumed the salesperson was in constant and effective contact with the relevant personnel on the buyer side o f the equa tion. That does not often seem to be the case today. In this historic scenario, brand-building activities were generally believed to come primarily from the B2B organisation's efforts, with the seller guiding and direct ing the buyer through the process. In today's digitised world, however, it is pos sible for buyers to take an active role in the brand-building process via a multitude of increasingly available touch points.14,15 This massive shift in information tech nology, and the development o f customerdriven information search systems, has created an interactive and often automated marketplace.16 In this new collaborative landscape, the buyer has access to much more information about solutions to the firm 's wants, needs and requirements than ever before.17 Often, this knowledge is more relevant as the buyer knows his or her needs and the seller often does not. Naude and Holland3 state that the B2B marketplace has transitioned from a trans actional and even a relational orientation to one o f 'information-driven relation ships' which may not even be based on human face-to-face contact. Today's B2B buyers/customers have the ability to conduct much of their branding for the new B2B digital marketplace pre-purchase search for solutions to their product needs and requirements without sales force inputs or even minimal per sonal contact. A recent report indicates that buyers have completed as much as 90 per cent o f the sales cycle by the time they contact a sales representative.18 In this new era, information transfer often occurs through customer-developed formal and informal consortia such as the Institute for the Study of Business Markets in the USA and commercial organisations such as salesforce.com, Gartner and Forrester.19 Such pre-search activities commonly result in the buyer's identification o f alter native suppliers.With the B2B brand sales person no longer occupying the role of 'trusted adviser', the salesperson becomes just another persuasion-focused voice clamouring for attention. This change in the sales force's importance and focus has an impact on how these groups are now sized and structured and the roles they play in the B2B buying process.20 Such a customer-driven scenario has resulted in a buyer who is empowered prior to any salesperson's actual contact.21 In this atmo sphere, branding the firm's products and services becomes vital. While the marketplace and the relation ship between the seller and the buyer have clearly changed, little academic research seems to have investigated, charted or commented on these developments and transitions.22 There are few studies spe cifically looking at the role o f the inter net and social media in a B2B context.21,22 Those that do, however, do not focus on the changing role or the relationship between the salesperson and the buyer.23,24 Indeed, a 2011 review paper by Leek and ChistodouHdes17 outlined the need for such a future research direction for B2B branding in building an understanding o f the customer decision process and the importance of branding at the different H E N R Y S T E W A R T P U B L IC A T IO N S 2 0 4 5 -8 5 5 X J O U R N A L O F B R A N D S T R A T E G Y V O L 3, N O . 4 ,3 5 7 -3 7 2 W IN T E R 2 0 1 4 -1 5 359 A Z ahay , Schultz and K umar stages of that process. That call has not yet been filled. In addition, that paper also makes no mention of the importance of marketing technology systems in today's branding process an example of just how quickly the marketplace is changing. Thus, the present paper argues that the B2B brand must emerge from the shad ows and provide relevant differentiation in an interactive, cluttered, buyer-driven, global marketplace even to be considered by the purchasers. To do that, new models for understand ing B2B branding and the concomitant search process required clearly demand a new research agenda to develop empiri cal methodologies. Because o f the need for extensive research on the needs and requirements of both buyers and sellers in this dramatically different marketplace, this paper first offers a review o f research from both the academic and practitioner realms. This analysis results in a new con ceptual framework which can be used to develop alternative B2B branding models. The paper concludes with a comprehen sive research agenda for both academicians and practitioners. B2B BRANDING AS A CONCEPT From its early roots, branding has now evolved to be considered a source of sus tainable competitive advantage for the firm and an important element o f mar keting strategy and implementation.13 Researchers concur that branding is important for B2B firms17,23,26 and that, going forward, global brands will likely dominate most B2B marketplaces. Strong B2B branding efforts clearly can have long-lasting effects, as demonstrated by Intel's 'Intel Inside' marketing and brand ing campaign from the 1990s. That ongo ing branding effort has enabled Intel to remain among the top ten global brands 360 over the past several decades.27 Further, brand valuation measures have estimated that B2B brands, particularly in the tech nology areas by firms such as Microsoft, IBM and Google, can account for as much as 30 per cent o f the overall value of the firm.28 Much research also shows that brands are important from a strategic point of view. Even though the brand is considered an intangible asset, from a resource-based view (RBV) the firm 's competitive advan tage often results from difficult to imitate firm resources,29 of which brand strength or brand equity is a clear example. In the context o f various forms of B2B relationships, a strong brand creates a distinct identity, differentiates the firm, enhances quality perceptions, serves as a risk-reduction heuristic and, if a competi tive advantage can be created, can allow the firm to command a price premium in the marketplace.23,30\"34 Additionally, a strong B2B brand can influence decision making and relation ship building with the buyer. This often results in more loyalty among custom ers and therefore increases the company's negotiating power in the marketplace23,33,35 and increases the firm 's overall market per formance.37 W ith the proliferation o f and easy access to information about compet ing customers on the internet, branding is more likely than ever to be important to the B2B organisation.38 Branding also becomes more critical in the new age o f B2B marketing because of the changing role of service in the buyerseller relationship. That simply means the salesperson's role becomes more service oriented7 and less sales oriented; thus, all brand contacts become more important. Many o f these thoughts on the impor tance of service can be traced to the service-dominant logic (SDL) concepts developed by Vargo and Lusch.38 These H E N R Y S TEW A R T P U B L IC A T IO N S 2 04 5 -8 S 5 X J O U R N A L O F B R A N D S T R A T E G Y V O L 3, N O . 