The Credit Union Brand: What Is It Good For?

Transcription

ISBN 978-1-932795-52-3
The Credit Union Brand:
What Is It Good For?
ideas grow here
PO Box 2998
Larry D. Compeau, PhD
Madison, WI 53701-2998
Phone (608) 231-8550
PUBLICATION #173 (12/08)
www.filene.org
ISBN 978-1-932795-52-3
Associate Professor in Consumer/Organizational Studies
Clarkson University
Clarkson University
Copyright © 2008 by Filene Research Institute. All rights reserved.
ISBN 978-1-932795-52-3
Printed in U.S.A.
Filene Research Institute
Deeply embedded in the credit union tradition is an ongoing
search for better ways to understand and serve credit union
members. Open inquiry, the free flow of ideas, and debate are
essential parts of the true democratic process.
The Filene Research Institute is a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit
research organization dedicated to scientific and thoughtful
analysis about issues affecting the future of consumer finance.
Through independent research and innovation programs the
Institute examines issues vital to the future of credit unions.
Ideas grow through thoughtful and scientific analysis of toppriority consumer, public policy, and credit union competitive
issues. Researchers are given considerable latitude in their
exploration and studies of these high-priority issues.
Progress is the constant
replacing of the best there
is with something still better!
— Edward A. Filene
The Institute is governed by an Administrative Board made
up of the credit union industry’s top leaders. Research topics
and priorities are set by the Research Council, a select group
of credit union CEOs, and the Filene Research Fellows, a blue
ribbon panel of academic experts. Innovation programs are
developed in part by Filene i3, an assembly of credit union
executives screened for entrepreneurial competencies.
The name of the Institute honors Edward A. Filene, the “father
of the U.S. credit union movement.” Filene was an innovative leader who relied on insightful research and analysis when
encouraging credit union development.
Since its founding in 1989, the Institute has worked with over
one hundred academic institutions and published hundreds of
research studies. The entire research library is available online
at www.filene.org.
iii
Acknowledgments
The success of this research depended greatly on those who volunteered to participate, both the members and the management of six
credit unions. Due to promised confidentiality and anonymity, I am
unable to thank by name each individual interviewed. However, they
know who they are, and I thank them deeply for their time, honesty,
frankness, and willingness to tell me what they really felt. I learned a
great deal from them.
I also want to thank Rajesh Sethi, my good friend and colleague
who accompanied me on some of these trips and helped with the
interviews.
A special thanks goes to Josey Siegenthaler and George Hofheimer
for their patience and support throughout this research project and
for their insightful advice and comments.
Finally, I am deeply grateful to William Kelly, who pioneered the use
of qualitative research at the Filene Research Institute back in 1998,
when he invited me to submit the very first qualitative research
proposal.
v
Table of Contents
Executive Summary and Commentary
ix
About the Author
xiii
Chapter 1
Introduction
Chapter 2
Key Research Findings
13
Chapter 3
Recommendations for Credit Union Brand
Management
25
Appendix 1
Methodology
43
Appendix 2
Elkhart County Farm Bureau Credit Union:
The “Abe Lincoln of Credit Unions”
49
References
55
1
vii
Executive Summary and Commentary
By George A. Hofheimer,
Chief Research Officer
“Credit unions need to start a national branding campaign.” If I had
a nickel for every time I heard this statement in credit union circles,
I’d have a heavy bag of nickels.
There are a few problems with the desire to conduct a national
credit union branding campaign. First, what brand promise could be
conveyed by over 8,000 unique institutions? Second, lots of national
brand campaigns have already been conducted by the Credit Union
National Association (CUNA). In fact, at this very moment I am
looking at my vintage, eBay-procured 1973 print advertisement
with TV star Chad Everett proclaiming, “Join your credit union. It’s
where you belong” in his stylish leather sport coat. Problem is, previous national credit union branding campaigns have not resonated
with consumers1—which brings me to the final problem with a
national credit union branding campaign, and that is, do consumers
really care about the “credit union” brand?
While much work (and effort) is spent on a national credit union
brand, relatively little research today focuses on the brand identity of
individual credit unions. This topic is important because over the last
10 years credit unions rapidly expanded from their original sponsor organizations into broader membership groups that are based on
multiple (and sometimes unrelated) employer groups, vast metropolitan areas, countrywide professional groups, and even virtual relationships. With this broadening come name changes to better reflect
who individual credit unions are serving. So, Xerox Federal Credit
Union is now Xceed Financial Credit Union, John Deere Community Credit Union is now Veridian Credit Union, and so on.
The Filene Research Institute gave the research task of better understanding individual credit union brand identity to Larry Compeau,
PhD, professor of consumer/organizational studies at Clarkson
University. Compeau took a qualitative research approach whereby a
small number of in-depth interviews were conducted with a variety of
credit union types (single-SEG, multi-SEG, community, etc.), credit
union members (age, length of membership, gender, etc.), and credit
union employees (CEO, senior management, staff, etc.) across the
United States.
Compeau’s techniques assessed interviewees’ conscious and subconscious thoughts with regard to their particular credit union. For each
credit union, the number of interviews was determined by the point
1
For a complete discussion of this topic, please see “A National Brand for Credit Unions: A Compendium of Opinions about a National Brand for
the Credit Union Industry,” CUNA Marketing and Business Development Council, 2008.
ix
at which the overall thoughts and feelings conveyed by interviewees
became repetitive and revealed little new information.
Compeau’s key findings are summarized below:
• Members hold a strong brand identity of their individual credit
union. They tend to describe their credit union with the following attributes: reliable, friendly, helpful, not flashy, and
informative.
• Employees hold weaker perceptions of their credit union’s brand
identity than their members.
• Except for longer-tenure members who may have helped build
their credit union, credit union members tend not to differentiate
credit unions generically from banks.
• One of the small points of differentiation that credit union
members could verbalize is that credit unions are “a little more
personal” but “not as sophisticated” as banks.
From these high-level findings, Compeau provides a comprehensive set
of recommendations for credit unions to consider as they build their
individual brands. Specifically, he recommends that credit unions:
• Strategically position their individual brand with the focus on
emotional rather than functional qualities. The financial services
marketplace is rife with brands positioned around service, quality,
convenience, and price; compelling brands tackle the less obvious
emotional qualities that are more difficult to compete with, like
localness or associations with a certain lifestyle (e.g., environmentalism or religious beliefs).
• Don’t obsess over their brand name. The name isn’t a brand until
you’ve branded it. If I had told you 10 years ago that Google
would be one of the world’s top brands, you’d probably Giggle.
• Enact the brand. Make simple connections for members and
non-members about what your brand means. Compeau contends
the positioning of a brand is conjured up by managers but is
meaningless to consumers unless they can make sense of what the
brand means.
• Build a local credit union brand community. Individuals who
become members of a strategically well-positioned credit union
feel that they belong to a special group of people who are different in some way from other consumers. If you’ve ever talked to an
Apple user, you’ll understand what brand community is.
Compeau also veers into a discussion on the concept of a national
credit union brand since the topic emerged during the course of the
research. Besides adding another nickel to my overflowing bag, Compeau’s informed discussion on this topic offers a few clues on what
x
an effective national
branding campaign
could
look like. He claims,
Executive
Summary
and
Commentary
“From our research, we take the position here that a national credit
union brand might be beneficial, but only in an indirect manner”—
not necessarily a ringing endorsement for what many think is a
panacea for U.S. credit unions. So rather than going to the same old
well of a national branding campaign, consider saving those nickels
and focus on your individual credit union’s identity. The benefit may
be much more impactful, according to this research study.
xi
About the Author
Larry D. Compeau is an associate professor in consumer/organizational
studies at the School of Business at Clarkson University. His research
interests are in pricing, consumer behavior, marketing strategy, and
public policy issues in marketing. His work and expertise in consumer
behavior have been relied on in highly prominent popular press including Time magazine, Newsweek, the Washington Post, National Public
Radio, Christian Science Monitor, and the Associated Press. Dr. Compeau has published over 30 papers. His research has won numerous
awards and has appeared in top journals, including the Journal of the
Academy of Marketing Science, the Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, the Journal of Business Research, the Journal of Consumer Affairs, the
Review of Marketing Research, and Pricing Strategy and Practice: An International Journal. He also was editor for a special issue of the Journal of
Public Policy & Marketing focusing on behavioral pricing. In an article
published in 2002 he was cited as the fifth most published author over
the past decade in that same journal. Dr. Compeau currently serves on
the editorial boards of four journals, including the Journal of Retailing,
the Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, the Journal of Consumer Affairs,
and the Journal of Product and Brand Management. Dr. Compeau has
served as an expert witness for several legal cases involving consumers’
interpretations of price. Dr. Compeau also conducted the research and
published the Filene report Successful Turnarounds from Bad Credit to
Good: What We Can Learn from the Borrower’s Experience in 2001.
xiii
CHAPTER 1
Introduction
Credit unions have always enjoyed the luxury
of knowing, or at least believing, that they are
special; they are nonprofit institutions dedicated to their members—seemingly an obvious
and startling difference from traditional banks.
Most everyone knows that Heinz is the slowest ketchup and 7-Up is the “un-cola,” but do
consumers really know that credit unions are
the “un-banks”? Most members we interviewed
seemed to lump credit unions in with banks.
“Credit Unions are not banks!”
—Credit union CEO
But what is a credit union? Even the words “credit union” do not
seem to convey a specific meaning in modern vocabulary. For most
consumers, credit is what you owe, and a union is an organization
of employees formed to bargain with the employer. How does this
name tell today’s consumers what credit unions are and how they
differ from banks?
