This report examines modern brand strategies, focusing on Nestle's Kit Kat, by analyzing concepts such as brand community, identity, architecture, and loyalty. It highlights how the brand's representation has evolved in response to new media and consumer behavior, particularly through technology partnerships. Key findings indicate the importance of brand identity and community engagement in enhancing consumer connections, while emphasizing the challenges of maintaining brand loyalty in a competitive marketplace.

1. Knowledge and understanding of the Brand
Strategy concepts and theories – CW1
Ian
Adams
21028547
Abstract
Have the core fundamentals changed within brands, how have
new media changed how consumers see brands. This report
explores how a modern brand has developed not its products but
how it represents its self as a brand.
The report will look at the following brand concepts; brand
community, brand identity, brand architecture, brand personality,
emotional aspects to a brand, brand awareness, brand meaning,
brand associations, brand loyalty and Brand experience.
Introduction
The report will comparing definitions of branding concepts
mentioned above by a range of academic authors. These
concepts will then be applied to the brand Kit Kat by Nestle.
Brand Community
A brand community is a specialized, non-geographically bound
community, based on a structured set of social relations among
admirers of a brand. (Muniz & Guinn 2001) The new post-
postmodern branding proposed, suggests that as marketers are
no longer omnipotent, brands have become citizen-artists and that
brands are cultural artifacts through which consumers assert
themselves as individuals in society. (Quinton 2013) The brand
communities are social entities that reflect the situated
embeddedness of brands in the day-to-day lives of consumers
and the ways in which brands connect consumer to brand, and
consumer to consumer. Three essential markers of community
(conscious- ness of kind, rituals and traditions, and moral
responsibility) are present, but differences in their expression
make brand communities something significant in their own right.
(Muniz & Guinn 2001)
Kits Kat is a very unique brand it has a number of big
communities, after the partnership of with Google (JWT, 2013) to
use Kit Kat as the name of the next android operating system. The
brand has seen a change in its once traditional community. This
new tech audience that spans across ages and regions is tech
savvy so they ill be using social media. To relate to the concepts
above Kit Kat, has lead the brands towards a more community
driven approach, if the community has an issue with the product
they can complain as an entity and be responded to.
Brand Identity
The idea that consumers use brands to express their identities has
led many companies to reposition their products from focusing on
functional attributes to focusing on how they fit into a consumer’s
lifestyle. However (Chernev et al. 2011) depicts that brand identity
has deeper meanings then functional attributes It is about the
ethos, aims and values that present a sense of individuality
differentiating the brand. (de Chernatony 1999) Also reference to
(see Appendix 1) shows the components of brand identity; that are
Presentation, positioning, personality, Brand vision/culture and
relationships that drives towards a brands desired positioning and
identity. (de Chernatony 1999)
Kit Kat brand differentiates itself from other chocolate bars
because it places itself within a situation within the consumer life,
‘take a brake’ and ‘have a brake, have a Kit Kat.’ The many
advertisements that Kit Kat shows a range of different audiences
within busy lifestyles and need escapism.
Brand Architecture
(Devlin 2003) explains brand architecture refers to an
organization’s approach to the design and management of its
brand portfolio and the relationship between such brands.
However (Douglas et al. 2012) explains It should clearly define
deeper importance and role of each level of branding, as, for
example, at the corporate, product division, or product brand level,
as well as the interrelation or overlap of branding at each level.
(Petromilli et al. 2002) places structure with the two types of
architecture “house of brands” has a master brand like IBM, Virgin
and “branded house” groups of stand along brands proper and
gamble.
Kit Kat has mix between the two architecture “house of brands”
and “branded house”. Kit Kat is owned by Nestle that has brand

2. groups, then within these groups are a collection of brand
extension. Kit Kat has its ‘4 finger’ ‘2 finger’ and ‘Chunky’ range.
All nestle products have the logo on the packaging to portray the
relationship between each products endorsed values.
Brand personality
Brand personality is a vehicle of consumer self-expression and
can be instrumental in helping a consumer express different
aspects of his or her self (Aaker 2005). Yet Brand personality
defined by (Azoulay & Kapferer 2003) is certainly a key facet of a
brand identity, the current scales of brand personality do not in
fact measure brand personality, but merge a number of
dimensions of brand identity. This is shown within (see Appendix
5) with Kapferer brand identity prism (Aaker 2005) further in study
states humanizing a brand empowers it to play a more central role
in the consumer’s life, potentially enabling the consumer to project
an aspect of his or her self that might be desirable for relationships
he or she seeks.
