Brand-Management Theoretical Principles in Music Business

Next, a diagram of the brand «health» is built, which allows you to assess its viability (Table 3). Thanks to the analysis of the «health» chart of the brand, it is possible to identify those areas that need measures to improve the effectiveness of brand management.

Table 3. Matrix for determining the «health» of a musical artist's brand

Source: developed on the basis of (De Chernatony, 2006)

Next, we considerM. Sherrington's model. He suggests evaluating the effectiveness of brand management using KPI (Key Performance Indicator), which is associated with the company strategy (Sherrington, 2006). He focuses on the necessity to highlight the dominant KPI, as this will help focus the business on the right character. However, such an approach requires constant monitoring of brand viability and additional verification of the selected dominant KPI, which can complicate the evaluation system as a whole.

Figure 1. Chernatony's model Source: developed on the basis of (De Chernatony, 2006)

D. Aaker's model. American specialist and guru of brand management D. Aaker (2003) states that to assess the effectiveness of brand management, it is necessary to analyze indicators of the use of brand capital assets, such as «brand awareness», «perceived brand quality», «brand loyalty» and «associations» that are related to the brand (pp. 34-44).

To assess the effectiveness of the use of assets, a system of characteristics (Table 4) is used, which the creator called the «ten characteristics of brand equity» (or Brand Equity Ten). In addition, the author emphasizes that effective brand management includes a system of not only financial but also behavioral and market indicators (Aaker, 2003, рp. 376-377). It should be noted that these ten indicators are not necessarily a constant, they can be modified depending on the specific situation and the task being performed.

The table shows that the first four indicators groups are consumer estimates of branded capital assets, which can be obtained as a result of research. The fifth group uses indicators that reflect the market situation (market share, brand representation in the distribution network). D. Aaker also believes that consumer loyalty to the brand remains the main parameter of brand capital since it is a barrier to a competitor that makes it possible to get time for appropriate measures when the competitor's new products appear. In addition, it acts as support in a situation of destructive price competition.

Table 4. Ten indicators of Aaker's Brand Equity Model

Source: developed on the basis of (Aaker, 2003)

The approach of T. Munoz and S. Kumar (2004). These specialists propose to build a brand management evaluation system based on three classes of metrics that allow evaluating effectiveness:

- perception metrics;

- behavioral metrics;

- financial metrics (p. 283).

At the same time, the company itself determines which metrics to include in these groups. However, this model does not include market indicators, such as market share and brand distribution levels, focusing only on consumer and financial metrics.

D. Lehmann, K. Keller, and J. Farley study. The principal purpose of this study was to identify universal brand metrics and establish the interdependence between them. Using the results obtained, an evaluation system was formed from six key groups of brand metrics: brand awareness, comparative advantage, interpersonal relationships, brand history, brand preference, and brand commitment (Lehmann et al., 2008). In addition, the authors note the need to pay more attention to «interpersonal relationships» and «brand history». The established groups of metrics can be used to build a general model for evaluating the effectiveness of brand management.

Another approach to assessing the effectiveness of brand management is to determine the brand strength, that is, the force of attracting the consumer to the brand. These techniques themselves provide useful information for analysis. According to this methodology, the market strength of the brand is evaluated based on the calculation of seven criteria: leadership, stability, market, internationality, trend, support, legal protection. Based on the evaluation results of each of these parameters, an integral estimate is given, which is expressed quantitatively as a percentage.

Business practice shows that the most understandable indicator of brand effectiveness is its contribution assessment directly to the company sale. This assessment allows you to see how much the brand's contribution to the overall current sales success of the company is and how stable it is.

3FM technology is a universal tool for evaluating brand effectiveness, developed by «Proryv Company» specialists based on The Boston Consulting Group's three-factor concept (Poezzhaev, 2006). This technology allows you to evaluate the brand contribution to the overall commercial results of the company in relative terms. This, in turn, allows you to compare the effectiveness of brands of different scales with different promotion budgets. As a result of the evaluation, a coefficient is obtained that determines how much the brand helps to achieve financial success in the market.

