RESEHHCH Brand Salience versus Brand Image:

CURREOTS Two Theories of Advertising Effectiveness

STEPHEN MILLER
How does advertising work? The dominant belief of most advertisers and academics
Fresident
over the past several decades has been that advertising primarily works by changing
Lieberman Research
Inc. consumer attitudes toward a brand. An analysis of an 11-year tracking-study tn an
established service category challenges this assumption. The key finding is that
LISETTE BERRY
advertising primarily influences market share by increasing brand salience. Advertising
President
Lisette Berry & had limited impact on brand image. _ .
Associates, Inc.

ONE OF THE QUESTIONS that market research pro-
fessionals frequently ponder is; How does adver-
tising work? Simon Broadbent of Leo Burnett
claims that there are a total of 456 theories about
how advertising works (Broadbent, 1992). And
that was back in 1992!
Even though there may be many theories about
how advertising works, most share a common
theme or assumption. They assume that advertis-
ing works by changing consumer attitudes about
brands. This has been the dominant belief of most
American advertisers and academics over the past
several decades (Jones, 1990).
The classical expression of the theory that ad-
vertising works by changing brand attitudes is the
AIDA model Ooyce, 1967). This simple model says
that awareness of a brand precedes interest, which
in turn precedes desire and action. The model as-
sumes that as the consumer moves from aware-
ness of a brand to action, attitudes toward the
brand shift. While awareness plays a role in this
theory, it is primarily a gatekeeper. The theory
simply states the obvious: that awareness of a
brand is required before you can be interested in it.
Many variants of this model have been pro-
posed over the years, all of which assume at least
a somewhat sequential processing of information
and that an attitude shift is required prior to pur-
chasing (e.g., Vaughn, 1980; Preston, 1982).
Maybe the clearest statement of the theory that
advertising works by changing brand attitudes or
imagery came from Al Achenbaum in an article
originally published in 1972 and reprinted by the
ARF in a special issue of the jAR in 1983.
The data suggest that the ad\'ertising process
works something like this. . . . Information
about one or more product attributes is com-
municated in a persuasive context by national
advertising. The attributes can be sensory,
evaluative or emotional.
If the communication is persuasive enough to
improve consumers' attitudes on that attribute,
their attitudes toward the overall brand will
improve as well. This improvement in overall
brand attitudes will concomitantly increase the
pi-obability of purchase.
The theory that advertising works by changing
brand attitudes has many adherents in the 1990s
though the concepts used to express the theory'
have changed. Several leading market research
companies have proposed models based on brand
equity and brand loyalty (e.g., Baldinger and Ru-
binson, 19%; Dyson, Farr, and Hollis, 1996; Farr,
1996). Measures of brand equity and loyalty are
included in tracking-studies where presumably
improvements on these measures are viewed as
intermediate criteria of advertising's success.
While some of these theories admit the importance
of brand presence or salience, this clearly plays
second fiddle to attitude changes, which are now
conceptualized in new and interesting ways, such
as "perceptions of the brand's relevance," "per-
ceptions of the brand's performance," "percei\'ed