4 .3 5 7 - 3 7 2 W IN T E R 2 0 1 4 -1 5 Reimagining ideas posit a radically different market place model from the one found in the traditional '4Ps' management approaches. The SDL approach suggests that, as an information technology driven business, new marketing approaches are rapidly replacing the traditional bases o f the sales and marketing functions. The approach demonstrates that when product and service are combined, much o f the pro cess o f delivery occurs online and in the cloud, thus further decreasing the value and importance o f the salesperson in the personal contact portion of the traditional sales model. From this theoretical lens of the SDL, as well as in that suggested by the RJBV, it becomes evident that branding increases in importance to the B2B organisation as these systems evolve. Despite the critical importance of the brand to the organisation, there is a notice able dearth o f academic research related to B2B branding.13,39,40 This statement is particularly true when one compares the research activities of B2B brand organisa tions with what has and continues to be done by and for business-to-consumer (B2C) products and services.17 Interestingly, however, while being dra matically different in approaches and val ues, B2B research has typically taken its lead from the B2C field and has adopted consumer brand equity models similar to those developed by Keller,41,42 Aaker43 and Kuhn and Alpert.44 O ther approaches have included developing brand measure ment models, often unique to B2B mar kets, which explain both the rational and emotional aspects of brand decision mak ing.45There has also been a focus on prod uct versus corporate branding,46 as this is a common approach for B2B organisations. It has been argued that an exact rep lica of consumer buying behaviour models cannot be applied to the B2B H E N R Y S T E W A R T P U B L IC A T IO N S 2 0 4 5 -8 5 5 X branding for the new B2B digital marketplace context because o f the significant differ ences between organisational buyers and retail consumers.47 It is believed that the B2B buyer is commonly more focused on establishing a long-term relationship with the supplier than the B2C buyer, which leads to the belief that more ratio nal buying decisions occur in B2B than in B2C.48,49Thus, traditional persuasive com munication, which is the basis for most B2C brand building efforts, may not be as useful or as effective in the B2B context, even though these forms o f communica tion continue to be explored by brand managers and researchers.50,51 In spite of these differences, there seems to be little doubt that branding activities and brand equity can play a powerful role in industrial markets.52 In order to further explore the changing role o f branding in this new age of B2B marketing, the paper will now focus on understanding the characteristics o f the B2B buyer. THE NEW BREED OF B2B BUYER In recent years, B2B ecommerce has become a much larger and more valuable marketplace than that of the traditional B2C,53 evidencing the trend of more cor porate/ customer interactions occurring online. A recent report from the Oracle Corporation54 showed that B2B marketers are recognising this change and are invest ing heavily in technology-driven selling, particularly through the use of online catalogues, mobile website applications, search engine optimisation (SEO) and content applications for their products and services. Malthouse and Schultz55 con firmed this view by suggesting that mar keters must become more skilled in the use o f social media platforms and other aspects of internet marketing in order to be successful going forward. Search and social media campaigns, content creation JO URNAL O F BRAND STRATEGY V O L . 3, N O . 4 ,3 5 7 - 3 7 2 W IN T E R 2 0 1 4 -1 5 361 " \\ Z ahay , Schultz an d K umar programmes and technologies to facilitate the work of the mobile salesperson are all increasingly part o f the brand-building structure of B2B organisations56 and bring with them their own evaluation and mea surement concerns.57 Examples of the changing buyer behav iour in the new marketplace abound. An industry report indicates that over 56 per cent o f the B2B marketers surveyed (versus 45 per cent of B2C marketers) stated that they had acquired new business partner ships through social media. Further, nearly 69 per cent of these B2B marketers (ver sus to 60 per cent ofB 2C marketers) said that they were able to gather marketplace insights from their social media efforts.58 Another industry study indicates that nearly 78 per cent ofbuyers ofB2B products begin their buying process by researching via an online search engine.59 These statistics show that social media and the internet are increasingly being used by B2B buyers, thus supplementing or even replacing the activi ties of the sales force. This change is being driven in the field by a process known as 'lead nurturing'. Lead-nurturing systems, such as those provided by Marketo,60 now make automated decisions based on buyerseller interactions and hand the lead off to the salesperson at the right moment to enable the closing of the sale.61 There is also evidence o f change on the part o f B2B marketing managers. For example, Singh, Gordon and Purchase62 have outlined how multinational B2B companies have used the internet to replace and supplement many traditional business functions including the field sales force. Mantrala and Albers20 suggest that the selling organisation must become more responsive to these new breeds of buyers who are trained for and want to do business