Yet, this quote from a credit union CEO captures what credit union
insiders think everyone knows: Credit unions are not banks and
differ in seemingly many obvious and important ways. In fact, the
historical perspective has always been that credit unions can compete with “banks” only because of the stark differences between the
two. In order to be competitive in today’s financial services markets,
institutions must differentiate themselves so that consumers can
easily identify them according to that difference. If they are viewed
as all the same, then financial institutions become commoditized
and consumers have no compelling reason to pick one over another.
Thus, HSBC, “the world’s local bank,” wants to be seen as a powerful international bank with worldwide resources and impact and yet
available in your community. This brand positioning allows consumers to select a bank that best meets their top priority needs.
But what specific need or set of needs comes to mind when someone
says “credit union”? More specifically, what images and identities are
conjured up with “First Trust Credit Union,” “Elkhart County Farm
Bureau Credit Union,” “Empower Federal Credit Union,” “Interra,”
and “Sunmark Federal Credit Union”?
Credit unions have always enjoyed the luxury of knowing, or at
least believing, that they are special; they are nonprofit institutions
dedicated to their members—seemingly an obvious and startling
difference from traditional banks. Most everyone knows that Heinz
is the slowest ketchup and 7-Up is the “un-cola,” but do consumers
really know that credit unions are the “un-banks”? Most credit union
2
members we interviewed for this study seemed to lump credit unions
in with banks.
“This has become the bank of choice for me.”
“. . . so they’re becoming more like a bank and they sell their loans
now.”
“This bank has just grown tremendously in the last . . . since they’ve
built this building, I think they’ve grown tremendously. And, I think
people see it as a bank.”
“It’s our bank, it’s our only bank.”
So what is going on here? Is this merely a simple generalization that
really doesn’t mean anything? Do consumers really know the differences but out of simplicity (since the services offered are similar)
merely lump them together under the rubric of banks? Certainly we
know that consumers might consider both banks and credit unions
in their choice set. Or, do members really see credit unions as just
another bank? The answers to these questions are critical in formulating future credit union broad strategies as well as more specific
branding strategies.
Even if members are not so knowledgeable about what credit unions
are and how they differ from banks, surely credit union managers,
whose job and mission it is to communicate these differences, believe
that most members know the difference—but maybe not. Here is a
verbatim portion of an interview we conducted for this study:
Interviewer: And you just switched [the credit union name], but
then the other part of your name is “credit union” and that stayed
the same. What do you think that means to people?
Response: Nothing.
Interviewer: Nothing?
Response: Un, huh [shaking head back and forth]—nothing, they
don’t care.
Interviewer: So, if you took that [credit union] out of your name . . . ?
Response: I don’t think it’d make a difference—not at all. It doesn’t
mean anything. People don’t know what it is.
Interviewer: Do you think people think you’re just a bank?
Response: Yes. Yup, especially now.
Interviewer: So, the credit union part of who you are seems to be
really important to you and to [the CEO] and to your management team and your staff, but you don’t think it trickles down to
the members?
Response: Membership, no.
3
Interviewer: Do you think they know when they deposit money
here, they own the credit union?
Response: No. They are looking for the best rates, the best service.
We’re a bank.
Thus, a series of intriguing questions remain:
• Do members see credit unions as different from banks?
• Exactly what is the brand image associated with “credit union” in
the minds of the members?
• Do individual credit unions have a brand image separate from
“credit union”? If so, what is it?
• What are the managers’ perceptions of their credit union brand
(brand identity)? What do managers believe about members’
impressions, and how do they compare with what members think
and feel?
We will focus on these questions in this study.
What Is a Brand?
The American Marketing Association defines a brand as a “name,
term, sign, symbol, or design, or a combination of them, intended
to identify the goods and services of one seller or group of sellers and
to differentiate them from those of competition” (Keller 2008, 2).
Thus, the primary purpose of a brand is to signify instant meaning
that differentiates this brand from all others in meaningful ways.
However, this definition focuses on a managerial view of a brand.
What about a consumer-based view of a brand? For consumers, a
brand incorporates image and reputation as part of its larger gestalt.
Thus, Keller (2008) considers a brand more like a set of mental
associations held by the consumer that add to the perceived value of
a product or service. It is important to distinguish between brand
identity (how the organization “sees” itself ) and brand image (how
others, most importantly consumers, see the brand or organization). Thus, brand identity answers the question, Who are we?, and
brand image answers the question, Who do people think we are?
In this research, we use the general term “brand” in a very broad
sense capturing all of the subtle nuances of what the names, terms,
signs, symbols, experiences, and communications mean to people in
terms of a holistic image of, or impression associated with, the credit
union. To differentiate between the consumer’s perspective—or in
this particular research, the credit union member’s perspective—
and the manager’s perspective, we use the terms “brand image” and
“brand identity,” respectively.
It is equally important to understand what brand equity is and
how it relates to the brand. All branding efforts are aimed at one
4
objective: building brand equity. From a consumer’s perspective,
brand equity is really nothing more than “the differential effect that
brand knowledge has on consumer response to the marketing of the
brand” (Keller 2008, 48). For example, if consumers respond the
same way to the marketing of Maxwell House coffee as they do to
the marketing of generic coffee, then there is no brand equity.
Just as with most products and services, probably the most important component of a credit union’s brand is the name. Sometimes
the name is almost automatic, as in the case of a single-sponsor
credit union. More recently, however, as credit unions expand into
multiple SEGs and embrace community-based charters, names have
been developed and selected ostensibly to convey a certain image or
identity to consumers and members. Many times the attempts are
influenced by history, politics, special interests, or social discourse.
No research to date has examined exactly what the name, or the
broader aspect of the brand in general, means to members, regardless
of how it came to be.
Why Study Credit Union Branding?
Brands are important for credit unions because they provide important functions. Brands can instantly allow consumers to recall specific
images associated with the credit union, wrapped up in a nice, tight
mental representation. Most everyone can immediately recall specific
identities for popular brand names such as Apple, IKEA, Starbucks,
Pixar, Diehard, Hallmark, and Victoria’s Secret—can any credit
union boast the same? Some brand names instantly “signal” the
brand image or identity to the consumer, such as Juicy Fruit gum,
Krispy Kreme doughnuts, Old El Paso Mexican food, and Jell-O
gelatin (does anyone really call it gelatin anymore?), since the names
contain the main feature of the brand identity and the product. Certainly, the experiences consumers have with the products further etch
the brand image into their minds. The experiences a member has
with the credit union can also build special meaning into the brand
over time. For example, if the term “credit union” is viewed as a
brand, consumers will immediately recognize it and associate certain
characteristics with it, allowing them to simplify their choice process
when it comes to selecting a financial institution. Since only a credit
union can use the credit union name, it is unique and can endow the
services offered with special meaning. This special meaning can be a
competitive advantage. One hurdle, however, is that the term “credit
union” does not appear to convey any significant modern interpretation. Nonetheless, other brands have overcome this obstacle, including Porsche, Levi’s, and Disney (all people’s last names that now
mean something totally different); Arm & Hammer (named and
modeled after a mythical god of fire and metalworking, Vulcan, that
5
has no relevance anymore); and Fruit of the Loom (hardly intuitive).
In each instance, the firm had to create a new brand identity while
keeping the old brand name.
It is also possible to develop
One hurdle, however, is that the term “credit union” does not
a brand that has no meaning
appear to convey any significant modern interpretation.
or connotation whatsoever
and build the brand identity
from scratch. Possibly the best
modern-day example of a brand that created its identity from scratch
is Google. So, although it might be preferable to develop a new
name for credit unions to reflect the main strategic positioning of the
brand, it is not impossible to create new meaning for the term “credit
union” over time.
In 1999, CUNA published a document that laid out an ambitious
national branding campaign for credit unions based on years of
research and development. A key component of this initiative was
national branding. “Credit unions need to effectively differentiate
themselves from other financial institutions . . . The objectives are to
raise visibility, and build market share and brand resiliency” (6). In
part, this research then examines whether the members we interviewed are aware of and believe in that differentiation and have a
grasp of the brand identity.
One question is whether such a thing as a credit union brand even
exists. Do credit union members have specific images in their minds
that capture the essence of their credit union and what it means to
them? If there is such a thing as a credit union brand, what advantages might it convey? How would credit unions go about managing
their brand?
Marketing researchers have consistently documented the value of a
brand, including such assets as recognition, legitimacy, and familiarity. Moreover, effective branding can lead to strong customer
preference and loyalty with the added advantage of supporting price
premiums.
Marketing researchers have consistently documented the value of a brand, including such assets as
recognition, legitimacy, and familiarity. Moreover, effective branding can lead to strong customer
preference and loyalty with the added advantage of supporting price premiums.
Although more concerted efforts have recently been implemented
to attempt to build a more universal and broad credit union brand
image across the country (CUNA 1999), a compelling unified
credit union brand image has historically been lacking. Credit union
members typically know their local credit union but have no notion
6
of a universal credit union image. Moreover, credit unions, and their
names and potential images, have dramatically changed in the last
decade. For example, whenever an employer that is a single sponsor
of a credit union (e.g., Acme Corporation/Acme Credit Union) hires
a new employee, this name sharing makes a clear connection between
the employer and the credit union, creating an immediate brand
image and identity and some level of brand equity based on the new
employee’s image of the employer. That is, the image of the employer
in the mind of the employee gets transferred to the credit union (for
good or bad). In these instances, membership in the credit union
is strongly positioned as a fringe benefit to the employee. However,
with the proliferation of SEGs and more community-based chartered
credit unions, credit unions are adopting more abstract, global, and
umbrella-type names unrelated to the primary sponsor (e.g., First
Credit Union). Thus, the immediate brand image and equity that
come with sharing the employer’s name are lost. In response, some
credit unions have attempted to select names that recapture their
ability to “brand” their image and identity. To address these issues,
the credit union should:
• Firmly establish any existence of credit union brands.