September October 1 9 9 8 JOURflflL OF HDIIERTISinfi RESEIIflCK 7 7

 r
RESEARCH CURRENTS
advantage versus competition," and ulti-
mately, "consumer bonding" (Dyson,
Farr, and Hollis, 1996),
THE MINORITY VIEW
While the majority of American research-
ers over the past few decades have held
strongly to the belief that advertising
works by changing brand imagery, there
is a minority opinion. This minority opin-
ion holds that in established categories,
advertising works primarily because it
impFoves or maintains brand salience
(Moral, 1990; Sutherland and Galloway,
1981). . : , V ;
"Brand salience" refers to the order in
which brands come to mind. It refers not
to w\mt consumers think about brands but
to which f/7fs they think about. In market
research, brand salience is frequently
measured by top-of-mind awareness
(brand that first comes to mind) and total
unaided brand awareness. Brand imag-
ery, on the other hand, is usually mea-
sured by overall ratings and attribute
ratings.
Two theories have been advanced to ex-
plain why brand salience may influence
sales and ultimately market share. One is
that brands which come to mind on an
unaided basis are likely to be the brands
in a consumer's consideration set and thus
have a higher probability of being pur-
chased (Miller and Georgiou, 1996; Suth-
erland and Galloway, 1981). A second ex-
planation is that advertising weight and
brand salience are cues to consumers in-
dicating which brands are popular. Ac-
cording to this theory, consumers have a
tendency to buy popular brands. Thus
there is a connection betu'een brand sa-
lience and sales (Sutherland, 1997; Suther-
land and Galtoway, 1981).
IMPUCATIONS OF THESE VIEWS
The issue of whether advertising primar-
ily works by improving brand salience or
7 8 JDUHItflL orflDUERTISinfiRES8IICH September October 1 9 9 8
building imagery is not just an academic
one. It has implications both on the prac-
tice of advertising and the roie advertising
has in the marketer's repertoire.
If advertising primarily works because
it builds or reinforces brand imagery, then
the following activities become extremely
important in the advertising process:
understanding the brand's equity
developing a brand position that is both
appealing and unique
developing advertising which persua-
sively communicates or at least rein-
forces the brand positioning
Of course, these activities are going to be
important regardless of what theory of ad-
vertising you hold. However, they be-
come of paramount importance if you
hold the theory that advertising primarily
works by influencing brand attitudes.
On the other hand, if you believe that
advertising primarily works by building
or maintaining brand salience, then it be-
comes extremely important to:
develop advertisihg that is intrusive
and/or entertaining
develop advertising that is well branded
Again, developing advertising with these
characteristics is going to be important re-
gardless of your position on the theoreti-
cal issue. However, these considerations
become critically important if you believe
that advertising works primarily by affect-
ing brand salience since, according to .this
theory, advertising's basic job is to register
your brand name with the public.
The brand salience versus brand imag-
ery debate also has implications on the
role of advertising in the marketer's rep-
ertoire of tools.
Advertisihg holds a unique place
among advertisers who believe that it can
build brand equity. This is because adver-
tising is one of the few tools that can do
this and is probably the most cost-
effective one. Promotions, sponsorships,
and public relations all lack advertising's
strengththe ability to change the pub-
lic's view of your brand.
On the other hand, if you believe that
advertising primarily affects brand sa-
lience, advertising is just one more tool for
getting your brand name in front of the
public. It is not fundamentally different
from other tools in the marketer's reper-
toire tiiat promote brand awareness. It be-
comes an empirical question whether ad-
vertising is the best way to promote brand
salience or whether this is best done with
other tools. With this view, cutting adver-
tising spending might make sense if other,
less costly, marketing tools can maintain
your brand's presence.
A CASE STUDY
This paper reports a case study from the
rent-a-car category that has implications
on the issue of Whether advertising works
by building brand imagery versus brand
salience. Rent-a-car is an established ser-
vice category with companies that spend
moderately on advertisinggenerally $50
million or less per year. In this respect, it is
typical of a great many other service cat-
egories in the United States today.
The results reported here were part of
an advertising review process. The pri-
mary goal was to review market research
results to determine the effect rent-a-car
advertising had on awareness, imagery,
and market share. A second objective was
to see what principles of successful adver-
tising could be ascertained so that future
advertising could deliver an even greater
return on investment.
t h e case study is based on a tracking-
study which Lieberman Research Inc.
(LRI) has conducted in the rent-a-car cat-
egory for 11 years. The survey is a point-
in-time tracker that is conducted with car
 RESEARCH CURRENTS

Figure 1 shows that there is a strong

Behavior-Market Share
Company Awareness
Ad Awareness
Ad Communications (Positioning)
Image-Company Ratings
Figure 1 Correlations between Changes in Advertising Share
of Voice and Tracking Study/External Measures
^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
Figure 2 Relative Impact of Changes in Advertising Share of
Voice on Ad Tracking Measures
Correlation
positive correlation between the amount
(0
of money a company spends on ad\ ertis-
ing and its share of market.
LRI Market Share .52
Airport Revenue Share .49
Advertising spending was correlated
with two measures of share of market
TopMjf-Mind Awareness .49 the LRI share-of-car-rental occasions from
Unaided Awareness .42
the tracking-study and the Airport Rev-
enue Share. Airport RevAue Share is an
Unaided Ad Awareness
independent measure of market share
,45
Total Ad Awareness .41
based on rent-a-car companies' reports of
revenue to the airport authorities.
.35 Ad\ertising spending was also corre-
lated with several other measures from
.23 the tracking study, it was correlated with
measures of company awareness and ad-
vertising awareness. It was also correlated
with advertising communications and, to
a lesser extent, company image.
The image measure used here was the
a\ erage rating for each company across 13
Company
attributes, covering characteristics like
Awareness
speed of ser\ice, condition of the car,
rates, etc. The communications measure
was based on a theme/slogan recall ques-
jsx,....^ Ad Awareness
tion. Respondents were read themes or
slogans from rent-a-car advertisements
and asked to identif)' the company that
Ad
uses the theme in its ad\'ertising. For each
Communications
theme or slogan, the percentage of car
renters who Associate it with the correct
rent-a-car company is calculated. The
image
communications score used in this analy-
sis is the average "correct identification"
across each of the six companies' ad\'ertis-
ing themes or slogans.