3FM (3 Factors «More») technology allows you to calculate the efficiency coefficient of brands and find out their academic performance based on retail audit and brand tracking data. The evaluation of brand effectiveness is based on a three-factor model of the transformation of brand strength into additional financial flows (Added Value Agent) through quantitative parameters of sales analysis and brand image, expressed by the formula 3 «More»:

M1 - «To sell it's more». An indicator that determines a brand contribution to the increase in brand sales concerning similar «non-branded» products in specific distribution channels. It allows evaluating how much the brand increases sales of this product.

M2 - «To sell more expensively». An indicator that determines the brand's contribution to increasing the product profitability in terms of brand support costs. Allows you to assess how much the brand helps to get more profit from sales.

M3 - «It's more than prospects». This indicator determines the possibility of increasing the brand's influence (brand extension) and expanding its target segment in the medium term. Allows you to assess how much additional financial flows from the brand operation may increase in the future.

The final coefficient

Ms = M1 х M2 х M3

allows you to evaluate the overall effectiveness of a brand relative to a non-branded product and in comparison with the performance indicators of other brands.

S. Davis andM. Dunn Model (2005). In their opinion, to assess the role of the brand in achieving a company's strategic and tactical goals, it is necessary to develop measurable parameters for evaluating the effectiveness of actions of a brand-oriented company that adheres to the existing or desired policy when making strategic decisions (p. 147).

To develop such performance indicators, S. Davis and M. Dunn propose to use the concept of contact brand management. Its essence is that by identifying and controlling the points of contact between the brand and the consumer, it is possible to assess the effectiveness of brand management. At the same time, contact points are understood as all those ways in which existing and potential consumers contact the brand and which can be used to influence current or future decisions related to the brand.

To assess the effectiveness of brand management, S. Davis and M. Dunn (2005) suggest analyzing the formation of consumer experience by three groups of points of contact between the consumer and the brand:

1) experience before making a purchase;

2) experience while making a purchase;

3) experience after making a purchase.

The authors note that the distribution of contact points into these groups is rather arbitrary since the same points can be in more than one group meanwhile and influence the behavior of both potential and real buyers.

The first group of points of contact is aimed at attracting new consumers. It forms knowledge about the brand before making a purchase. The experience of brand contact can be obtained primarily due to the influence of various marketing communication tools: advertising, viral marketing, PR campaigns, sales promotion, etc. Marketing communications are aimed at:

- firstly, creating awareness about the brand;

- secondly, the formation of brand perception and associated expectations;

- thirdly, the transmission of brand main benefits and advantages to a potential buyer;

- fourthly, the inclusion of the brand in the buyer's choice set.

At the same time, with the help of marketing communications, one should not overstate or exaggerate the customers' expectations from this brand acquisition, since a negative experience of using it after purchase can lead to consumer disappointment and unwillingness to re-purchase products under the appropriate name.

The second group of contact points is formed when buying. It is aimed at creating positive consumer contact with the brand when making a purchase. The formation of the brand's favorable impression is influenced by the quality of service and professionalism of the sales staff, the atmosphere in the store, merchandising, and sales promotion campaigns at the point of sale. Within the framework of music show business, the second group points are concerts, merch of performers, a fun-sign meeting, etc.).

The third group contacts after making a purchase. It is aimed, firstly, at maintaining a favorable image among consumers who have made a purchase; secondly, to achieve a high level of satisfaction from the purchase they have made. For a positive experience formation after the purchase, after-sales service activities, guarantees, and service are very important. However, the main goal of forming the experience gained after the purchase is to increase the number of loyal customers of the company and brand. This goal realization is helped not only by a high level of service and brand support following the expectations that arose before and during the purchase, but also by loyalty promotion programs (discount programs, sales promotion promotions, clubs of regular consumers).

The effectiveness of contact brand management is to ensure that the consumer receives a positive impression at all levels of contact with the brand. If the consumer has received a negative experience at one of the contact points levels, this can lead to the inefficiency of brand management overall. In other words, a favorable impression received by a customer at one of the levels of brand contact points is not always able to compensate for the negative experience received at another level. Yes, a negative experience at a certain point of contact will undermine the buyer's trust, and brand promises made at other stages will be in vain. It is the total amount of contacts with the brand that forms their reaction to brand management programs that provide for managing the entire process of forming the consumer experience before, during, and after making a purchase. In this regard, a brand manager needs to understand how existing and potential consumers come into direct contact with the brand.