• Carefully disentangle the more global “credit union” brand from
the local credit union brand.
• Gain a better understanding of what the credit union brand is
and what it means to its members. Without some baseline understanding of the nature of credit union brands, any assessment of
causal impact will be undermined since we will not know what
the brand actually means.
What’s So Special about Credit
Unions?
Credit unions occupy a unique position in the landscape of financial
institutions in America. The credit union’s legal status, corporate
structure, and organizational design are substantially different from
those of other financial institutions, with an overall focus on members (consumers) rather than stockholders. This status was, and still
is, believed to offer credit unions somewhat of an exalted position in
the eyes of management—after all, members are not only customers,
but owners of the credit union.
This “image” of a financial institution—designed from the beginning to exist not to make money, or profit, from its customers, but
rather to return any profits to its customers/members—has been a
compelling thrust for many years. The brand identity associated with
“credit union” has mainly relied on this cooperative structure and
spirit. But, prior research has never closely examined the credit union
7
brand from both the members’ and management’s views. We do not
know what members experience, feel, or think or how they respond
to the credit union brand, if one even exists. This report examines
the credit union brand at two levels, the “credit union” brand and
the individual brands of credit unions (e.g., “community”), and from
two perspectives, that of management and that of the members. The
focus here, however, is on the members’ views.
Getting to the “Credit Union” Brand
through Research
Given this historical perspective, to simply assume what the brand
“credit union” means to members is unfounded. Despite all the
brochures, signs, banners, pens, and magnets, the brand identity
espoused by credit unions may not be the brand image that is held
in the minds of the members. Thus, there is a need to examine
members’ perceptions of credit unions and what they mean to them.
These perceptions come from the credit union’s marketing activities and from the members’ experiences with the credit union. They
include interactions with the staff, visiting the facilities, reading the
literature, obtaining a loan, “banking” online, and so forth. Thus,
creating a deep understanding of members’ experiences with their
credit union will help credit unions more fully realize what the credit
union, and the credit union brand, means to members. This insight
should help credit unions better position the credit union brand
in the multidimensional brandscape in members’ minds, creating
higher member satisfaction, greater loyalty, and greater brand equity.
The goal is to better understand the significance and meaning of the
credit union brand.
While a quantitative approach could be helpful in establishing certain characteristics of members’ perceptions of their credit union, to
understand the meaning of the brand, we employ a deeper, qualitative approach to gain an in-depth look at members’ experiences,
thoughts, and feelings. Surveys cannot probe the depth of the experiences of members to see in everyday activities what the credit union
means to them. Even an ethnographic approach is not well suited for
this endeavor since participant observation will not necessarily allow
the researcher to dig deep into the participant’s experiences. The primary method used in this research (individual, in-depth interviews)
allows the researcher to focus on a narrow topic but develop a great
deal of depth.
One particular benefit of qualitative research is the luxury of “emergent design.” That is, the design of the research can and should
change over the life of the project as the researchers learn more as
part of the interviewing process. For example, at first the design
8
called for interviews only with members. But as background interviews with credit union CEOs were conducted to get preliminary
insights, it became obvious that interviews with management at each
credit union would be necessary to situate the members’ narratives.
This design change added greatly to our ability to interpret the
results and provide more useful recommendations.
A total of 29 interviews across six credit unions were conducted.
Sixteen interviews were with credit union members, and 13 were
with management. Although generalization across age, social class,
marital status, and other demographic categories is not a goal of this
research, nor is it tenable given the methodological approach, the
participants did cover a broad spectrum of demographics, including both male and female; a wide range of ages (an educated guess
would be ages 20 to 75—we didn’t ask); marital statuses such as
single or married with various numbers of children at different ages;
a wide range of occupations, from laborer to small business owners,
college professors and doctors; and education from high school to
advanced college degrees. Of course, all credit union management we
interviewed were employed at the credit union in some supervisory
capacity, but at all credit unions we interviewed the CEO, a marketing manager, and at least one other senior management person. All
members interviewed were currently employed outside the home or
were retired.
We also collected materials from the credit unions, including brochures, “gifts” (e.g., pens and magnets), and other material that
we thought might help us understand the credit union better. We
examined their Web sites and even some forms such as loan applications. For those credit unions that participated fully in the project,
we provided a “brand sketch.” This written document provided each
credit union with a summary snapshot of how we interpreted the
members’ impressions of the credit union in the form of brand identity. Each brand sketch was unique to each credit union and varied
considerably. Although all sketches are held in strictest confidence,
the Elkhart County Farm Bureau Credit Union2 permitted us to
include its brand sketch here (Appendix 2) for illustration purposes
and because it serves as an exemplar for some of our key results.
The interviews proceeded in two stages. The first stage consisted of
an open-ended unstructured depth interview as described here and
in Appendix 1 in more detail. Once this part of the interview was
exhausted, the interview then employed other qualitative techniques
that took a more direct approach at uncovering deep impressions
2
Shortly after the research study was completed, the Elkhart County Farm Bureau Credit Union changed its name to Interra Credit Union due to
legal challenges from the Farm Bureau system.
9
about the member’s credit union. For example, free association, projective techniques, and metaphorical approaches were employed. At the
end of each member interview, a form and a stamped, self-addressed
envelope were provided for each member to write down a story about a
specific experience that came to mind and then answer a series of questions about that experience (see Appendix 1 for details). Management
participants were not required to complete this step.
In this report, we present the results of this research as both an interpretation of the participants’ narratives, suggesting several key themes
that emerged from the transcripts, and a description of whatever common themes we could derive in terms of brand identity. We then translate these themes into recommendations for credit union branding.
This research then diverges from many previous efforts in four distinct
ways. First, the research employs a multimethod design that includes
phenomenological depth interviews, free association, projective techniques, metaphor making, and written narratives. Second, a qualitative approach that focuses on people’s experiences is taken, rather
than the more traditional quantitative (i.e., survey or secondary data)
examination. Third, this research examines brand image from both the
PROJECTIVE TECHNIQUES
To gain an understanding of any brand
Projective techniques attempt to uncover
image that might exist, we must first delin-
the true thoughts and feelings that may
eate the member’s brand knowledge. That
be difficult to express for a whole host
is, what do the members currently know or
of reasons. By asking members to “proj-
believe about the brand (the credit union)?
ect,” that is, disconnecting the members’
Of course, the most direct method is to
thoughts and feelings from themselves,
simply ask. However, people sometimes
they may be better able to reveal their true
have difficulty expressing their feelings
feelings. While there are many projective
and thoughts, and other times they are
techniques, possibly the most famous is
concerned about whether what they say
the Rorschach test—asking subjects to tell
is appropriate, especially to a researcher
the researcher what an ink blot looks like.
they have never met before. Revealing
In this research we use more mundane
true feelings requires a lot of trust. Just the
techniques, including word or free associa-
fact that the interviews were conducted
tion, comparison tasks, completion tasks,
mostly at the credit unions might prompt
and a variation of the Zaltman Metaphor
members to focus on the positive. So, we
Elicitation Technique (ZMET).
must turn to more unconventional research
methods to get an accurate depiction of
brand knowledge.
10
See Appendix 1 for more details.
members’ and the managers’ (brand identity) points of view. Fourth,
this research looks at both the broader image of “credit union” as well
as the specific image of several individual credit unions.
It is important to recognize that this research is all about creating a deep and rich understanding about credit unions and their
brands. It is focused on understanding what members’ credit unions
mean to them in their everyday lives. Thus, a quantitative approach
would simply not be appropriate in this instance. Of course, this
type of qualitative research does not allow us to generalize to all
credit unions, nor was it ever the goal of this research to do so. This
research digs deep and allows us to “see,” to grasp, and to develop a
deep understanding of a smaller number of credit union members
and their relationships with their credit union. We can then apply
this understanding to general cases to develop deep insights and
finally make recommendations.
We first present our findings on credit union brands, and then we
provide recommendations for managing credit union brands.
EXISTENTIAL PHENOMENOLOGY
In this research we employ an approach
preferred method. In this way, no artificial
called existential phenomenology. This
definitions or boundaries are placed on the
paradigm joins the philosophy of existen-
participants, and their stories are allowed
tialism with the methods of phenomenol-
to unfold naturally. It is through this para-
ogy. Within this paradigm, the goal of
digm and process that the meaning of the
research is to describe experiences as
person’s existence emerges—both for the
they are lived and interpret the meaning of
person and for all those around him or her,
those experiences. We seek to understand
including the researcher. What emerges
the events of everyday human life, free
is a thick and deep description of the lived
from presuppositions. What that means is
experiences that allows the researcher
that no external structure is forced on the
to interpret the meaning and significance
participants. An old adage is particularly
of those experiences in the participants’
relevant here: “I will learn more about you
everyday lives.
by the questions you ask than you will ever
learn about me from my answers.” Thus,
See Appendix 1 for more details.
the unstructured depth interview is the
11
CHAPTER 2
Key Research Findings
This research failed to find any strong global
sense of “credit union” as a brand, at least from
the members’ perspective. About the only sense
we could identify of any overarching brand
image for “credit union” is “more personal.”
That is, most members, when asked what a
credit union is, or how credit unions differ from
banks, or what “credit union” means to them,
stumbled a bit, but eventually mentioned that
credit unions are “more personal.”
The Meaning of Credit Union Name
Brands: A Credit Union by Any Other
Name . . .
In many respects, the key findings of this research were quite unexpected. We fully anticipated that members would be able to easily
articulate some mental model of their image of their credit union
and for credit unions in general such that it would differentiate them
from other financial institutions. However, what we found is far
more complex than anticipated. Although there were some general
findings that cut across all members from all credit unions, much of
what we found does not. In fact, our results depend on several critical factors, including:
• Generation.