renters either once or twice a year. The BASIC CORRELATIONS

basic sample consists of 800 car renters in
the top 25 markets nationally, where rent-
a-car companies do most of their business.
The study covers a variety of issues in-
cluding brand and advertising awareness,
communications, brand image, and share
of market. The tracking-study data was
collected over an 11-year period between
1986 and 1996.
The first step in this process was to look at
the relationship between changes in adver-
tising spending and changes on various
tracking-study measures over the 11-year
period. For each of six companies, we cal-
culated correlations between advertising
share of voice and various tracking-study
and external measures. We then averaged
the correlations across companies.
MODEL OF HOW ADVERTISiNG IMPACTS
MARKET SHARE
The next step was to build a model to de-
scribe how changes in advertising spend-
ing influence share of market in the rent-
a-car categor\'. The model, based on re-
gression analysis, involves dividing up
the explained variance between ad\'ertis-
ing spending and market share to under-

September . October 1 9 9 8 JDllRdHL OF HflllEIITISinG IteSEHIICN 7 9

 RESEARCH CURRENTS
Company
Awareness
Ad Awareness
Ad
Communications
Image
Figure 3 Relative Impact of Changes in Ad Tracking
Measures on Market Share . -, .. r :
Company
Awareness
Ad Awareness
Ad
Communications
Image
Rgure 4 Full Advertising Impact Model
stand the mechanisms through which ad-
vertising has its influence. The model is
based on the five rent-a-car companies for
which we have data on all measures
throughout the ll-year period.
The first part of the model shows the
relative association between changes in
share of voice and various tracking-study
measures (see Figure 2). It shows that
changes in advertising spending have a
greater effect on company awareness, ad-
vertising awareness, and advertising com-
munications than on company image. Or,
to say this another way, it is easier to
change your awareness and communica-
80 JOURIlflL or IIII0UT1SII16 HESEflfCH September . October 1998
in tracking-study measures and share of
market (see Figure 3). The two mea-
sures most highly associated with share
of market are company awareness and
company image. Advertising-related
measures are directly correlated with
share of market at lower levels. What
this means is that changes in company
awareness and imagery are more likely
to be translated into improved market
share than changes on advertising-related
measures.
Up to this point, we've shown how ad-
vertising is related to measures of aware-
ness, communications, and image and, in
turn, how these measures are correlated to
market share. Now the question is: how
does advertising influence market share?
What's the net-net?
To do this, we calculated a net-effect
score by multiplying the percentages on
each side of the chart and then repercen-
24% taging the results back to 100 percent. Fig-
ure 4 shows that over 70 percent of the
15% effect of advertising on market share is
generated by increasing awareness
particularly unaided company awareness.
14%
In contrast, only a small amount of the
effect of advertising in the rent-a-car cat-
egory is due to communications or the ad-
vertising building a company's image.
This is not because imagery is unimpor-
tions scores than it is to change your com- tant to market share. Rather, it is because
pany's image. it is more difficult to change a company's
The next part of the model shows the image than it is to change awareness of
degree of association between changes the company.
Very High (40% or more) 1 6% '
.<- V ;; : High (20%-39%) ^ ^ 1 13%
Moderate (10%-19%) ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ H i 30% ' .. -
' - " - ' ' ' /
Low (less than 10%)
^ ^ ^ ^ ^ H ^ ^ ^ H 51%
Category Average = 12.5%
R g u r e 5 Correct Identification o f T h e m e s / S l o g a n s