Metrics of contact brand management in the S. Davis and M. Dunn model. The authors cite two groups of indicators that should be taken into account in the company's metrics system: tactical and strategic.

Tactical metrics allow you to analyze the brand management effectiveness in terms of customer experience formation at the points of contact with the brand. Thanks to these metrics, it is possible to evaluate the activities carried out by the company related to existing or potential customers within one of three groups of points of contact with the brand. The following metrics of brand management effectiveness are considered tactical by S. Davis and M. Dunn (2005):

- brand awareness;

- brand understanding;

- brand relevance;

- brand credibility;

- fulfilling brand promises;

- brand preference;

- brand review;

- brand influence on the purchasing decision;

- fulfillment of the promise by the brand;

- brand satisfaction;

- brand recommendation (pp. 244-252).

The listed tactical metrics should be taken into account when evaluating the effectiveness of the company's measures at the points of contact with the brand. Performance analysis allows you to identify the strengths and weakensses of the brand and identify those points of contact with the brand that needs to be improved.

Strategic metrics, in turn, provide diagnostics of the brand's influence on business efficiency. They help to assess the impact of brand creation actions on the overall effectiveness of the brand (Davis & Dunn, 2005, p. 244).

The following strategic metrics of brand management effectiveness allow us to assess how efforts to create a brand and actions at the points of contact with it affect the overall results of work. These are the following metrics:

- brand expansion;

- acquisition of customers with the brand help;

- retention of brand customers;

- brand purchasing power;

- price premium for the brand;

- brand commitment.

In general, the choice of metrics for evaluating the effectiveness of brand management depends on the evaluation goals. Without a clear understanding of specific goals, it will be difficult to determine which of the metrics is really of fundamental importance in this situation or, in general, in the brand strategy.

Conclusions

In this article, the brand concepts, its creation process, as well as brand management features in the music business, and methods of evaluating its effectiveness were considered. That allows us to draw the following conclusions.

1. In the theoretical analysis process, it's revealed that a brand is considered as a wide set of features that distinguish it from other similar ones and enhance recognition among consumers. The strength of the brand is that it will be chosen among similar products with similar qualities. The qualitative brand formation, the orientation of all its components to the main idea, and the active use of consumer research results can ensure its long-term existence. It is also established that brand management is aimed at creating a positive brand image, maintaining and enhancing its position in the market.

2. In the modern music show business, brand management should become one of the ways to promote a musical artist. Creating and promoting an artist's personal brand is extremely important and efficient. The point of music brand management is to make an artist recognizable, form a loyal fan base, and effectively promote their brand in the music market. With effectively planned and successfully implemented brand management, the target audience will truly love a particular artist or music band, buy up music, albums, and other products related to their idol.

3. A brand is a dynamic structure that requires constant monitoring by the manager. The music artist's brand is no exception. To assess the effectiveness of brand management in the music industry, the models and techniques used in commodity brand management: for example, the model of D. Aaker or L. De Chernatony, the metrics of S. Davis and M. Dunn, etc. In music show business, when a music performer's brand becomes an important asset, evaluating the effectiveness of brand management activities becomes extremely necessary. It is brand management effective evaluation that allows managers and producers to make informed and more effective decisions in the future, as well as optimize the brand management process itself.

The scientific novelty. The scientific novelty lays in generalizing and systematizing theoretical provisions on brand management, in particular, the management of musical artist's brand; it is proposed to consider a musical artist as a brand that holds their particular characteristics and elements, which can and should be formed and promoted in the market according to the principles of brand management. Also, in this work, the methodology for evaluating the effectiveness of a musical artist's personal brand, taking into account the specific features of the musical show business, has been further developed.