• Member versus manager.
• Level of analysis.
• Type of credit union (single-sponsor versus multi-SEG or
community-based).
• Culture.
We use “generation” here to denote the cohort group that we simply
divide into three segments: retired members, working members, and
new members. Although “generation” is dependent on age, it captures
much more, including certain common experiences that one cohort
has lived through that others have not. We also use this phrase to
denote the length of time that the member has been involved with the
credit union, since, again, they seem to correlate well. Thus, generation refers to age, length of membership, and common experiences
(a simplistic categorization, but one that fits quite well). Most retired
members are over 60 (some are between 55 and 60), have been credit
union members for decades (some were actually founding members),
and grew up in a culture where saving and frugality were values more
universally embraced. Working members typically are between 35 and
55, have been with the credit union less than 10 years, and rely on the
credit union mainly for direct deposit and credit products (car loans,
14
mortgages, etc.) as they buy homes and raise families in their communities. New members are usually under 35 and typically have been with
the credit union less than three years.
The classification of member versus manager should be obvious.
“Level of analysis” is defined by whether we are looking at the local
credit union, the community in which it resides, or the national level
of credit unions in general. The type of credit union also played a
critical role in making sense of the interview data. A clear dichotomy
emerged between members of single-sponsor credit unions and
members of multiple-SEG and community-based credit unions.
Finally, “culture” refers to the culture we found at all three levels:
individual credit union, community, and national credit union.
We first discuss our findings for the general brand of “credit union”
and then focus on the findings for individual credit unions.
The “Credit Union” Brand Does Not
Exist Anymore—If It Ever Did
This research failed to find any strong global sense of “credit union”
as a brand, at least from the members’ perspective. About the only
sense we could identify of any overarching brand image for “credit
union” is “more personal.” That is, most members, when asked what
a credit union is, or how credit unions differ from banks, or what
“credit union” means to them, stumbled a bit, but eventually mentioned that credit unions are “more personal.”
“[We] mostly use it like a bank; although it seems a little more personal than a bank.”
“They are very warm, friendly, personal.”
This image, however, flows from the bottom up, not the top down.
That is, most members feel that credit unions in general are more
personal because they feel that their own credit union is more personal. Since it was beyond the scope of this research project (but an
excellent question for future research), it remains to be seen whether
non-members share this image, and if so, why being more personal
would not motivate them to become credit union members.
Since it was beyond the scope of this research project (but an excellent question for future
research), it remains to be seen whether non-members share this image, and if so, why being more
personal would not motivate them to become credit union members.
A quick examination of Figures 1 and 2 seems to suggest some other
brand personality characteristics. For example, several members
15
indicated that if their credit union were a car, it would be a Japanese
car (Toyota or Honda), suggesting that it was because these cars are
reliable, dependable, functional, and not flashy. Similarly, if the credit
union were an animal, the family dog was often mentioned, invoking
traits such as friendly, dependable, and hard working. In fact, across
all metaphor questions we see the following basic characteristics:
• Dependable.
• Reliable.
• Functional.
• Friendly.
• Plain, not flashy.
Thus, the temptation here is to ascribe these characteristics to all
credit unions in general. However, when further probed, the members
specifically stated that they do not believe or even know if other credit
unions are similar to their credit union. Therefore, these characteristics must remain specific to each credit union. Nonetheless, even if
we accept that these characteristics might carry over to credit unions
in general, they do not seem to be very compelling and they are likely
similar to how consumers would describe their favorite bank.
Most of the members interviewed could not and do not significantly
differentiate between credit unions and banks.
Figure 1: Taxology of Metaphors Provided by Members about Their Individual Credit Union
Car
Animal
Occupation
Fabric
Magazine
Toyota/Honda/Japanese (7)
Family dog (8)
Financial advisor (3)
Cotton (5)
Time (2)
Chevy Impala (2)
Horse (3)
Engineer (2)
Corduroy
Newsweek (2)
Buick (2)
Cat (2)
Fireman
Spandex
US News & World Report
Chrysler LeBaron
Badger
Security guard
Silk
Money
Cadillac
Koala bear
Teacher
Burlap
Life
Chevy Monte Carlo
Human resources
Polyester (wash & wear)
Handyman
Lexus
Carpenter
Good Housekeeping
Architect
Reader’s Digest
Postal carrier
Sports Illustrated
GQ (Gentlemen’s Quarterly)
Figure 2: Main Metaphor Descriptive Characteristics
Car
Animal
Occupation
Fabric
Magazine
Reliable
Friendly
Helps people
Not flashy
Informative
Dependable
Hard working
Analytical
Functional
Dependable
Not a lot of bells and
whistles
16
Versatile
Comfortable
Strong
“People see it as a bank.”
“It would be indifferent to me whether it be a credit union or . . .
whatever.”
Some members did articulate a general sense of knowing that credit
unions are somehow different from banks, but this was never expressed
as a compelling differentiation, nor was it usually explicated. In other
words, they know credit unions are supposed to be different somehow,
but just how escapes them. Again, members usually feel that credit
unions are more personal than banks. Most members do not recognize
“credit union” as a brand, nor can they describe what credit unions, in
general, are and how they differ from banks. They are not aware that
all credit unions are based on the same basic tenets. In fact, several
members asked the researchers to describe the differences between a
credit union and a bank. A result of this lack of a definitive image of
credit unions in general engenders a concomitant lack of any significant level of loyalty to credit unions as a “brand” of financial institution. When asked if they would look for another credit union if they
had to move, most simply indicated that if one were convenient they
would consider using it, but being a credit union alone was not a compelling reason. Thus, there was a small but generally insignificant level
of loyalty to credit unions in general. As one member put it,
“I’m not attached to [credit unions]; I’m attached to what they offer.”
One exception was with longtime credit union members. Typically,
these people have been members for more than 30 years, and some
are even founding members of their credit union. This group of
members has a keen sense of the
importance attached to what
they sometimes refer to as “the
In other words, they know credit unions are supposed to be difcredit union movement.” Most,
ferent somehow, but just how escapes them.
but not all, firmly grasp what
credit unions are, how they
differ from banks, and why they would look for another credit union
should they ever move. For example, one member who was a founding member of the credit union clearly knew everything about credit
unions in general, including organizational structure, legal structure,
and the cooperative philosophy.
“One member, one vote. I like that . . . I’m only one vote, but, nevertheless, I can go in and do it.”
“I realize the difference between a credit union and a bank. There are
some legal structure issues that one can do and the other can’t.”
Even the most knowledgeable members, however, still have trouble
speaking specifics about the differences. For example, all but two
members were not aware that credit unions are not-for-profit
organizations.
17
Managers seem to have a much better grasp than members, but
many still do not know or fully embrace the “cooperative” philosophy underlying credit unions.3 Of course, as would be expected, all
CEOs demonstrate a depth of knowledge regarding the credit union
legal and organizational structure; however, interestingly enough, the
level of commitment and conviction to the fundamental ideals of the
cooperative spirit and day-to-day implementation of that spirit upon
which the credit union culture is based varies considerably. This level
of conviction (or lack thereof ) trickles down into the heart and soul
of the credit union itself. We will say more about this in the next
section when we discuss the individual credit union brand, but it is
important to recognize that some CEOs articulate a very deep commitment to the cooperative philosophy, evidenced by observations
while visiting the credit union and by the interviews of other management staff and members. Others never even acknowledge any sense of
being a cooperative—they are focused on running a business.
Another, and a bit more insidious, characteristic of credit unions in
general also emerged from members. Often, members’ comments
were tinted by what we might term “limited competency.” Members
spoke about how their credit union may not offer the latest products
or services or be as professional as a bank. A slight skepticism about
the solidity of the credit union also crept in from time to time.
“I think there are some credit unions out there that are really struggling, and for that reason, I would be pretty selective about what
credit union I would [join].”
“It pulls away from that big city feel, being professional.”
“They’re small and limited, but that’s okay. They’re very friendly.”
Even the not-for-profit status was not always viewed in a positive light.
“If we get to a place where it’s not-for-profit and we can’t compete
with them, we obviously have lost our place in the banking industry.”
A quick examination of Figures 1 and 2 reinforces this lackluster image.
The metaphorical descriptions focus on rather mundane and functional
attributes such as reliable, dependable, hard working, and plain—not a
bad set of attributes, but not exactly dynamic or compelling.
In sum, “credit union” as a national brand really does not exist in
terms of holding meaning or significance to members. About the only
characteristic or personality the credit union brand holds is that most
members feel that all credit unions will likely be a little more personal
than banks. There does not seem to be a sense of the “we are all in this
3
For a complete discussion on this topic, please see John Gatewood and John Lowe, Employee Perceptions of Credit Unions and Implications
for Member Profitability (Madison, WI: Filene Research Institute, 2008).
18
together, looking out for each other” cooperative spirit that is thought
to be the hallmark of credit unions in general. Nor did we find any
value attached to the fact that credit unions are not-for-profit organizations with a cooperative structure. One member, well aware of the
differences between credit unions and banks, put it this way:
“Credit unions in general are unique at least in some way between the
bank and the credit union, but I would like to see them spend more
time being unique for the reasons that we’re in the credit union.”
This individual is a member of the credit union because the rates
were better and he wants personalized service. But when it came to
evaluating the personalized service, he noted,
“I think the credit unions need to look into what they can do so that
you need them—[like] more personalized service.”
Thus, members do not recognize “credit unions” in general in terms
of what one might expect if it were acting as a brand. There does not
appear to be any equity, loyalty, significant meaning, or mental models associated with “credit union” except for long-term and highly
involved members, and this group of members is disappearing rapidly. As will become even more obvious, a paradox emerged in that
while a global brand for credit unions is nonexistent, or very weak at
best, a very strong brand image often exists for local individual credit
unions.