. - - the key difference between highly recalled messages
and less highly recalled enes is that highly recalled mes-
sages are much more iiiceiy to i>e supported by wolh
funded, iong-standing advertising campaigns.
REViEW OF COMMUNICATION DATA
The low association between advertising
weight and imagery found over the 11-
year period may be due to the fact that
much of the advertising in the rent-a-car
category does not do a particularly good
job of communicating key messages. In
the tracking stuJy, recall information was
collected on close to 65 advertising themes
and slogans used in rent-a-car advertising.
The themes and slogans were read to re-
spondents and they were asked to identify
the company which uses the theme or sl(>
gan in its advertising. We then are able to
determine, for each theme or slogan, the
percent of car renters who are able to cor-
rectly identify it.
Even though there are some excepHons,
the general level of recall of the themes
and slogans tested over the past 11 years
is low. The highest correct idenHfication
level obtained by the average theme or
slogan is only 12 percent (see Figure 5).
Over one-half of the themes and slogans
are correctly identified by less than 10 per-
cent of car renters. Many of the themes
and slogans were In the tracking-study for
several waves, and we used the highest
correct identification level obtained by the
theme or slogan in this analysis!
PRINCIPLES OF SUCCESSFUL
COMMUNICATION'
To better understand what is involved in
successful communication, we compared
the high, moderate, and low recalled
themes/slogans.
We found, not surprisingly, that the key
.. L ^ L- Li 11 J
difference between highly recalled mes-
, .
sages and less h.ghly recalled ones is that
highly recalled messages are much more
likely to be supported by weU-funded,
long-standing adverHsing campaigns. The
less highly recalled ones did not receive
such adverHsing support. What is inter-
esting here is mt that these highly recalled
messages are supported by some of the
larger advertising budgets in the cat-
egory-we would expect this-but that
most of the highly recalled messages
were, quite literally, on-air for years. Table
1 shows the five themes/slogans recalled
by 30 percent or more of car renters. Most
of these are easily identifiable even
though the campaigns may not be run-
ning now.
In addiHon, several other characterisHcs
are correlated with successful communi-
cations. For one thing, the more success-
fully communicated messages had a
greater propensity to be unique. Saying
the same thing as everyone else did not
facilitate effective communicaHon. For ex-
ample, over the years, several rent-a-car
companies ad^'ertised low rates for luxury
cars and none of these messages were
among the most highly communicated.
Finally, themes and slogans tied into the
companies' current brand equity tended to
be recalled at higher levels than other
themes and slogans. For example. Avis
and Hertz had an easier time communi-
eating fast servicepart of their long-term
reputationthan other messages such as
rates and cars.
This has an interesting implication.
^ ^
Themes and slogans that support a com-
' i I ,.
pany s current image seem to generate
September October 1 9 9 8 JDOirnHL Of HDUQITISIIIG HESEflRCH 8 1
RESEARCH CURRENTS
awareness fester than themes and slogans
which support a new positioning. This has
obvious impUcaHons when repositioning
a company or brand.
CONCLUSiONS
The findings from this analysis support
the brand salience theory of advertising
.ff^^veness rather than the brand ,mag-
^^^ ^^^^^^ Awareness measures in rent-
^^^^ accounted for approximately 70 per-
^^^^ ^^ advertising's effect on market
^^^^^ ^,^^^^^ ^^ approximately 30 percent
^^^^^^ ^^^ ^^ content-related measures,
^^^^ .^ communicaHons and imagerv'.
Assuming that these^i^indings can be
g^^peralized to other established service
.at^gories with moderate advertising
b^dg^t,, they offer sobering food for
^^^^^^^^ ^^ marketers and advertisers who
^ , j ^ ^ , ^ ^j^^^ ad^ ertising ^^orks by impro^-
-^^ attitudes toward t L i r brand a la
Achenbaum (1972) or by reinforcing
j^^^^j attitudes a la Ehrenberg (1974).
It is undoubtedly true that adverHsing
^^^^^ ^^^^ ^^ ^ ^^^^^^ . ^ p ^ ^ ^^ ^ ^ .
^lunications and imagery if rent-a-car
3d^ertisers displayed a greater commit-
^^^^ ^^^^^^ advertising and advertising
spending. But this "what if" argument is
^^^uewhat disingenuous. Car rental agen-
^.^ ^^^ ^^^ telecommunicaHons compa-
^^ ^ ^ ^ g ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ h u n d i ^ s of
^.^^.^^^
TADI C -i
" ' S ^ KeC
(CorreCt Identification30%
or Greater)
T.^.^..!'.')'....^!^.^.'!: :
The company is employee-owned.
0 ^^ Qlyl3 QQIJ Service.
""'" ,_ , _. ^L. ^ _^-