The significance of the study. The significance of this study results lies in the possibility of using them in the process of forming a personal brand of a musical artist, integrating brand management into the strategy of promoting musical artists, in particular in Ukraine, as well as in developing recommendations for the strategy of promoting musical artists of domestic show business. The results of the study can also be used in the process of teaching academic disciplines related to marketing and music management.

Prospects for further research. Of course, this topic has many directions for further research, both theoretical and especially practical. Among them, it is worth mentioning the analysis of Ukrainian performers' personal brands (with comparison and recommendations creation), the development of methods for evaluating the effectiveness of the musical artist's personal brand, social networks influence on the construction and promotion of a musical artist personal brand, etc.

References

1. Aaker, D. (2003). Sozdaniye Sil'nykh Brendov [Building Strong Brands] (Trans. in Eng.). Moscow: Publishing House «Grebennikov» (in Russ.).

2. American Marketing Association (n.d.). Branding, Retrieved from https://www. ama.org/topics/branding/.

3. Borisov, B. L., (2001). Tekhnologii Reklamy i PR [Advertising Technologies and PR]. Мoscow: GRAND: Fair-press (in Russ.).

4. Bove, K. L., & Arens, U. F. (2001). Sovremennaya Reklama[Contemporary Advertising] (Trans. in Eng.). Мoscow: Dovgan' (in Russ.).

5. Brymer, Ch. (2003). What Makes Brands Great. Brands and Branding. London: EIU: Economist Intelligence Unit, 65-76.

6. Bulgarelli, F. (2015). Methods of Brand Valuation, Retrieved from http://www. vernimmen.net/ftp/Francesca_Bulgarelli_Master_Thesis.pdf.

7. Chernozubenko, P. (n.d.a). Brend [Brand]. Zapiski Marketologa: Marketingovyy Slovar' [Marketer's Notes: Marketing Dictionary], Retrieved from https:// www.marketch.ru/marketing_dictionary/marketing_terms_b/brand/ (in Russ.).

8. Chernozubenko, P. (n.d.b). Brending [Branding]. Zapiski Marketologa: Marketingovyy Slovar' [Marketer's Notes: Marketing Dictionary], Retrieved from https:// www.marketch.ru/marketing_dictionary/marketing_terms_b/branding/ (in Russ.).

9. Chornozub, O. (2004). Stoimost' Brenda: Real'nost'PrevoskhoditMify [Brand Value: Reality Surpasses Myths], Retrieved from http://www.sostav.ru/ articles/2004/03/16/mark160304-2/ (in Russ.).

10. Davis, S., & Dunn, M. (2005). Brend-bilding: Sozdaniye Biznesa, Raskruchivayushchego Brend [Building the Brand-Driven Business: Operationalize Your Brand to Drive Profitable Growth] (Trans. in Eng.). St. Petersburg: Piter (in Russ.).

11. De Chernatony, L. (2006). From Brand Vision to Brand Evaluation: The Strategic Process of Growing and Strengthening Brands. Amsterdam: Elsevier, doi: https://doi.org /10.4324/9780080459660.

12. Dwi Putra, A., & Hudrasyah, H. (2012). An Audience Research in Music Industry: Characteristic of the Fans of Balum. Journal of Business and Management, 1(2), 73-78.

13. Grant, J. (2007). Manifest Innovatsiy Brenda: kak Sozdayutsya Brendy, Pere- oriyentatsiya Rynkov i Preodoleniye Stereotipov [The Brand Innovation Manifesto: How to Build Brands, Redefine Markets and Defy Conventions] (Trans. in Eng.). Мoscow: IDT Group (in Russ.).

14. Gregory, J. R., & Wiechmann, J. (1997). Leveraging the Corporate Brand. Lincolnwood, Ill.: NTC Business Books.

15. Kiseleva, O. V. (2006). Sushchnost' i Opredeleniye Ponyatiya Brend [Essence and Definition of the Brand Concept]. Sovremennyy Nauchnyy Vestnik. Seriya: Ekonomika [Modern Scientific Bulletin. Series: Economics], 2(3), Retrieved from https://studopedia.su/4_35837_evolyutsiya-termina-brend. html (in Russ.).