The Individual Credit Union Brand:
It’s Who You Are That Counts, Not
Your Name
“All you have, see, is the experiences. That’s all there is Johnny—to
everything—just the experiences.”
—Burgess Meredith in Grumpy Old Men
Results at the individual credit union level differ markedly from the
more global level of credit unions. Here we found not only deep
meanings and connections but also high levels of loyalty for some
credit unions. Members wrote and talked about specific experiences
that are deep in meaning to them and reflect an obviously valued
relationship with the individual credit union. Although members
are not all that knowledgeable about what credit unions are and
how they differ from banks, they certainly know “who” their credit
union is and why they are loyal. In fact, while all but one member
indicated that taking “credit union” out of the name would not
be detrimental (that person was a founding member), many have
significant attachment to the local part of the name and the local
credit union.
19
This attachment, however, is much stronger depending on the culture of
the credit union and the community in which it resides. For example, we
visited one credit union that is situated in a strong farming community
in a very rural location and is deeply steeped in a Christian-based religion and what we might call “traditional values.” The religious-based culture suffuses throughout the town, its people, and its local credit union.
Basic beliefs in honesty, fairness, justice, hard work, family, and “do unto
others” are the hallmarks of their
existence. The members and the
employees are part of this comAlthough members are not all that knowledgeable about what
munity and part of the culture
credit unions are and how they differ from banks, they cerdriven by this simple philosophy
tainly know “who” their credit union is and why they are loyal.
of life. It is not coincidental, then,
that the credit union mirrors the
image of the strong culture in which it is embedded. Here we found
the strongest commitment by managers to the cooperative spirit and
philosophy, all the way up and down the organizational chart. However,
the cooperative spirit of the credit union and the traditional value base
of this community’s culture are very synergistic. It was here that we also
found some of the strongest loyalty by members to their credit union,
and the clearest image of “who” the credit union is to the members. The
metaphors rang with farming animals, tools, and other farming icons.
The credit union’s name, Farm Bureau Credit Union, and its image are
remarkably consistent and precise. When asked what would happen if
the local part of the credit union’s name were to be changed or removed,
one long-term member reacted strongly.
“I think if they change anything it would be a big, big issue . . .
because it has stood the test of time. They’ve proven themselves for
the last 50 years in terms of ‘we have a good place to come put your
money in’ . . . a good place to get money, if you need money.”
But it is not that simple. Even with such a strong image, times
change, and for most of the other members at this same credit union,
the name was not all that important.
“I guess I don’t have an affinity to the name. I don’t think it would
matter that much.”
It is critical to note that this image and this loyalty come about as a
result of the members’ experiences. All members wrote wonderful
stories and talked specifically about their experiences and what it
means to them to be a member of this credit union.
“I mean, all the tellers know me well. I bring my little kids in with
me. The other day I was here and four tellers were bringing candy. It’s
just that some are like family.”
“They have an annual meeting and they invite the families. It’s
so simple, and they give door prizes. Well, I mean, that’s nice.
20
One time they had a magician . . . But, what I mean is, they’re
family-oriented.”
When this member says that “they’re family-oriented,” he means that
the credit union embraces and shares the same value system, and he
feels connected to the credit union in a very personal way.
Thus, at the local level, one way to build a brand image and brand
loyalty and equity is through the experiences. Another method is to
tap into loyalty that already exists. Members of single-sponsor credit
unions also appear to be more attached to their credit union. They
know that the members are also their coworkers and friends. They
express higher levels of concern should the name change, they describe
quite succinctly “who” the credit union is, and they are highly loyal.
“I’d say that I feel loyalty to them as much as I do my employer.”
In essence, they see the credit union as part of their employer, possessing the same traits—and why not? They are very closely connected. Thus, these members have a direct connection to the credit
union that shares their employer’s name. They understand a little
more about how a credit union differs from a bank, although this
understanding is mainly focused on the credit union being a fringe
benefit for employees and mistakenly viewed as the credit union
being “owned” by the employer instead of the members. This labeling of the credit union as a fringe benefit appears to immediately
convey certain traits. For example, since it is a fringe benefit, employees conclude that it must cost the employer something and therefore
must be an advantage to the employee. Most of this understanding
and misunderstanding is due to the credit union sharing the name of
the employer and thus being viewed as a fringe benefit.
Of course, this loyalty depends on the level of loyalty to the employer.
In our research we were not able to find a single-sponsor credit union
where employees, and thus members, did not feel good about their
employer and, thus, via a halo effect, feel good about their credit
union. That is, if one likes his or her employer, he or she is likely to
like the employer’s credit union by mere association.
“It’s a perk for the employees . . . It’s a bank for [XYZ] employees.”
Some single-sponsor credit unions associated with employers that
have a lesser reputation with employees would likely experience
either a lesser effect or even possibly a negative effect on loyalty.
Single-sponsor credit union members express a better “awareness” of
the cooperative spirit.
“I knew it [the rate] was going to be fair and also the rate wasn’t as
important to me as the place I really care about. I’m giving my money
to the right place. It’s like when you buy stock in a company. Do you
21
believe in that company? Where is the money going? Is it doing good
for society? Am I helping out people better?”
So, what is the common thread between single-sponsor credit
unions and the credit union that is so deeply embedded in its local
religious-based culture? Why are they so dramatically different in
terms of members’ knowledge about credit unions and their loyalty
to their credit union? In these two instances, members know and feel
a direct connection between the credit union and themselves. For the
single-sponsor credit unions, the credit union is who the member is
in terms of his or her profession, who he or she works for—a big part
of one’s life for most people. The image of the employer transfers to
the image of the credit union, and the loyalty goes right along with
it. For the tight-knit value-based
community, the feeling is the
same—they all share the same
Compared with multi-SEG and community-based credit
fundamental beliefs about life,
unions, there is no “special” connection; they basically serve the
and they know that the credit
community at large, just as banks do, so they must somehow
union, because it is made up
rely on other measures to make the connection.
of people like themselves,
shares those same fundamental values. They know themselves, so they know their credit union,
because it is “them.” Their daily experiences with the credit union
define and reinforce this image. Compared with multi-SEG and
community-based credit unions, there is no “special” connection;
they basically serve the community at large, just as banks do, so they
must somehow rely on other measures to make the connection. That
is, other than the more personal attention, it’s all about the rates,
products, and services—a tougher position from which to compete
in an increasingly more competitive marketplace. As one member
of a large multi-SEG credit union that recently underwent a name
change described it,
“I can’t tell you what the new name of the credit union is. And, it’s
not important to me . . . because they [banks] change every five years.
[Changing the name] isn’t important. Business-wise, I’m sure it was
a good decision . . . For us, it’s more like, ‘They have a good rate, let’s
just take it.’ ”
It was not difficult to derive and define brand sketches for singlesponsor and, what we might call, “strong culturally defined” credit
unions. The voices were univocal and clear. For example, we dubbed the
credit union deeply immersed in the local well-defined values-based
culture the “Abe Lincoln of credit unions” (see Appendix 2). Its
commitment to old-fashioned values and family and its small-town
vibe all work together to give it a specific and unique character that
resonates well with the community at large. Needless to say, yank
this credit union out of its local community and put it where the
22
community values differ and it is less likely to be successful. On the
other hand, change its name, and as long as it continues to reflect the
deeply held values of the community and that commitment is well
communicated, it likely will not suffer negative consequences from
current members; it may even attract new members who may have
felt left out due to the restrictive name.
Summary
There does not appear to be a strong brand image for credit unions
in general. From our findings, any significant brand image associated with credit unions exists at the local individual credit union
level. These brand images differ sharply depending on the individual
characteristics of each credit union. Two themes emerge, however.
The strength of the brand image and the resulting advantages seem
to depend on how well defined and focused that image appears to
the members. Our results demonstrate that this finely etched image
can be facilitated via the transfer of an employer’s image in the case
of a single-sponsor credit union, or through a consistent reinforcing
range of experiences that emphasize and articulate a deep sense of
the community in which the credit union exists. A large multi-SEG
or community-based credit union with a diffuse membership often
results in a vague and imprecise image, if one exists at all.
23
CHAPTER 3
Recommendations for Credit Union
Brand Management
The positioning of local credit union brands
must tap into the values and characteristics of
the cultures in which the credit union exists.
Consumers have to be able to quickly grasp how
this particular credit union is different from a
bank, and even other credit unions in the area,
and why this difference is important. From
these differences, an individual credit union
“brand community” can also emerge.
“In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In
practice, there is.”
So what can credit unions do? Is it possible to build a national
brand and local brands simultaneously? Is it at all advantageous to
do so? In this section we provide a short introduction to traditional
brand-building strategies and then, from the results of this research,
interweave these with established brand theory to develop a set of
recommendations.
Traditional Brand-Building Strategies
Creating differences is what branding is all about. The heart and
soul of a successful brand rests on the positioning of the brand
in a unique space in consumers’ minds. The brand’s position is
the result of creating differences. We defined a brand as the consumer’s set of mental associations that add to the perceived value
of a product. Another way of looking at it is that each brand
known to the consumer occupies a (hopefully) unique position in
the multidimensional “brandscape” in consumers’ minds. Thus,
clear positioning of a brand is critical to building brand image,
and clear positioning requires meaningful, compelling, and valued
differences.
Of course, the point of building a unique and powerful brand image
is to create brand equity. Brand equity is the “differential effect that
brand knowledge has on consumer response to the marketing of that
brand” (Keller 2008, 48). Thus, if consumers do not “see” and value
the differences, then there is no brand equity. Consumers acquire
knowledge about the differences associated with the brand via the
firm’s marketing activities, in which information about the brand
is communicated to the consumer and as a result of consumers’
26
experiences or interactions with the brand. Thus, in order for brand
equity to exist:
• Firms must communicate knowledge about their brands to consumers through their marketing activities and consumer experiences focusing on the differences.