Featuresf 0. J. Simpson in the advertising.
r
Bigge/t name in rental cars,
.~.r.
RESEARCH CURRENTS
The findings from this anaiysis support tho brand sa-
Honce theory of advertising effectiveness rather than the
hrand imagery theory.
ing. Given the realities of the car rental
busine^ todayincluding the amounts of
the advertising budgetsadvertising sim-
ply does not have that great an effect on
imagery. Speculating about what "could
be" in an ideal world does little to aid our
understanding of the day-to-day advertis-
ing business.
The finding that advertising in estab-
lished sen'ice categories has limited effect
on brand equity is actually somewhat of a
relief. It suggests that established brands
are stronger and more robust than many
suspected. There is no reason for fear of
"losing" brand equity if an advertising
campaign is a flop. Nor is there need to
worry about falling off the brand equity
map if we do not advertise for six months
or a year.
These findings should not be taken to
imply that advertising in the rent-a-car
category has little effect on market share.
In fact, the relationship between advertis-
ing spending and market share was fairly
strong. However, the reason for that rela-
tionship is somewhat different than many
advertising and marketing professionals
might have suspected. i {1996): 22-34. .
NOTE
The theory of brand salience discussed in
this paper is considerably different than
the theor\' discussed by Ehrenberg, Bar-
nard, and Scriven (1997). These authors
use the term "brand salience" somewhat
differently than most advertising and re-
search professionals. By it they mean a
general "halo effect" whereby a brand
that has greater salience than another
brand obtains greater scores on a variety
of measures including awareness, famil-
82 QF HDUEHTISIOG HESEflRCH September October 1 9 9 8
iarity, overall favorability, brand ratings,
etc. Ehrenberg et al. believe that advertis-
ing can develop, maintain, or "nudge"
brand salience.
This concept of brand saUence has a
clear attitudinal or image component-
even if the authors reject or minimize the
notion of brand differentiation. In con-
trast, the concept of brand salience dis-
cussed in this paper refers to which brands
consumers think about, not wiiat they
think about them, or how favorable they
are toward them. The concept of brand
salience used in this paper is related
more to "attention" (awareness) than to
"attitudes." | ^
REFERENCES - '
AcHEN'BAUM, A. A, "Advertising Doesn't Ma-
nipulate Consumers." loimial of Advertising
Rcicarch 12, 2 (1972): 3-13 and in JAR Special
IssueHow Advertising Works (1983): 39-51.
BALDINCER, A., and ). RUBI\SON. "Brand Loy-
alty: The Link between Attitude and Behav-
ior." Journal of.Advertising Research 36, 6
BROADBEISTT, S. "456 Views of How Advertis-
ing Worksand what if anything, they tell
us." Admap, September 1992.
. "456 Views of How Advertising
Worksand what if anything, they tei! us.
Part 2: The Findings." Admap, November
1992. . .
DYSON, P., A. FARR, and N. HOLLIS. "Under-
standing, Measuring, and Using Brand Eq-
uity." Journal of Advertising Research 36, 6
(1996): 9-21.
EHRENBERG, A. "Repetitive Advertising and
the Consumer." journal of Advertising Research
14, 2 (1974): 25-34 and in JAR Special I s s u e -
How Advertising Works (1983): 29-38.
EHRENBERG, A., N. BARNARD, and J. SCRIVEN.
"Differentiation or Salience." Jounial of Adver-
tising Research 37, 6 (1997): 7-14.
FARR, A. "How Advertising Builds Brand Eq-
uity." Admap, April 1996.
JONES, J. P. "Advertising: Strong Force or
Weak Force? Two Views an Ocean Apart."
International Journal of Advertising 9 (1990): . .
233-46.
. "The Double Jeopardy of Sales Pro-
motions/' Hanmrd Business Revieio 68, 5 .
(1990); 145-52.
JOYCE, T. What Do We Know About How Adver-
tising Works? London: J. Walter Thompson
Co., 1967. . . . .
MILLER, S., and P. GEORGrou. "Advertising Ac-
counfability: 10 Years of Advertising Tracking
in the Rent-A-Car Business." In Transcript Pro-
ceedings of the ARF Advertising and Brand
Tracking Workshop, New York: Advertising
Research Foundation, 1996.
MoRAN, W. "Brand Presence and the Percep- .
tual Frame." Journal of Advertising Research 30,
5 (1990): 9-16.
PRESTON, l."The Association Model of the Ad-
vertising Communication Process." Journal of
Advertising Research 11, 2 (1982): 3-15. .
SUTHERLAND, M. Advertising and the Mind of the
Consumer. Australia: Allen & Unwin, 1997.
, and J. GALLOWAY. "Role of Advertis-
ing: Persuasion or Agenda Setting?" Journal of
Advertising Research 21, 5 (1981): 25-29 and in
JAR Special IssueHow Advertising Works
(1983): 52-56.
VAUGHN, R. "HOW Advertising Works: A
Planning Model." loiirnal of Advertising Re-
search 20, 5 (1980): 27-33.