online. Practitioner research also shows that buyers commonly have a mass of 362 H E N R Y S T E W A R T P U B L IC A T IO N S 2 0 4 5 -8 5 5 X information at their fingertips when the salesperson arrives at their door. A recent survey by the corporate executive board o f the Marketing Leadership Council indicates that by the time the salesper son is involved in the sale, at least 60 per cent of the purchase decision process has already been completed.63Thus, it appears that B2B customers increasingly interact on the company's website and with their own industry networks to learn about various product offerings relevant to their needs prior to any formal contact with the potential B2B supplier or its sales force.21 Therefore, the salesperson's role must evolve from being primarily a 'persuasive seller' to becoming a responsible 'value co creator'.This juxtaposition from the old to the new way o f interfacing with the B2B customer is shown in Figure 2. CONCEPTUAL AND STRATEGIC FRAMEW ORKS: PAST VERSUS FUTURE The practitioner and academic research described previously indicates that sub stantial changes must occur in how con ceptual and strategic frameworks relating to B2B sales, marketing and branding are developed. To begin the development of a new conceptual model in this area, the paper will now take a look at 'then' and 'now' in B2B marketing management. As the summary in Table 1 indicates, much has changed from that found in the tradi tional B2B literature regarding basic ideas of: (a) how B2B brands are developed; (b) the buyer decision process and how that has developed and changed; and (c) the importance o f communication in the overall B2B system. Table 1 is divided into two parts. The 'T hen' factors column is a summary of the traditional B2B buying process based on literature sources previously cited and commonly accepted industry buying/ JOURNAL OF BRAND STRATEGY V O L . 3. N O . 4 .3 5 7 -3 7 2 W IN T E R 2 0 1 4 -1 5 Reimagining T a b le I branding for the new B2B digital marketplace B 2 B m a r k e tin g p a s t a n d p r e s e n t Then Now In te r n e t/d ig ita l te c h n o lo g y B ra n d c r e a tio n T h e sales f o r c e Sales p ro c e s s Funnel N u r t u r in g P u rc h a s e d e c is io n B u y e r c e n tr e N e tw o rk A c c e le r a te d D e c is io n p ro c e s s C o n s id e r e d S e llin g p r o p o s itio n V a lu e B ra n d C o n te n t H o a rd e d V e n d o rs p r o v id e f o r fre e A d v e r tis in g /s e llin g Push P ull A w a re n e s s Sales f o r c e / t r a d e s h o w s In t e r n e t: s e a rc h , v e r tic a l in d u s tr y s ite s , p r o fe s s io n a l g ro u p s R e la tio n s h ip s A t t e m p t t o m a nage P a rtic ip a te in n e tw o r k s S e rv ic e P r o d u c t based S e rv ic e an d p r o d u c t a re c o m b in e d selling principles. The 'N ow ' column has been constructed from more recent find ings and the observations outlined above. Whereas brand creation was once the responsibility of the sales force, it is now the responsibility of the brand/m arketing function, often employing internet technology. Further, the sales process his torically relied on the traditional sales fun nel to winnow out prospects to identify customer leads which could be provided to the field sales force. Today, the funnel is a nurturing environment facilitated by technology. W here once the purchase decision was primarily the exclusive job o f the buying centre, it is now part of the broader network of associations where the B2B buyer goes for assistance in mak ing purchasing decisions. W here once the organisational purchase decision was believed to be made as a result of a num ber of personal decisions, ie the traditional 'buying centre', today technology has changed and accelerated that process. In this new world, content is not hoarded by the salesperson to be doled out as needed to the customers, but is freely provided in order to enhance the customer's apprecia tion o f the product and the brand. Even product awareness has migrated from the responsibility of the salesperson, and pros pect attendance at trade shows, and media advertising is increasingly buyer-driven and generated through consortia and internet searches. As a result o f all these changes, relation ships identified by the seller and managed in some type of customer relationship management (CRM) system have shifted to various forms o f participative net works.64This trend is reflected in the shift of all types o f service from product-based to an engagement orientation.65 Quite relevant for this paper, where delivering 'value' and 'value propositions' was tradi tionally the most important part o f the B2B selling process, branding has become increasingly important as buyers today often rely on the recommendations and comments of others and the marketplace reputation of the product, the organisation and the brand in making their purchase decisions. A NEW D EC ISIO N -M A K IN G PROCESS: THE IMPORTANCE OF THE BRAND IN AN INTERACTIVE SEARCH AND FIND B2B MARKETPLACE Today, marketers who are conducting effective B2B lead-generation programmes by responding to how their customers search and purchase are flourishing.53'66As illustrated in Figure 1, the B2B customer is using search, social media, website con tent and other industry sources such as HENRY STEWART PUBLICATIONS 2045-8S5X J O U R N A L O F B R A N D S T R A T E G Y VOL. 3. N O .4 .3 5 7 -3 7 2 W IN TE R 2014-15 363 Z ahay, Sc h u l t z and K umar specialised B2B portals,67 supplemented with salesperson interactions, to learn about and classify the company and/or product and how those fit their require ments. Each of these 'touch points', ie search, social media, web content, industry and professional networks and the sales person and the like, clearly add to the development o f overall brand perceptions. Alternatively, the absence of or misman agement o f these touch points can often result in the prospect making no further inquiry or simply ignoring the firm for any future needs. Indeed, it appears that unless the B2B brand has some relevant position in the customers 'knowledge set', the product, the firm and any potential interaction may go unnoticed and thus not even be considered when it comes to the buying stage.68 Figure 1 illustrates