Kit Kat personality is portrayed through its marketing
commination’s, the content shared throughout social media sites
like Facebook, Twitter and YouTube are technology focused,
showing the product in a comedic manner. This lighthearted spirit
reflects in their direct response to people commenting and
tweeting the brand. (see Appendix 9) is a good example of a tweet
that shows of personality, this makes the brand relatable and
likeable.
Emotional aspects
If involvement can be characterized by mild affect, brand
attachment refers to a strong emotional bond (i.e., “hot affect”)
between a consumer and a brand, as evidenced by its three
dimensions—affection, passion, and connection. To be clear
emotional aspects are qualities of brand attachment, brand
experience is not an emotional relationship concept it’s the
interaction between customer and product. Experiences are
sensations, feelings, cognitions, and behavioral responses evoked
by brand-related stimuli. Over time, brand experiences may result
in emotional bonds, but emotions are only one internal outcome of
the stimulation that evokes experiences. (Brakus et al. 2009)
Kit Kat is a chocolate bar so the sensation is the taste; the treat of
the moment develops a passion and an individual connection with
the product. The bar is targeted towards having a brake from the
customer’s busy lifestyle. Because the product fits easily into
consumers day-to-day life and also can find within their friends life
style as the product can be shared.
Brand awareness
Brand awareness indicates customer ’s capability to recall or
recognize a brand. (Aaker & Joachimsthaler 2000) Brand
awareness according (Aaker, 1996) is the first step in the overall
customer experience. It is the first step to understanding the
brand, at this stage it is merely being aware that is exists. This can
be seen at (see Appendix 8). As explained earlier brand
architecture can help to further expose the brand if a ‘Branded
house’ approach has been taken. (Aaker & Joachimsthaler 2000)
explains further, every exposure of the brand in one context
provides visibility that enhances brand awareness in all contexts.
The significant positive effects of both brand identity and
identification suggest that companies should invest on brand
identity and consumer identification. Instead of merely
communicating brands for the purpose of brand awareness, brand
investment should focus on according strong ‘identity’ meaning to
consumers, so that it facilitates consumer search for consumer–
brand bond. (He et al. 2012)
Based on this customer based brand equity conceptualization, the
essential dimensions of brand equity are brand awareness, brand
associations, perceived quality and brand loyalty (Aaker &
Joachimsthaler 2000)
Kit Kat is a mass-market product and well known within the UK
market even if it isn’t the front of mind chocolate bar like Cadbury’s
or Galaxy. However with effective marketing communications the
brand has positioned itself as a quick snack. Awareness is high
and partners with technology companies are only going to further
increase this awareness across markets.
Brand meaning
This meaning can be defined by a number of attributes that means
most to a consumer of the brand. History is just one aspect of the
consumer's brand experience. There is a process of interplay
between the past and the present in contextualizing brand
meaning, just as there is between managerial intent and consumer
action. In choosing to consume a particular product or specific
brand, consumers have the right to construct what a brand means.
At this fundamental level, therefore, the co-construction of brand
experience directs brand management (Schembri 2009)
Kit Kat branding meaning for a consumer can vary from customer
to customer as they will have different symbols experiences and
depending on how successful or strong they where it will mean

3. stronger deeper meaning. If a customer for example if a group of
customers experienced an outdoor campaign where they won a
free nexus phone they would have a better experience, this would
help them relate this these different values intern developing a
deeper meaning. Campaign can be seen at this reference (Yong,
2013)
Brand associations
Models of associations in memory attempt to explain two cognitive
events. Two types of models can be distinguished within the HAM
tradition, connectionist models and Bayesian models. Human
Associative Memory (HAM) models and adaptive learning models
describe two unique approaches to teach the brand associations
that are subsequently used to make predictions about
consumption benefit. Both types of models represent declarative
knowledge as a network of concept nodes connected by
associative links. These models assume that the learning of
associations between one cue and an outcome is not dependent
on the presence of other cues and their associations with the
same outcome. That is, learning is cue independent.
Connectionist models employ a simple Hebbian or “coincident
activation” learning, each connection is strengthened whenever a
cue and an outcome co-occur(Janiszewski 2002)
As seen in (Aaker, 1996) model of Customer Experience Brand
association is seen to be set two in the journey after Brand
awareness, this is when the customer understands the brand on a
cognitive level taking into account associated stimuli to build a
perception of the brand, this leads to ‘Perceived Quality’.
Kit Kat still relies on nostalgia, because it is well knit to British
society. But with new Google partnership is consumers will build
associations with android long after the next update comes out of
operating system. According to Adweek ‘Andriod Kit Kat’ will
appear on 50million bars (Heine, 2013) Other connotations are
colour red, two/four fingers, unwrapping tin foil and for some it
might be the brand extensions like the during Easter with special
editions.