• This knowledge must result in consumers feeling, seeing, hearing, and learning about the uniqueness of this brand versus other
brands.
• Consumers must value these differences.
A first step in building brand image, and thus brand equity, is
to create brand awareness. Obviously, a consumer cannot prefer
a brand unless he or she knows it exists. Usually brand awareness is created through marketing activities such as advertising,
promotion, signage, sponsorships, publicity, and public relations.
During our interviews with managers, a great deal of evidence
surfaced, demonstrating that all of these credit unions are heavily
involved in these types of marketing activities. Thus, the more that
consumers are exposed to the brand, the more familiar they will
become with the brand. However, brand awareness alone simply
means that consumers know of the brand. It does not necessarily follow that consumers know what the brand means, what the
brand means to them personally, and whether they prefer it.
To be truly effective, this familiarity must have a simple “positioning”
that consumers attach to the brand. This positioning consists of the
“differences” consumers value as compared with other brands. For
example, most consumers immediately know the positioning of 7-Up
soda, Ivory soap, and Heinz ketchup: not a cola; pure (and therefore
it floats); and thick, respectively. If a national brand is desirable, then
a similar positioning response for consumers must occur when they
hear or see “credit union.”
Thus, the first step is to determine what “differences” consumers
desire—this requires research. The primary question is, What is it
that consumers want but are not getting from the current panoply of
brands available to them? Once these characteristics are determined,
the usual next step is to design a product or service that delivers these
benefits and position it accordingly. The communications regarding
these different benefits are then designed, and the new product is
cleverly positioned in these messages such that consumers find it easy
to understand exactly “who” the brand is and why they should value
it over other brands.
27
This positioning of the brand—focusing on differences—is absolutely
critical. For the positioning to be effective, four criteria must be satisfied. First, consumers must find the focal differences relevant to them.
That is, consumers may completely see and understand the differences,
but do they care? Second, these differences must be unique and distinctive. If the differences are already available with alternatives, then
these differences will not be compelling to consumers—at best, the
product will be viewed as a “me too” product; at worst, consumers will
simply categorize the entire product market as a commodity. Third, the
consumer must value these differences and see them as superior in some
way. Fourth, the differences must be believable. This may sound obvious, but many brands have failed because consumers simply did not
believe the claims. Possibly the most egregious examples are the products that promised to do it all or tried to be all things to all people.
A National Credit Union Brand?
From our research, we take the position here that a national credit
union brand might be beneficial, but only in an indirect manner.
Although our participants do not recognize any national credit union
brand in any specific sense, they sense that credit unions are somehow special. Again, although they were generally unable to articulate
specifically how credit unions are special, they sense that they are. We
think that these feelings provide
a base upon which a national
credit union brand can be built.
From our research, we take the position here that a national credit
The point of building a national
union brand might be beneficial, but only in an indirect manner.
credit union brand would be to
assist individual credit unions
in building their brands. That is, ABC Credit Union would benefit
because members, and potential members, would attach value to ABC
being a “credit union.” A national credit union brand on its own has
little value since it must be cashed out through every large, small,
single-sponsor, multi-SEG, or community-chartered credit union in
the nation. Thus, several advantages could result from a strong national
credit union brand image that would benefit every credit union:
• Widespread recognition of credit unions as a unique group of
financial institutions.
• A better understanding of what credit unions are and how they
are different.
• A sense of greater size and impact for members, being a part of
something bigger.
• Greater loyalty to all credit unions.
• Signal of quality and level of service.
• Consistent national message reinforcing brand positioning.
28
However, this national branding may also invoke certain disadvantages. For example, members do not always view the not-for-profit
status of credit unions as beneficial. Often, members interpret this
nonprofit status as a signal that credit unions can’t compete with
banks—that they are somehow inferior. On the other hand, many
members value that their credit union is small, local, and personal.
If not carefully designed and implemented, a national credit union
brand could contradict or undermine that image of small, local,
and personal.
Nonetheless, we feel that a national credit union brand could deliver
these advantages while minimizing the impact of any disadvantages.
The key to this process will be finding a highly valued, truly meaningful, but simple articulation of the primary set of different benefits credit
unions offer to consumers.
This research was initially focused on local credit union brands and
primarily centered on trying to gain an understanding of any brand
image that might exist as credit unions expand their membership
base. That is, this research was originally motivated by the situation
where a credit union moved from single sponsor to multi-SEG or
community chartered, which was often accompanied by a name
change. Thus, the original research question was, What impact, if
BRAND AWARENESS VS. BRAND EQUITY
It is important to note the differences
the strength of the brand in the memory
between brand awareness and brand
structure of the consumer. Notice that
equity. Brand awareness is a much lower
brand awareness does not have any affec-
hurdle and conveys far fewer benefits
tive component. A consumer might have
than brand equity. Brand awareness is the
a high degree of brand awareness for a
level at which a consumer can identify the
brand that is disliked. Also, although brand
brand under different circumstances. For
awareness is necessary to build brand
example, one might test brand awareness
equity, it is only one component of brand
by asking consumers to name as many
equity. Brand equity goes beyond mere
brands as they can think of in a product
awareness in that the consumer holds
category (recall test). This is a stronger
some strong, favorable, and unique beliefs
test than simply providing a list of brands
about the brand that consistently convey
and asking consumers to identify those
a preference for that brand. Simply being
they recognize (recognition test). Thus,
aware of a brand is a far cry from believing
brand awareness can be thought of as
in, and consistently preferring, a brand.
29
any, does the name change have on the brand and its meaning to
members? As we attempted to address this research topic, however, the design evolved as other issues and situations presented
themselves.
Our results are quite clear. The credit union brand consists of two
distinct components: the term “credit union,” which reflects a
national designation common to all credit unions, and the local
name of the credit union, which is unique to that credit union.
All members we interviewed recognized and discussed this separation. Apparently, a credit union by any other name is not a credit
union. This is very much akin to what is commonly referred to
as “family branding.” For example, Kellogg’s has its family brand
“Kellogg’s” on every box of cereal, but it also has individual brand
names associated with each product or product line, such as Rice
Krispies or Special K. Our results also make it clear that for most
credit union members, there is no equity in the credit union
brand, nor do the members know what it means. They recognize
it and have some affinity toward it, but they do not express any
specific image associated with it. The only exception we noted is
members who have been part of the same credit union for many
years, often being a founding member, but even then the image
was blurry and diffuse. Moreover, this base of members is dwindling and does not offer a sound foundation for the future. While
our original focus here was not on the national credit union
brand, its role emerged quite naturally as part of our discussions with members and management. So, while we cannot speak
definitively on the national credit union brand since it is beyond
the original scope of this research, we can still offer some basic
suggestions based on our findings.
Our results are quite clear. The credit union brand consists of two distinct components: the term
“credit union,” which reflects a national designation common to all credit unions, and the local
name of the credit union, which is unique to that credit union.
In 1999, CUNA published The National Credit Union Brand
Strategy, which is based on a significant amount of research, primarily consisting of that from focus groups. Almost 10 years later, our
research results are consistent with those from CUNA. However, our
interviews allowed us to dig much deeper into understanding members’ relationships with their credit union and what the credit union
means to them. In fact, even earlier research found similar results. In
this document, CUNA cites research performed by Luntz Research
30
companies and Global Strategy Group, Inc., conducted in 1997. It
quotes the following conclusion:
Perhaps the single greatest challenge facing credit unions is their lack of
familiarity among a relatively large segment of the American population. Fully 38% of all adults cannot offer an opinion (either favorable
or unfavorable) of credit unions and one-quarter (27%) are “not at all
familiar with credit unions.” By comparison, only 7% have “no opinion” about banks. This difference is significant, and only a significant
nationwide public relations effort will shrink this “awareness gap.” (7)
Thus, it should come as no surprise that the credit union brand simply does not exist in any real sense for much of the American population. The surprise is that our research demonstrates that it doesn’t
even exist for credit union members. This CUNA report also goes on
to proffer a national branding strategy complete with a logo, tagline,
and suggested tactics. How aggressively and universally this branding campaign was implemented is not known by this researcher.
Nonetheless, almost 10 years later, our results show that a credit
union brand is not recognized by members interviewed in this study,
much less the population at large. Why the 1999 national branding
campaign did not make the credit union a well-known brand, even
to credit union members, is a question unanswered by this research.
So, what can be done? What will it take to make consumers aware of
the “credit union” brand and what it stands for?
Our results show that most members think of and categorize credit
unions as banks. Thus, credit unions are viewed as one option in a
commodity market of banking services. We could find little indication of any sense of specific differentiation between credit unions and
other financial institutions, particularly banks. Thus, we might look at
two highly successful examples of how commodities were transformed
into highly valued and sought-after brands and borrow from them.
Outside Industry Examples
Up until Chiquita started putting stickers on its bananas and advertising heavily, bananas were commodities. Shoppers did not know
which banana came from where or who produced which ones. A
banana was a banana; thus, banana growers had to simply accept
whatever price the market provided. In a brilliant move, Chiquita
“branded” bananas by putting little stickers on them and touting
how its bananas were different and why they were superior. In little
time, a brand image (due in part to the Chiquita Banana Lady) was
built and consumers became so loyal to the Chiquita brand that
Chiquita bananas commanded a price premium over other bananas.
Consumers now had a choice: Pay a higher price for higher quality
31
(at least perceived as a higher-quality banana), or pay less for any old
banana—a great positioning and branding strategy.