the typical resources that B2B customers may use to gather or acquire needed information prior to any contact with the salesperson. The initial search may rely on a commercial search engine such as Bing, Google or Yahoo. These search engines typically provide results in the form o f lists of potential ven dors from which additional information might be obtained such as vendor company Search F ig u re I 364 Social M edia Company sites Vertical sites Mobile Applications Blogs Public platforms Private sites sites, broad internet search results, vertical sites and mobile applications. Unless the seller's brand is displayed in the first few searches, commonly through some type of recognisable brand or messaging device, the opportunity for that vendor may well end at that point. In addition to the above online search aids, further buyer choices may include content gathering from a variety of sources such as webinars, case studies, rel evant videos, white papers, industry asso ciates, other knowledgeable colleagues and consortia. Since much o f the interac tion between the B2B seller organisation and customer takes place today before the salesperson meets or is even acquainted with the customer, the brand or brands being investigated or considered by the buyer become critical. If the salesperson is no longer the sole repository and dis penser of knowledge for the selling firm, clearly something must fill that void. That can and is increasingly being done through the new role the B2B brand is being asked to play. W ithout the traditional salesperson to reinforce the firm, its capabilities and its image early in the decision process, the B2B marketer must increasingly focus on C ontent Webinars Case studies White papers O ther Industry Sources Experts Colleagues Trade Associations T he Sales person How B2B customers find and process information in the interactive age H E N R Y S TEW A R T P U B L IC A T IO N S 2 0 4 5 -8 5 5 X JO URNAL OF BRAND STRATEGY V O L 3, N O . 4 .3 5 7 - 3 7 2 W IN T E R 2 0 1 4 -1 5 R e im a g in in g brand-building activities and processes prior to actual physical and personal con tact and the initial negotiation between the customer and the sales force.9 In such situations, brand knowledge and accep tance by the customer from a distance becomes not just increasingly important but mandatory for corporate success. THE SALES FUNNEL REIM AGINED As is evident from Figure 1, today the salesperson may be functioning primarily as an information conduit, involved only in the latter parts of the buying process to help negotiate and close the sale. This trend does not denigrate the role of the salesperson, but it does cast them in a new light when it comes to delivering brand and branding information. In the traditional sales force driven model above, the sales force helped the buyer recognise the firm's needs and then moved the buyer toward purchase through a consideration set located in a 'sales fun nel'. As the seller created the 'funnel', the selling firm has traditionally controlled the buyer's movement through that process. That process has developed from the use b r a n d in g fo r t h e n e w B2B d ig it a l m ar ketplac e of various 'value propositions' developed by the seller and presented to the buyer. Today, as shown in Figure 2, it is gen erally acknowledged that this 'purchase funnel' has been collapsed and the process has been rapidly accelerated by network systems through which the buyer identi fies and negotiates choices on a buyerinitiated basis. Thus, the sales force has been pushed more into a 'support' rather than an 'initiator' or 'persuasion' role. Therefore, the role of marketing versus sales in this system is dramatically differ ent from that of the traditional sales fun nel. The historic approach likely requires some fundamental changes (Figure 2) to accommodate this buyer trend of collect ing more and more information, scanning alternatives and critiquing suppliers before the salesperson arrives. In summary, it might be said that per suasive selling by a field sales force is no longer as important or as impactful in the early stages of the buyer's initial purchase decisions of analysis and screening as it has been in the past.The buyer has many more sources of market and product-solution information, some of which are not even known to the seller or to which the seller Then... ...Now Marketing Marketing F ig u r e 2 M a rk e tin g v e rsu s sales in th e sales fu n n e l, th e n a nd n o w S o u rc e : h ttp ://s te v e p a tr iz i.c o m /2 0 12 /1 0 /2 3 /th e -n e w -m a rk e tin g -s a le s -fu n n e l/. H E N R Y S TEW A R T P U B L IC A T IO N S 2 0 4 5 -8 5 5 X J O U R N A L O F B R A N D S T R A T E G Y V O L 3, N O . 4, 3 5 7 -3 7 2 W IN T E R 2 0 1 4 -1 5 365 A Z ahay , Schultz an d K umar often has no access. Thus, the sales force is finding itself in a new position in the B2B marketplace. This new role may be thought of as the 'value proposition nego tiator' and the buyer as an 'aggressive buyer' rather than a 'passive consumer' of information. This trend raises some inter esting questions about how brand knowl edge and relationships are developed in this new, interactive marketplace. THE NEW BUYER ENGAGEMENT PROCESS One question remains uppermost in the buyer engagement process. Not only has the diffusion of information technol ogy enabled buyers to have an as good or a better product and value proposition understanding and competitive knowl edge set as the seller but, in many cases, the buyer evaluation data are less expensive to obtain and manage by the purchasing firm than the traditional alternative resources. This trend means that time spent with the salesperson, visits to trade shows and the like become less important. Thus, one can see a complete shift of marketplace power coming primarily from the development o f 'buyer-side' systems and processes that have emerged and evolved over just the past few years. The model for the 'B2B buyer engage ment process' shown in Figure 3 responds to these changes and charts a course for the future. The model uses the analogy of the basic B2C consumer buying behav iour model which includes five steps. These steps are: (a) need recognition; (b) information search; (c) evaluation of alter natives; (d) purchase; and (e) post-purchase evaluation.69 The first step in the new B2B engage ment process is 'need recognition'. In this phase, the business customer develops an understanding of the needs within their / Post-Purchase Evaluation F ig u re 3 366 Engagement The buyer engagement process H E N R Y S TEW A R T P U B L IC A T IO N S 2 0 4 5 -8 5 5 X J O U R N A L O F B R A N D S T R A T E G Y V O L 3, N O . 