Brand loyalty
(Aaker, 1996) explains that the last step of the costumers
experience is brand loyalty (see Appendix 8). This step indicates
that the customer has understood all what the brand means down
to the core values, relates to the brand. With this there are two key
behavioral outcomes; customer satisfaction and loyalty
(Chandrashekaran et al. 2007; Oliver 1993) Brand personality can
provide differentiation, increases preference, and enhances trust
and loyalty. Consumer satisfaction affects loyalty. When a
consumer feels good about the relationship and appreciates the
product or brand, a high level of commitment and loyalty results
(Anderson 1993)
Self-image congruence is found to enhance brand loyalty for
consumers who are motivated to conform, but not for those who
are driven to escape. Alternatively, product knowledge is found to
enhance brand loyalty for escapism-motivated consumers, but
inhibits brand loyalty for consumers who are bound to conform.
(Labrecque et al. 2011)
Kit Kat is a within both confectionery and biscuit market, there are
a wide range substitutes so loyalty is low. After all the rich
experience and history with the brand, customers still question do
they need a chocolate bar? Also Mintel reports (Soininen, 2013)
states that loyalty is low across the Biscuit market as people
during economic times tend to go towards the promotions and
supermarket own brands because of the price incentives.
Brand experience
Brand experiences vary in strength and intensity; that is some
brand experiences are stronger or more intense than others. As
with product experiences, brand experiences also vary in valence;
more positive than others or even negative. (Brakus et al. 2009)
Moreover some brand experiences occur spontaneously without
much reflection and are short-lived. Over time, these long-lasting
brand experiences, stored in consumer memory, should affect
consumer satisfaction and loyalty (Oliver, 1980) Brand experience
based on the affection to a brand this can be triggered by Stimuli
may include; “touch and feel,” “appeal to different senses,
smells
nice and is visually warm”
fun,” “refreshed,” “inspired,” “nostalgia”.
(Brakus et al. 2009) as seen in (see Appendix 7) shows the
outputs of a brand experience; Sensory, Affective, Intellectual and
behavioral this can all be effected differently from the above
stimuli that will have a direct impact on the satisfaction a customer
will have.
Kit Kat had a lack of brand experience because there is no in-
store or extended periods with the product. The one area the
brand has invested in with JWT the creative agency is online with
the use of social media platforms. With competitions where
customers who have bought a chocolate bar have a chance to win
a free phone. (See Appendix 10) This is good because it drives
interaction within the brand and the community. If they win they
share with the their friends on twitter further adding different
emotional stimuli associated with the brand.

4. Conclusion
Overall Kit Kat is a small biscuit chocolate bar, but still has a range
of interesting dynamics to the brand. Key finding are each
individual has a say, communities drive change and it up to the
brand to use this data to improve and adapt. Identity is key within
a crowded marketplace; going back to the core product function is
key. The brand architecture needs to incorporate cross brand
integration to use the core values of each brand. People believe
people so brand personality can be used to add value, good
example is the use if twitter and interacting with other brands and
people. Kit Kat is using the emotional aspects, for example
escapism from everyday life; this shows they understand the
modern person. The partnership with Google has given Kit Kat the
opportunity to change its brand meaning with its new tech savvy
consumers. It also lets the brand build new associations with
android that will have strong long connections even when a new
update is released. Loyalty is low because of economic times,
however by adding extra value to a chocolate bar away from price
incentives, this can build an overall better brand experience. Kit
Kat has started its journey towards new media ventures, the only
issue is that the focus is off the chocolate and towards using the
Google platform. Have Google got the better end of the deal.
References
Aaker, D.A. & Joachimsthaler, E., 2000. The Brand Relationship
Spectrum: , 42(4).
Azoulay, A. & Kapferer, J.-N., 2003. Do brand personality scales
really measure brand personality? Journal of Brand
Management, 11(2), pp.143–155. Available at:
http://www.palgrave-
journals.com/doifinder/10.1057/palgrave.bm.2540162.
Brakus, J.J., Schmitt, B.H. & Zarantonello, L., 2009. Brand
Experience: What Is It? How Is It Measured? Does It Affect
Loyalty? Journal of Marketing, 73(3), pp.52–68. Available at:
http://journals.ama.org/doi/abs/10.1509/jmkg.73.3.52.
De Chernatony, L., 1999. Brand Management Through Narrowing
the Gap Between Brand Identity and Brand Reputation.
Journal of Marketing Management, 15(1-3), pp.157–179.
Available at:
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1362/026725799784
870432 [Accessed November 11, 2013].
Chernev, A., Hamilton, R. & Gal, D., 2011. Competing for
Consumer Identity : Limits to Self-Expression and the. ,
75(May), pp.66–82.