Similarly, most coffee drinkers (and even many who don’t drink coffee)
know who Juan Valdez is, but until the National Federation of Coffee
Growers of Colombia invented him and the tagline “100% Colombian Coffee” to brand the origin of coffee (recall that Juan Valdez on a
package of coffee assures the buyer that it is 100% Colombian coffee),
consumers shopped only by the manufacturer’s brand, such as Maxwell
House or Folgers. Although many still rely on manufacturer’s brands,
shoppers now are also loyal to 100% Colombian coffee from those
brands. In fact, some shoppers will switch manufacturer’s brand rather
than switch away from 100% Colombian coffee.
Just as the 100% Colombian brand coexists and supports manufacturers’ brands, we believe that credit unions can exploit a strong
national brand image, but it must coexist, support, and reinforce
local credit union brand images. For example, a McDonald’s
approach, where there would be no differentiation among credit
unions, would simply not work. Our findings show that each credit
union is different and individualized to its local community, its sponsor, or its SEGs. In fact, we noticed that credit unions seem to be
more different than similar. Thus, we make the following recommendations for developing a compelling national brand for credit unions.
National Branding Strategies
1. Start with the Appropriate Research
Research needs to be conducted to find out what consumers want
from financial institutions but feel they are not getting. Although we
gain some insight from this research, more specifically tailored research
that can be generalized is necessary. This research would focus more on
people who are not and have not been credit union members. Some
might argue that the differences between credit unions and banks are
already set in stone; in fact, they arise from differences in the philosophy, organizational structure, and legal entity. While it is tempting
to fall back on these long-standing unique characteristics, such as
member-owned/cooperative structure, not-for-profit, more personal,
friendlier, and so forth, it is still necessary to find out whether consumers want these attributes and if they value them. If not, then it would
be foolish to try to position a national credit union brand around any
of them. Our interviews were sprinkled with comments that hinted
that members often view credit unions as not as “professional” or
capable as banks, seemingly suggested by the not-for-profit label.
This research would need to consist of both qualitative and quantitative elements. A larger set of interviews, similar to those conducted in
this study, but extended to include both members and non-members
32
and more focused on what consumers want from their financial institutions but are not getting, would be instructive. This research can
provide the depth necessary to understand consumers’ preferences
and needs. These results can also be used to design a quantitative
study that can confirm the insights gained from the qualitative study
on a national basis.
While it is tempting to fall back on these long-standing unique characteristics, such as
member-owned/cooperative structure, not-for-profit, more personal, friendlier, and so forth, it is
still necessary to find out whether consumers want these attributes and if they value them.
This research should culminate in the expression of several potential
positioning strategies for the national credit union brand. Additional
research will be necessary to identify the most powerful positioning strategy and then design a marketing campaign to aggressively
implement it. This process typically necessitates the use of consumer
research as designs evolve and must be repeatedly tested.
2. Tap into Values, Not Functionality
Consistent across all the interviews conducted during this research
project is that members were the most attached and the most loyal
when they felt that the credit union shared and reflected some value
important to them. When considered carefully, this makes sense.
Often, the financial lives of people are the most personal and the
most important. It makes sense, then, that one might feel more
connected to a financial institution when the connection is based on
something deeper than hours of operation. Of course, credit unions
need to be competitive with the functional benefits, but if one is
looking for a deeper connection, functional benefits are unlikely to
deliver. In fact, from our interviews, functional benefits did not seem
to hold sway, unless the credit union was deficit in some way. Thus,
the functional benefits (convenience, hours, free checking, etc.) were
assumed to be competitive, and only when they were significantly
lacking did members focus on these benefits. We must also bear in
mind that functional benefits are easily copied and therefore do not
represent an opportunity to gain a sustainable competitive advantage.
However, connecting with members at the values level is very difficult to copy in the short term and could be a sustainable competitive
advantage. Even when the functional benefits were at a disadvantage
for credit unions, if a value connection was present, it mitigated any
strong negative effects. Note that the value must not just be shared or
reflected by the credit union, but it must be a value that is important
to the members. Most of the values we observed are connected at the
local level and varied from credit union to credit union as each local
33
credit union took on the patina of the members and the community
it serves. However, certain fundamental values should cut across all
credit unions, and research can tease them out. For example, one
shared value expressed in the interviews was that the credit union
keeps all money local. These members greatly value helping people
who live right in their community, rather than strangers from
another community.4 Some of the shared values mentioned by members were important enough that they were the primary reason for
the person to remain a member. Some of these values include:
• Localness: All the money stays local, helping the community in
which I live.
• Honesty and integrity: No scandals, no investigations, honest
people, trusted.
• Frugality: They do business like I would do business—prudently,
conservatively, frugally.
• Family: The credit union operates like a family and is like a part
of my family.
Often, the financial lives of people are the most personal and the most important. It makes sense,
then, that one might feel more connected to a financial institution when the connection is based
on something deeper than hours of operation.
From a manager’s perspective it might seem beneficial if consumers
highly valued the cooperative nature of the credit union organization
and that they are not-for-profit organizations, but we found little evidence that they do. In fact, some members reacted negatively when
learning that their credit union was a not-for-profit organization.
Certainly, this is an empirical question that can be answered with
quantitative research. There is the possibility that with a very intense
campaign some consumers can be educated to the advantages of a
cooperative structure and a not-for-profit standing, but this goal has
been elusive for many years and nothing in this study suggests that
anything has changed. The key point, however, is that while members
do not appear to value the fact that credit unions are not-for-profit cooperative organizations, they do value the benefits that are driven by the
cooperative not-for-profit foundation of credit unions, namely, personalization, family atmosphere, localness, integrity, and prudence.
Thus, it would seem that an appropriate process would proceed
as outlined above. Do the right research, develop and position the
4
For discussion on this approach, please see Stuart Hart and Monica Tousenard, Integrating Sustainability into Credit Union Strategy (Madison,
WI: Filene Research Institute, 2008).
34
brand identity, and try to connect it to values that are motivating to
a targeted group of consumers.
3. Focus on Building a National Credit Union Brand
Community Instead of Just a Brand
From our research results, it is clear that a brand identity can be
constructed that will differentiate credit unions from other financial
institutions in a way that is simple, meaningful, and valued by consumers, but additional research is needed. Our goal in this research
was to examine if credit union brands exist, and then determine
the meaning of those brands for individual credit unions. We have
argued that a particularly promising approach is to focus on values.
At the national level, this brand identity has to be a value that is
common across all credit unions but still differentiates credit unions
from other financial institutions (i.e., banks). This brand identity
could focus on a single element or, at most, two elements. Part of
building a brand identity is the development of a value proposition. A value proposition answers the question, What functional,
emotional, and symbolic benefits do members get above and beyond
other financial institutions? This brand identity should not be based
on what credit unions currently do well, unless it happens to match
what consumers want from their credit union. However, as our
results demonstrate, and if prior national branding attempts are
indicative, a credit union national brand may be difficult to achieve
and may not provide any concrete advantages.
Another important part of this process is positioning the brand.
Consumers have to be able to quickly grasp how credit unions are
different and why those differences are valuable. How are Apple
products different from all other brands? They are easier and more
fun to use. This positioning is simple and very compelling. As a
result, people who own Apple products feel “different” as a person
than if they owned any other brand. Because Apple products are
creative, less serious, and more whimsical, owners feel that they too
are less serious and more creative—T-shirt and sandals versus suit
and tie, so to speak.
From these differences, a very powerful marketing tool—a brand
community—can emerge. A brand community is a “specialized,
non-geographically bound community, based on a structured set of
social relations among admirers of a brand” (Muniz and O’Guinn
2001, 412). Apple has one of the strongest. Owners of Apple products
feel as though they belong to a special group of people who share special
characteristics—characteristics they feel are important to who they are.
Local Apple users groups number in the hundreds and share the Apple
philosophy and subculture in their meetings and communications regularly. Every marketing activity in which Apple engages highlights and
35
reinforces this brand community, from supporting local user groups to
the design and navigation of its Web site, product design, advertising,
distribution (where one can buy Apple products), pricing, and so forth.
Can credit unions build a national brand community? We think so.
We sensed a “specialness” in some of the members’ comments when
they wrote stories about their credit union. This specialness could be
exploited to build a credit union brand community. That is, if the
brand community was designed and implemented correctly, consumers would feel that by joining a credit union they are somehow special and different from people who use banks. Members mentioned
several ways they thought their credit union was special; we think
some of them hold promise as positioning elements:
• Being an anti-bank; not part of the corporate-owned financial
markets and systems; can’t be bought, can’t be sold.
• Being 100% local, guaranteed—keeping all money local; helping
you, your friends, your family, and your neighbors.
• Investing in people, not corporations.
• Ethics—honesty and integrity.
These should look quite familiar since they are based on the values
previously listed as those expressed by members. Of course, research
designed specifically to tease out the possible bases for this differentiation, or specialness, and market testing to determine their potential
impact would be needed. Nonetheless, the point here is important:
Focusing on building a brand community may be more successful
than focusing solely on building a brand.
Building Local Brands for Multi-SEG
and Community-Chartered Credit
Unions
Of the six credit unions included in this research, we were able to
interpret a brand image for two of them, which also demonstrated
significant levels of brand loyalty and brand equity. Both credit
unions share a strong bond with their members. In one instance, the
bond was the result of the credit union having a single sponsor. In
fact, it appears that single-sponsor credit unions have little trouble
with brand identity since the identity of the sponsor virtually defines
the credit union from day one. Thus, we have little to say regarding
recommendations for single-sponsor credit unions.