16. Kotler, F. (1999). Marketing, Menedzhment: Analiz, Planirovaniye, Vnedreniye, Kontrol' [Marketing Management: Analysis, Planning, Implementation, and Control] (Trans. in Eng.). St. Petersburg: Piter (in Russ.).

17. Krylov, I. V. (1998). Marketing: Sotsiologiya Marketingovykh Kommunikatsiy [Marketing: Sociology of Marketing Communications]. Moscow: Center (in Russ.).

18. Lehmann, D. R., Keller, K. L., & Farley J. U. (2008). The Structure of Survey- Based Brand Metrics. Journal of International Marketing, 16(4), 29-59.

19. LePla, F., & Parker, L. (2003). Integrirovannyy Brending [IntegratedBranding] (A. Romanchenko, Trans. in Eng.; S. G. Bozhuk, Ed.) St. Petersburg: Neva; Moscow: OLMA-PRESS (in Russ.).

20. Litvinov, N. N. (2007). Brend-Kul'tura: Zavoyevaniye Raspolozheniya Kliyenta [Brand Culture: Winning the Customer's Favor]. Brend-Menedzhment [BrandManagement], 5, 338-343 (in Russ.).

21. Martynyshyn, Ya. M., & Khlystun, O. S. (2018). Fenomen Idei v Upravlinni Zhyttiediialnistiu Suspilstva [The Phenomenon of Ideas in Management Livelihoods of Society]. Visnyk Kyivskoho Natsionalnoho Universytetu Kultury i Mystetstv. Seriia: Menedzhment Sotsiokulturnoi Diialnosti [Bulletin of Kiev National University of Culture and Arts. Series in Management of Social and Cultural Activity], 1(2), 7-25, doi: 10.31866/2616-7573.2.2018. 149294 (in Ukr.).

22. Martynyshyn, Ya. M., & Khlystun, O. S. (2019). Iierarkhiia iak Fenomen Orhanizatsijnoi Kul'tury [Hierarchy as a Phenomenon of Organizational Culture]. Visnyk Kyivskoho Natsional'noho Universytetu Kul'tury i Mystetstv. Seriia: Menedzhment Sotsiokulturnoi Diial'nosti [Bulletin of Kyiv National University of Culture and Arts. Series in Management ofSocial and Cultural Activity], 2(1), 7-31, doi: https://doi.org/10.31866/2616-7573.L2019.170653 (in Ukr.).

23. Martynyshyn, Ya. M., & Kostiuchenko, O. V. (2018). Proektnyi Menedzhment yak Stratehichnyi Instrument Rozvytku Sotsiokulturnoi Sfery [Project Management as Strategic Instrument for Socio-Cultural Sphere Development]. Visnyk Natsionalnoi Akademii Kerivnykh Kadriv Kultury i Mystetstv [National Academy of Managerial Staff of Culture and Arts Herald], 4, 84-89, doi: https://doi.org/10.32461/2226-3209.4.2018.152988 (in Ukr.).

24. Martynyshyn, Ya. M., & Kovalenko, Ye. Ya. (2017). Smysly v Kul'turi Uprav- linnia [The Measures in Culture of Management]. Visnyk Natsional'noi Akademii Kerivnykh Kadriv Kul'tury i Mystetstv [Herald National Academy of Managerial Staff of Culture and Arts], 4, 26-31 (in Ukr.).

25. Martynyshyn, Ya. M., & Kovalenko, Ye. Ya. (2018). Formuvannia Suchasnoi Systemy Upravlinnia Zhyttiediial'nistiu Suspil'stva [Formation of the Modern System Management of Life Society]. Visnyk Kyivskoho Natsional'noho Universytetu Kul'tury i Mystetstv. Seriia: Menedzhment Sotsiokulturnoi Diial'nosti [Bulletin of Kyiv National University of Culture and Arts. Series in Management of Social and Cultural Activity], 1, 7-24, doi: https://doi.org/ 10.31866/2616-7573.1.2018.143383 (in Ukr.).