Devlin, J., 2003. Brand Architecture in Services: The Example of
Retail Financial Services. Journal of Marketing
Management, 19(9), pp.1043–1065. Available at:
http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-
bin/cgi?ini=xref&body=linker&reqdoi=10.1362/02672570377
0558312.
Douglas, S.P., Craig, C.S. & Nijssen, E.J., 2012. Executive
Insights : Integrating Branding Strategy Across Markets :
Building International Brand Architecture. , 9(2), pp.97–114.
He, H., Li, Y. & Harris, L., 2012. Social identity perspective on
brand loyalty. Journal of Business Research, 65(5), pp.648–
657. Available at:
http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S01482963110010
20 [Accessed November 12, 2013].
Janiszewski, C., 2002. Two Ways of Learning Brand Associations.
, 28(September 2001), pp.202–223.
Labrecque, L.I., Krishen, A.S. & Grzeskowiak, S., 2011. Exploring
social motivations for brand loyalty: Conformity versus
escapism. Journal of Brand Management, 18(7), pp.457–
472. Available at: http://www.palgrave-
journals.com/doifinder/10.1057/bm.2011.12 [Accessed
November 22, 2013].
Muniz, A.M. & Guinn, T.C.O., 2001. Brand Community. ,
27(March), pp.412–432.
Petromilli, M., Morrison, D. & Million, M., 2002. Brand architecture:
building brand portfolio value. Strategy & Leadership, 30(5),
pp.22–28. Available at:
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/1087857021044252
4 [Accessed November 22, 2013].
Quinton, S., 2013. The community brand paradigm: A response to
brand management’s dilemma in the digital era. Journal of
Marketing Management, 29(7-8), pp.912–932. Available at:
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0267257X.2012
.729072 [Accessed November 8, 2013].
Schembri, S., 2009. Reframing brand experience: The experiential
meaning of Harley–Davidson. Journal of Business
Research, 62(12), pp.1299–1310. Available at:
http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S01482963080025
92 [Accessed November 14, 2013].
Aaker , D . A . ( 1996 ) Measuring brand equity across products
and markets . California Management Review 38 (3) : 102 –
119 .
Aaker, Jennifer L. (1997), “Dimensions of Brand Personality,”
Journal of Marketing Research, 34 (3), 347–56
Anderson, Eugene W. and Mary W. Sullivan (1993), “The
Antecedents and Consequences of Customer Satisfaction for
Firms,” Marketing Science, 12 (2), 125–43.
Holt, D.B. (2002).Why do brands cause trouble? A dialectical
theory of consumer culture and branding. Journal of Consumer
Research, 29, 70–90. Hooley,G.J.,&Saunders,
Kapferer, J.-N. (1992) ‘Strategic Brand Management’, Free Press,
New York, NY and Kogan Page, London. (14)

5. Oliver, Richard L. (1980), “A Cognitive Model of the Antecedents
and Consequences of Satisfaction Decisions,” Journal of Mar-
keting Research, 17 (November), 460–69.
Saucier, G. (1994) ‘Mini-markers: A brief version of Goldberg’s
unipolar big five markers’, Journal of Personality Assessment, Vol.
63, No. 3, pp. 506–516.
Heine, C. (2013, 10 3). Adweek. Retrieved 11 20, 2013, from
Adweek: http://www.adweek.com/news/technology/googles-
android-kitkat-will-appear-50-million-candy-bars-152173
JWT. (2013, 5 4). KITKAT and Google. Retrieved 11 20, 2013,
from JWT: http://jwt.co.uk/work/android-kitkat-unveiled-jwt-
launches-global-campaigns-behind-nestle-google-partnership.html
KitKat. (2013, 11 20). Kit kat. Retrieved 11 20, 2013, from Android:
https://www.kitkat.co.uk/android/default.aspx
Soininen, K. (2013, 7 01). Mintel. Retrieved 11 20, 2013, from
Biscuits, Cookies and Crackers - UK - March 2013:
http://academic.mintel.com/display/637989/
Yong, J. (2013, 9 20). Youtube. Retrieved 11 20, 2013, from Taxi:
http://designtaxi.com/news/360795/Kit-Kat-Rewards-People-With-
Free-Nexus-7-Tablets-For-Taking-A-Break/
Appendixes
Appendix 1
(de Chernatony 1999)
Appendix 4
(Petromilli et al. 2002)
Appendix 5
(Kapferer 1992, 1998)
Appendix 6

6. Appendix 7
(Brakus et al. 2009)
Appendix 8
(Aaker, 1996 )
Appendix 9
Appendix 10
(KitKat, 2013)