4 ,3 5 7 - 3 7 2 W IN T E R 2 0 1 4 -1 5 Reimagining own organisation, typically through vari ous interdisciplinary entities that make up what in the past has been known as the 'buying centre'. The goal, of course, is to come to a basic understanding of the internal problem that needs to be solved. The second step is 'information search'. Here, the buyer initiates the search, and identifies and determines the methods by which data and understanding of their problem(s) might be solved.This focal shift, from the seller to the buyer, has occurred because the buyer commonly knows the problem more intimately. It is easy for the buyer to conceptualise the problem that can be solved through a purchase deci sion but, without this information and understanding, the seller can only specu late. Thus, the buyer, having defined the needs and requirements, does not wait for a salesperson to call. Instead, the person, as a 'buyer' or as a member of the 'buy ing centre', initiates a search by themselves or through some type of consortium or external resource group. Therefore, the model has changed because the situation has changed from 'persuasion' to 'need resolution'. Once the information search is initi ated by the buyer, engagement between the buyer and the seller is the next step. Today, this engagement often occurs by the buyer reaching out to the salesper son through a request-for-proposal or more personally through the internet or social media. The fourth step in the cycle is evaluation of alternatives. B2B buyers are increasingly turning to the internet to evaluate and choose among different solutions and suppliers. Social media web sites offer feedback about suppliers from buyers who have used these resources. While such sites are limited today, they are likely to increase in popularity as they are perceived to provide an unbiased rating scorecard for potential buyers. H E N R Y S T E W A R T P U B L IC A T IO N S 2 0 4 5 -8 5 5 X branding for the new B2B digital marketplace The final steps are purchase and post purchase evaluation interspersed with additional engagement between the buyer and the seller. This interaction occurs when the salesperson finally enters the sales process, either through negotiation or confirmation of the value to be deliv ered. While these activities commonly occur face-to-face, they can also be done through electronic communication from the seller acknowledging the transaction or a phone call from the buyer enquiring about the order status. In the final post purchase evaluation stage, technology again plays a role to create further engage ment. Not only does the purchaser evalu ate the product, but they may also post reviews on internal or external websites or revisit the reviews of others first examined in the search phase. In this new type of buyer approach, the seller's brand becomes increasingly impor tant in this entire 'search and buy' process. Unless the brand or the organisation is recognised and accepted or acceptable to the buyer, the selling organisation and its offerings become just another 'alternative' in the marketplace mix, imbued with little more than a 'commodity' status in terms of buyer preference. Such a situation of commoditisation commonly leads to only price, not a value, being the prime pur chasing consideration. TH E N E W RESEAR CH A G EN D A FOR B 2B B R A N D S A N D B R A N D IN G As can be seen from the preceding litera ture review, traditional research in B2B branding has focused on the conventional salesperson-centric view, with the sales person being the personification and pri mary contact in brand development. The following research suggestions focus on B2B branding research and involve the new technologies and approaches being JO URNAL OF BRAND STRATEGY V O L 3, N O . 4 ,3 5 7 - 3 7 2 W IN T E R 2 0 1 4 -1 5 367 Z ahay , Schultz and K umar used by the buyer. This agenda expands upon the research topics suggested by Leek and Christodoulides17 by incor porating the ideas explored above. They reflect the recent dramatic changes in the B2B buyerseller relationships and pur chasing process. The suggested appropri ate research topics for 2011 were: the B2B brand concept, brand architecture, brand relationships (including the decision making process) and brand equity. The present research agenda fits into these broad topics much more specifically and suggests research on new trends in tech nology and their impact on B2B brand ing. Therefore, the following research topics are based on the new B2B brand ing paradigm: B2B customer brand valuation developed through digital media. How does the B2B customer value the brand in a new mar ketplace where relationships are cre ated and established through search, social media and technology, rather than through personal contact with the salesperson? How can B2B brands be developed and maintained in this type o f'arms-length' system? Competing content and the brand concept. What is the impact and effect of alter native and perhaps conflicting content available in today's B2B marketplace? In other words, what impact does access to a wealth of information about com panies, products, processes and the like have on the buyer-decision processes? Do these processes change or are they simply maintained and modified? Most importantly, do they affect what cus tomers and prospects feel and think about the brand? Distribution channels and brand equity. What is the impact of complex distri bution channels on the creation of or destruction of brand value in the B2B 368 H E N R Y S TEW A R T P U B L IC A T IO N S 204S -85S X marketplace? As the seller has less and less control over the communication processes, and conversations today about the brand often occur outside the pur view of the brand owner, what is the impact of this loss of control? Information search/availability and the brand concept. Given the changes in the buyer's