26. Martynyshyn, Ya., Khlystun, O., & Blaskovв, M. (2020a). The System as a Socio-Cultural Phenomenon Philosophy of Management. Socio-Cultural Management Journal, 3(1), 3-38, doi: https://doi.org/10.31866/2709-846X. 1.2020.219795

27. Martynyshyn, Ya., Khlystun, O., Adamoniene, R., & Dibrova V. (2020b). System Analysis in Socio-Cultural Management: Theory, Methodology and Technology. Socio-Cultural Management Journal, 3(2), 3-29, doi: https://doi.org/10.31866/2709-846X.2.2020.222640.

28. Munoz, T., & Kumar, S. (2004). Brand Metrics: Gauging and Linking Brands with Business Performance. Journal of Brand Management, 11(5), 381-387.

29. Muzykant, V. L. (2006). Formirovaniye Brenda Sredstvami PR i Reklamy [Brand Building by Means of PR and Advertising]. Moscow: Ekonomist (in Russ.).

30. Naryshkina, M. (2005). Obzor Osnovnykh Metodov Otsenki Stoimosti Brenda

31. [Review of the Main Methods for Assessing Brand Value]. Laboratorija Reklamy, Marketinga i Public Relation [Laboratory of Advertising, Marketing and Public Relation], 5, Retrieved from http://www.advlab.ru/articles/ article410.htm (in Russ.).

32. Poplavskyi, M. M. (2001). Shou-Biznes: Teoriya, Istoriya, Praktyka [Show Business: Theory, History, Practice]. Kyiv: KNUKiM (in Ukr.).

33. Pоezzhaev, K. (2006). Otsenka Effektivnosti Brenda na Osnove Vyyavleniya yego Vliyaniya na Finansovyye Rezul'taty Kompanii [Assessment of Brand Performance Based on Identifying its Impact on the Company's Financial Results], Retrieved from https://4p.ru/main/theory/1940/ (in Russ.).

34. Preobrazhenskii, D., & Latov, U. (n.d.). Shou-Biznes [Show Business], Retrieved from from https://www.krugosvet.ru/enc/kultura_i_obrazovanie/teatr_i_ kino/SHOU-BIZNES.html (in Russ.).

35. Preobrazhenskii, D., & Latov, U. (n.d.). Shou-Biznes [Show Business]. Encyk- lopediya Krugosvet [Encyclopedia Around the World], Retrieved from https://www.krugosvet.ru/enc/kultura_i_obrazovanie/teatr_i_kino/SHOU- BIZNES.html (in Russ.).

36. Radawiecka, E. (2008). Methods of Brand Value Valuation. Research Bulletins of the Faculty of Economic Sciences, 1(12), 195-202.

37. Radzeviciute, R., & Ruzevicius J. (2010). Brand Equity Integrated Evaluation Model: Consumer-Based Approach. Economics and Management, 15, 719-725.

38. Razumov, D. (2019, July 19). Brend [Brand]. About Marketing, Retrieved from https://aboutmarketing.info/osnovy-marketynhu/brand/.

39. Sherrington, M. (2006). Nezrimyye Tsennosti Brenda [Invisible Brand Values] (Trans. in Eng.). Moscow: Vershina (in Russ.).

40. Simonian, R. (2018). Otsenka Stoimosti Brenda: 3 Samykh Tochnykh Rasscheta Stoimosti [Assessment of Brand Value: 3 Most Accurate Cost Calculations], Retrieved from http://www.gd.ru/articles/3353-otsenka-stoimosti-brenda (in Russ.).

41. Starov, S. A., & Alkanova, O. N. (2009). Metodologiya Otsenki Effektivnosti Brendinga [Methodology for Assessing Branding Effectiveness]. Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo Universiteta [Saint Petersburg University Bulletin], 8(4), 130-153 (in Russ.).

42. Tolmachev, O. M., & Kozhokova, D. S. (2016). Marketingovyye Tekhnologii Prodvizheniya Uslug Shou-Biznesa na Otraslevom Rynke [Marketing Technologies for Promoting Show Business Services on the Industry Market]. VestnikMGOU. Seriya: Ekonomika [MRSUBulletin. Series: Economics], 2, 127-132, doi: https://doi.org/10.18384/2310-6646-2016-2-127-132 (in Russ.).

Размещено на Allbest.ru