information availability and the rapidity with which that information changes, what is the impact on how the brand develops long-term promo tional concepts? In other words, should the brand represent the product/service or the corporate organisation and how would that practice change current branding approaches? Information search /availability and the purchase decision. How does the shift in marketplace knowledge from the seller to a wide range of buyer/influencers through consortia, blogs, vendor-views, white papers and the like influence the way in which the development of B2B brand value occurs? What is the oppor tunity for 'brand co-creation' and the resulting co-creation o f 'ongoing brand value'? Content marketing strategies and the brand concept. It has been suggested that effec tively placed content on a website can lead the prospect through the sales pro cess, educating and answering questions along the way, much like an 'electronic salesperson', if you will. Many ques tions still need to be answered about content marketing, however, including what types of content are most effec tive in each stage of the customer pur chase journey. For example, what is the relative effectiveness of webinars versus white papers and how does this impact the traditional theoretical explanation for effectiveness? Zahay70 has suggested that B2B researchers focus on the role of the salesperson, the growth of con- JO URNAL O F BRAND STRATEGY V O L . 3, N O . 4 ,3 5 7 - 3 7 2 W IN T E R 2 0 1 4 -1 5 Reimagining tent marketing and the role of social media as well as the B2B search process. Is this a sufficient model or should more factors be included? Search and the decision-making process. How does the B2B search process occur today, eg beyond the limits of the firm? How does extending the concept of the buying centre beyond the traditional concept of the buying unit occur? Doubtless, new, improved and extended concepts are being developed and tested in the marketplace. What are they and how influential are they on the buyer's search process? What impact does this have on growing or diminishing the brand in the decision-making process? Brand architecture as affected by new technol ogy. The relative effectiveness of the rap idly expanding automated lead-genera tion and selling systems is another area ripe for research. In addition, research is needed on the implications of these new tools on sales force size and struc ture along with the resulting impact on the B2B brand.20 The branding concept and brand relationships in the new era. Is the era o f 'persuasion' and 'persuasive selling' over or at least drawing to a close? Is it being replaced by a more interactive 'value develop ment and sharing' approach between the buying and selling organisations? If so, what is the impact on the training of the field sales force in terms of becom ing 'brand ambassadors' rather than just quarter-to-quarter, quota-driven sales generators? These are just a few of the areas and top ics that need to be investigated. Doubtless, there are others. While these issues are posed here as brand and branding issues, they are likely to influence most of the decisions being made by B2B managers in the months and years ahead. Addressing branding for the new B2B digital marketplace these potential research areas will likely narrow the gap between B2B branding research and that being done by B2C brand managers. Some time ago, Fern and Brown71 suggested that grounding industrial marketing research in market ing theories and empirically testing vari ous models would lead to B2B research coalescing with B2C research progress with value for all. With the proposal out lined in this paper, one should anticipate further B2B branding research that takes into account the changing sellerbuyer relationship, which can only benefit both parties. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND NEXT STEPS Based on this investigation, there is clear evidence that the entire field of sales, marketing and the management of B2B organisations, both from the buyer and seller sides, is undergoing rapid and seem ingly disruptive change. This paper has outlined some of those major changes and how they are influencing the practice of B2B branding and brand management. The changes are so massive and the impact so pervasive that it is almost impossible to do justice to the subject in a journal paper. Therefore, this analysis, report and sugges tions for future study and change should be viewed primarily as a call to action by both academicians and practitioners. The problems and challenges are substantial, but the opportunities are equally great. While some of the observations and recommendations may appear to be too aggressive and radical, when viewed in the context of what is occurring in the marketplace they may actually be too lim ited and limiting and may take too long to develop. The entire field of B2B is beset by new entrants, new technologies, new competitors and new methodologies for H E N R Y S T EW A R T P U B L IC A T IO N S 2 0 4 5 -8 5 5 X J O U R N A L O F B R A N D S T R A T E G Y V O L 3, N O . 4 ,3 5 7 - 3 7 2 W IN T E R 2 0 1 4 -1 5 369 Z a h a y , Sc h u lt z and K umar solving problems. Rapid changes reward the nimble while punishing the staid and plodding. Thus, getting better at what the organisation does now is almost a sure path to irrelevance, along with loss of custom ers, market share and ultimately profits. Clearly, change dramatic change is needed. It is hoped that this paper will encourage all B2B marketers and academ ics to engage with each other and with their customers to find solutions to the demands on how brands are developed, built and maintained in a dramatically dif ferent marketplace. References (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) 370 Bughin,J. (2014) 'Brand success in an era of digital Darwinism',Journal of Brand Strategy, Vol. 2, No. 4, pp. 355-365. Miller, M. (2012) 'B2B Digital Marketing: Using the Web to Market Directly to Business', Que, Indianapolis, IN. Naude, P. and Holland, C. (1996) 'Businessto-business relationships'. In: F. Butde (ed.) 'Relationship Marketing,Theory and Practice', Sage, Newbury Park, CA, pp. 40-54. Sheth, J. N. (1973) 'A model of industrial buyer behavior',Journal of Marketing,Vol. 37, pp. 5056. Anderson, R . (1996) 'Personal selling & sales management in the new Millennium',Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management,Vol. 16, No. 4, pp. 17-32. Ball, B. and Monoghan, R. (1994) 'Redefining the sales and marketing relationship', Potentials in Marketing, October, pp. 19-20. Sheth, J. N. and Sharma,A. (2008) 'The impact o f the product to service shift in industrial markets and the evolution of the sales organization', Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 37, No. 3, pp. 260-269. Strong, E. (1925) 'The Psychology of Selling and Advertising', McGraw-Hill, New York. Sharma, A. and Sheth, J. (2010) 'A framework of technology mediation in consumer selling: Implications for firms and sales management', Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, Vol. 30, No. 2, pp. 121-129. Lavidge, R. and Steiner, G. (1961) 'A model for predictive measurements of advertising effectiveness',Journal of Marketing,Vol. 25, pp. 5962. Dalrymple, D., Cron,W. and DeCarlo,T. (2008) 'Sales Management', John Wiley, Hoboken, NJ. (12) Rouzies, D., Anderson, E., Kohli,A., Michaels, R.,Weitz, B. and Zoltners,A. (2005) 'Sales and marketing integration: A proposed framework', Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, Vol. 25, No. 2, pp. 113-122. (13) Lynch, J. and de Chernatony, L. (2007) 'Winning hearts and minds: Business-to-business branding and the role of the salesperson'Journal ofMarketing Management,Vol. 23, Nos 12, pp. 123-135. (14) Holland, J. and Baker, S. (2001) 'Customer participation in creating site brand loyalty', Journal of Interactive Marketing,Vol. 15, No. 4, pp. 34-45. (15) Peltier,J., Schultz, D., Schibrowky,J. and Zahay, D. (2006) 'Interactive IMC:The relational transactional continuum and the synergistic use of customer data ',Journal ofAdvertising Research, Vol. 46, No. 2, pp. 146-159. (16) Ballantyne, D. and Aitken, R. (2007) 'Branding in B2B markets: Insights from the service-dominant logic of marketing',Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing,Vol. 22, No. 6, pp. 363-371. (17) Leek, S. and Christodoulides, G. (2011) 'A literature review and future agenda for B2B branding: Challenges of branding in a B2B context', Industrial Marketing Management,Vol. 40, No. 6, pp. 830837. (18) Rothman, D. (2014) 'Lead Generation for Dummies', John Wiley, Hoboken, NJ. (19) Anders Pink (2014) Anders Pink website, available at: http://anderspink.com/insightsinto-b2b-buyers-and-informationsources-theyuse/ (accessed 30th March, 2014). (20) Mantrala, M. and Albers, S. (2012) 'The impact o f the internet on B2B sales force size and structure'. In: G. L. Lilien and R . Grewal (eds) 'Handbook of Business-to-Business Marketing', Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp. 539-559. (21) Brennan, R. and Croft, R . (2012) 'The use of social media in B2B marketing and branding: An exploratory study',Journal of Customer Behavior, Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 101-115. (22) Sharma, A. (2002) 'Trends in internet-based business-to-business marketing', Industrial Marketing Management,Vol. 31, No. 2, pp. 7784. (23) Michaelidou, N., Siamagka, N.T. and Christodoulides, G. (2011) 'Usage, barriers and measurement of social media marketing: An exploratory investigation of small and medium B2B brands', Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 40, No. 7, pp. 1153-1159. (24) Busscher, N. (2013) 'Social media:Their role as marketing tools in b2b marketing', Unpublished BA thesis, University ofTwente, Enschede. (25) Sila, I. (2013) 'Factors affecting the adoption ofb2b e-commerce technologies', Electronic Commerce Research, May,Vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 199-236. HE N R Y S TEW A R T P U B L IC A T IO N S 2 0 4 5 -8 5 5 X J O U R N A L O F B R A N D S T R A T E G Y V O L . 3. N O . 4 ,3 5 7 -3 7 2 W IN T E R 2 0 1 4 -1 5 Reimagining (26) Mudambi, S., Doyle, P. and Wong,V. (1997) 'An exploration of branding in industrial markets', Industrial Marketing Management,Mol. 26, No. 5, pp. 433-446. (27) Interbrand (2014) 'Best global brands report', available at: http://www.interbrand. com/en/best-global-brands/2013/BestGlobalBrands-2013.aspx (accessed 30th March, 2014). (28) Brand Finance (2014) 'League tables', available at: http://brandirectory.com/league_tables/ table/global-500-2014 (accessed 30th March, 2014). (29) Barney,J. (1991) 'Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage',Journal of Management, Vol. 17, No. l,pp. 88-120. (30) Michell, P., King,J. and Reast.J. (2001) 'Brand values related to industrial products', Industrial Marketing Management,Mol. 30, No. 5, pp. 415-425. (31) Cretu, A. E. and Brodie, R . J. (2007) 'The influence of brand image and company reputation where manufacturers market to small firms: A customer value perspective', Industrial Marketing Management,Mol. 36, No. 2, pp. 230-240. (32) Low, J. and Blois, K. (2002) 'The evolution of generic brands in industrial markets: The challenges to owners of brand equity', Industrial Marketing Management,Vol. 31, No. 5, pp. 385-392. (33) Ohnemus, L. (2009) 'B2B branding: A financial burden for shareholders?', Business Horizons,Mol. 52, No. 2, pp. 159-166. (34) Brown, B. P., Zablah, A. R ., Bellenger, D. N. and Johnston, W J. (2011) 'When do B2B brands influence the decision making of organizational buyers? An examination o f the relationship between purchase risk and brand sensitivity', International Journal of Research in Marketing,Mol. 28, No. 3, pp. 194-204 (35) Wise, R . and Zednickova, J. (2009) 'The rise and rise o f the B2B brand'Journal of Business Strategy,Mol. 30, No. 1, pp. 4-13. (36) McQuiston, D. H. (2004) 'Successful branding of a commodity product: The case of RAEX LASER steel', Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 33, No. 4, pp. 345-354. (37) Homburg, C., Klarmann, M. and Schmitt,J. (2009) 'Brand awareness in business markets: When is it related to firm performance?', International Journal of Research in Marketing,Mol. 27, pp. 201-212. (38) Vargo, S. and Lusch, R. (2004) 'Evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing',Journal of Marketing,Mol. 68, No. 1, pp. 117. (39) Kim,J., Reid, D., Plank, R. and Dahlstrom, R. (1998) 'Examining the role o f brand equity in business markets: A model, research propositions, (40) (41) (42) (43) (44) (45) (46) (47) (48) (49) (50) (51) (52) (53) branding for the new B2B digital marketplace and managerial implications',Journal of Businessto Business Marketing,Mol. 5, No. 3, pp. 6589. Zablah, A. R., Brown, B. P. and Donthu, N. (2010) 'The relative importance o f brands in modified rebuy purchase situations', International Journal of Research in Marketing,Mol. 27, No. 3, pp. 248-260. Keller, K. (2001) 'Building Customer-based Brand Equity: A Blueprint for Creating Strong Brands', Marketing Science Institute, Cambridge. Keller, K. (2003) 'Building, Measuring, and Managing Brand Equity', Pearson Education, Upper Saddle River, NJ. Aaker, D. (1991,1996) 'Building Strong Brands', Free Press, New York, NY. Kuhn, K. and Alpert, F. (2004) 'Applying Keller's Brand Equity Model in a B2B Context: Limitations and an Empirical Test', Australian and New Zealand Marketing Academy, Wellington. Jensen, M. and Klastrup, K. (2008) 'Towards a B2B customer-based brand equity model', Journal ofTargeting, Measurement & Analysis for Marketing,Mol. 16, No. 2, pp. 122-128. Aspara,J. andTikkanen, H. (2008) 'Significance of corporate brand for business-to-business companies', Marketing Review,Mol. 8, No. 1, pp. 43-60. Lam, S., Shankar,V., Erramilli, M. and Murthi, B. (2004) 'Customer value, satisfaction, loyalty, and switching costs: An illustration from a business-to-business services context', Academy of Marketing ScienceJournal,Mol. 32, No. 3, pp. 293-311. Webster, F. and Keller, K. (2004) 'A roadmap for branding in industrial markets'Journal of Brand Management,Mol. 11, No. 5, pp. 388-402. Wilson, D. (2000) 'Why divide consumer and organizational buyer behaviour', European Journal of Marketing,Mol. 34, No. 7, pp. 780-796. Mitchell,V. (1995) 'Organizational risk perception and reduction: A literature review', British Journal of Management,Mol. 6, No. 2, pp. 115-133. Johnston,W J. and Lewin,J. E. (1996) 'Organizational buying behavior:Toward an integrative fram ew orkJournal of Business Research,Mol. 35, No. 1, pp. 115. Bendixen, M., Bukasa, K. and Abratt, R. (2004) 'Brand equity in the business-to-business market', Industrial Marketing Management,Mol. 33, No. 5, pp. 371-380. Hoar, A. (2012) 'US B2B eCommerce sales to reach $559 billion by the end of 2013', Andy Hoar's blog, available at: http://blogs. forrester. com/andy_hoar/12-10-18-us_b2b_ ecommerce_sales_to_reach_559_billion_by_ the_end_of_2013 (accessed 26thJanuary, 2015). H E N R Y S T E W A R T P U B L IC A T IO N S 2 0 4 5 -8 5 5 X J O U R N A L O F B R A N D S T R A T E G Y V O L 3, N O . 4 ,3 5 7 - 3 7 2 W IN T E R 2 0 1 4 -1 5 37 A Z ahay, Schultz and Kumar (54) Oracle (2012) 'B2B eCommerce trends', available at: http://www.oracle.com/us/ products/applications/web-commerce/ b2b-ecommerce-trends-2012-1503041 .pdf (accessed 30th March, 2014). (55) Schultz, D. E., Malthouse, E. and Pick, D. (2012) 'From CM to C RM to CN2: A research agenda for the marketing communications transition'. In:T. Langner, S. Okazaki and M. Eisend (eds) 'Advances in Advertising Research',Vol. III. European Advertising Academy, Amsterdam, pp. 421-432. (56) IBM (2010) 'How IBM uses b2b social media' (video), available at: http://bit.ly/9MU13j (accessed 30th March, 2014). (57) Henry, M. and Harte, B. (2012) 'A new model o f assessing the value o f social media activity', Journal of Brand Strategy,V61. 1, No. 3, pp. 234-239. (58) Stelzner, M. (2012) '2012 Social media marketing industry report', SocialMedia Examiner, available at: http://w w w . socialmediaexaminer.com/social-mediamarketing-industry-report-2012/ (accessed 30th March, 2014). (59) Nanji, A. (2013) 'B2B buyers prefer short content; rely heavily on Google searches', MarketingProfs, available at: http://w ww . marketingprofs.com/charts/2013/12095/b2bbuyers-prefershort-content-and-rely-heavilyon-google-searches (accessed 30th March, 2014). (60) Marketo (2014) 'The definitive guide to lead nurturing', Marketo, available at: http://w ww . marketo. com/ definitive-guides/lead-nurturing/ (accessed 12th May, 2014). (61) Roush, W. (2011) 'Death o f the salesman? Marketo is automating sales relationships and growing like crazy', Xconomy, available at: http://www.xconomy.com/sanfrancisco/2011/11/08/death-of-the-salesman- 372 marketo-is-automating-sales-relationships-andgrowing-like-crazy/ (accessed 30th March, 2014). (62) Singh,T., Gordon, G. and Purchase, S. (2007) 'B2B e-marketing strategies of multinational corporations: Empirical evidence from the United States and Australia', Mid-American Journal of Business, Vol. 22, No. 1, pp. 3144. (63) Corporate Executive Board Marketing Leadership Council and Google 'The digital evolution in B2B marketing', white paper. (64) Nokkentved, C. and Hedda, L. (2000) 'Collaborative processes in esupply networks', IMP Group, Nova Scotia, available at: h ttp :// www.impgroup.org/uploads/papers/102.pdf (accessed 30th March, 2014). (65) Coviello, N., Roderick, J., Danaher, P and Johnston, W. (2002) 'How firms relate to their markets: An empirical examination of contemporary marketing practices',Journal of Marketing,Vol. 66, No. 3, pp. 33-46. (66) Wizdo, L. (2011) 'The lead-nurturing payoff for the tech industry',Technology Marketing Professionals. (67) Clarke III, I. and Flaherty,T. B. (2003) 'Webbased B2B portals', Industrial Marketing Management,Vol. 32, No. 1, pp. 15-23. (68) Van Riel, A. C., Pahud de Mortanges, C. and Streukens, S. (2005) 'Marketing antecedents of industrial brand equity: An empirical investigation in specialty chemicals', Industrial Marketing Management,Vol. 34, No. 8, pp. 841-847. (69) Dewey, J. (2008) 'How We Think', revised edn, Cosimo Classics, New York, NY. (70) Zahay, D. (2012) 'Going interactive', Academy of Marketing Science Quarterly, Fall/Winter, p. 11. (71) Fern, E. F. and Brown, J. R. (1984) 'The industrial/consumer marketing dichotomy: A case of insufficient justification',Journal of Marketing,Vol. 48, pp. 6877. H E N R Y S TEW A R T P U B L IC A T IO N S 2 0 4 5 -8 5 5 X J O U R N A L O F B R A N D S T R A T E G Y V O L 3. N O . 4. 3 5 7 -3 7 2 W IN T E R 2 0 1 4 -1 5 Copyright of Journal of Brand Strategy is the property of Henry Stewart Publications LLP and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use