Our results are also instructive for multi-SEG and communitychartered credit unions. When a strong brand image was observed,
it was in the context of a strong and meaningful connection between
the members and the credit union. For example, we have already
36
discussed the strong bond we observed as a result of the credit union
sharing a set of values that are prominent in the subculture of the
community it serves. In fact, not only do credit unions share these
values, they espouse them. These findings are very consistent with
the literature on branding. Because of the deep connections between
the credit union and its members, a brand community has emerged.
The credit union acts as another community-based organization that
facilitates the lifestyles and values important to its members. Thus,
credit union members feel “special” to be a part of this credit union.
Being a member of this credit union is part of the person’s identity. It
tells other people who this person is and expresses him or her to others. It says, “I’m a person who believes in honesty, ethics, traditional
values, family, and frugality.” People who go to the local banks are
considered a quite different species.
Many members interviewed had a difficult time conjuring up an image
of their credit union. Many times, members could not give the reason
why they joined the credit union. For those who could recall the
reason, it was quite serendipitous. One member joined because he got
a flyer at work and was in need of a car loan at the same time; another
indicated that she was shopping with a friend who had to stop at the
credit union, so she joined while she was there; one member said that
he joined because he saw the credit union’s sign one day while he was
driving down the road, and he stopped in.5 Even when members had
difficulty expressing “who” the credit union is, they still mainly focused
on the fact that it is the personalized service that matters to them. In
one sense, we are back to the notion that even when a credit union
does not have a brand image clearly defined in the minds of its members, members still point to and value the more personalized service.
Our recommendations for building local credit unions brands follow.
They build on and are synergistic with our recommendations for a
national credit union brand.
1. Strategically Position Your Brand.
It is just as important for local credit unions to carefully position
themselves to develop a brand as it is for a national credit union
brand. Several questions must be answered:
• Who are you? That is, what is your current brand image?
• Who should you be, according to the values and benefits desired
by your target market?
• What must you do to get there?
5
The “drive-by” approach to joining credit unions is becoming more common. Please see George Hofheimer, Who’s Joining Credit Unions?
(Madison, WI: Filene Research Institute, 2008).
37
The first question can be answered by developing a brand sketch
(see Appendix 2 for an example) or a more fully developed brand
personality. This knowledge is necessary in order to move forward.
If a credit union does not know “who” it is now in the minds of
consumers (both members and non-members), how will it know
how to change? The second question can also be answered with the
same research as illustrated in this project. The last question can be
answered only through careful analysis and the development of a
branding strategic plan. Often forgotten as part of this process are
feelings. What feelings do you want members to have when they
think of your credit union? These feelings can be translated into part
of the positioning strategy.
Our results suggest that any positioning should capitalize on the
cultural characteristics of the community (or communities) the credit
union serves. For example, we observed special cultural characteristics of a geographically defined community, but we also observed
definitive cultural characteristics of an employment community.
Thus, the basis for, or definition of, the cultural community targeted
is not restricted to geography; it may be based on the main characteristics of the employer, the primary types or categories of jobs held by
members (e.g., teachers, researchers), the primary activity associated
with members, an ethnic association, or even a way of life or lifestyle
valued.
Note that we again suggest that values may be a particularly rewarding approach to establishing a clear position for a credit union brand.
These values present an opportunity to tap into the identity of your
members. That is, the values must connect directly to the members’
identities. A credit union might ask, What does being a member of
our credit union say about the person? What do we want it to say?
Will it be valued by the members? Thus, being a member of a credit
union becomes so much more than just getting lower rates, or having
convenience, or getting more personal service. Being a member of a
particular credit union says something about who the member is, what
she stands for, her role in the community and the world. It is about her,
not the credit union. It is part of her identity. It is who she is, and it is
important to her.
2. Don’t Obsess over the Actual Name. The Name Isn’t
a Brand until You’ve Branded It.
The actual name of the credit union does not seem to be particularly
important. Members often don’t care about the name, and in cases
where the name was changed, some did not even know the name
months after it had changed. In fact, we found that actual names
are mostly irrelevant. We did observe, however, that just as with
any brand, changing a long-standing name can be unsettling for
38
long-term members. To wit, many loyal consumers would recoil at
the prospect of Procter & Gamble changing the name of Tide detergent. Nonetheless, the fact that the product’s name is Tide means
little on its own. What do tides have to do with cleaning clothes?
The actual image associated with the name is created through the
marketing activities and the experiences consumers have with the
brand. The meaning of Tide is certainly now connected to its name,
and that is how one can invoke the meaning. But if the marketing
activities and consumers’ experiences were exactly the same, almost
any name would have yielded the same result. To reiterate, ABC
credit union by any other name still behaves like ABC credit union.
With the appropriate strategy and implementation, the name need
only not invoke negative connotations.
That said, some names offer instant imagery (e.g., single-sponsor
credit unions elicit images and impressions associated with the
employer), and some can be more or less helpful in this process.
For example, a good credit union name can hint at or suggest the
primary positioning of the brand or even reinforce the positioning
and image with each exposure. And that can surely be advantageous.
Selecting a name that resonates with the image and positioning can
stimulate certain imagery, feelings, and even provide signals about
the positioning. Such a name is not mandatory for making a name a
valued brand—it’s just helpful.
More importantly, just as we recommended for the national brand,
one must build brand awareness, aggressively communicate a strong
and compelling brand image and positioning, and create a sense of
brand community (which we will discuss in more detail shortly).
3. Enact the Brand.
A brand is made, not born. A brand is what a firm makes it. A brand
doesn’t exist out there somewhere, waiting to be uncovered. A brand
exists only because someone or some people at some point in time
decided that it would exist, and then went about enacting it. Furthermore, it exists only in the mind. To enact a brand, there has to be
deep belief, conviction, willingness to take a risk, commitment, and
hard work. To quote Popeye, “It ams what it ams and that’s all that
it ams.” The greatest branding strategy can fall flat on its face if the
people executing it do not believe in the brand.
People are always in a process of making sense of everything around
them. Karl Weick (1995) developed the theory of “sensemaking” to
capture this process and its impact on organizations. In this context,
we are more concerned about how consumers go about making sense
of their worlds, particularly as they relate to their financial affairs.
Consumers try to make sense of what different financial institutions
offer in terms of benefits and how these benefits relate to them. The
39
simpler it is to make sense, the more inclined consumers may be to
engage in that option. Brands offer an efficient shortcut for making
sense of a complicated array of choices and benefits. Brands allow
consumers to be more efficient in their shopping process since each
brand represents a known positioning in the minds of consumers;
thus, the choice task is simplified. Since brands are basically “conjured up” by managers, the managers essentially enact a brand.
Enactment is the recognition that when people act, they bring
concepts, structures, and events into existence and set them in action
(Weick 1988). It is a part of sensemaking and allows us to enact a
simpler concept of any aspect of the world around us. For example,
to make some sense of the stars above, constellations were enacted.
There is no big dipper; someone arbitrarily connected some of the
stars together to resemble a known object.
Thus, credit unions must enact their brand by “enacting connections.” This enactment of connections with the members of the communities they serve is part of building the brand community.
4. Build a Local Credit Union Brand Community.
Just as in the analysis for a national credit union brand, our research
leads us to believe that focusing on building a brand community may
be a more effective process than simply focusing on only the brand
itself. We won’t repeat the information provided previously regarding
building a brand community, but there are some differences in building a national brand community versus a local brand community.
Our research results suggest that positioning a local credit union
brand based on the cultural aspects of the community it serves,
possibly focusing on cultural values, may be a particularly fruitful
approach. Each credit union’s brand identity should focus on one
or two elements. The functional, emotional, and symbolic benefits
members get above and beyond other financial institutions define the
value proposition that is a part of the positioning of the brand. Each
brand identity should not focus on what credit unions already do
well (e.g., we are more personal), unless it happens to match consumers’ desires.
The positioning of local credit union brands must tap into the values
and characteristics of the cultures in which the credit union exists.
Consumers have to be able to quickly grasp how this particular credit
union is different from a bank, and even the other credit unions in
the area, and why this difference is important to them. From these
differences an individual credit union brand community can also
emerge. Consumers who become members now feel that they belong
to a special group of people who are different in an important and
unique way. We listed the possible key positioning differences in our
40
discussion on a national credit union brand community, and all these
apply here as well (e.g., anti-bank, 100% local, invest in people,
honesty, and integrity). However, local credit unions must also differentiate themselves from other credit unions, and while possibly being
100% local might work, most of the other differences apply to all
credit unions. Thus, a fine-tuning of the positioning must be made
to differentiate one credit union from its competitors. For example,
if a credit union that focuses on teachers and a credit union that has
a community charter compete in the same locality, each needs to be
able to position itself such that consumers clearly see the differences
between them in terms of relevant and meaningful benefits. Even so,
the brand communities may overlap—and that is fine, particularly
if that overlap focuses mainly on the broader credit union brand
community.
Conclusion
Brands are often positioned with or against competing brands. For
example, when Mazda introduced its first compact size sedan (the
626) in the United States, its ads showed the 626 along with the
Honda Accord. One goal of this ad was to get consumers to associate
the 626 with the Accord by placing them both in the same category
in their minds—that is, positioning with the competition. On the
other hand, 7-Up is consistently positioned away from the competition by being called “the un-cola” and by emphasizing how different
it is from Coke and Pepsi.
For years now, it seems that credit unions have placed themselves
more and more in the bank brandscape, and our research supports
this conclusion. What a pity that credit union members think that
credit unions are just another bank. But when you look at credit
unions, what is there about them that signals to consumers that they
are not banks? The buildings are often designed to look exactly like a
bank. Consumers conduct their financial affairs in a similar manner. Often even the advertising shouts “bank!” These signals do not
go unnoticed by consumers. And, it appears that some credit union
management may have felt that credit unions as financial institutions
didn’t get the same respect as banks in the past; thus a natural reaction would be to try to make credit unions more like banks to attain
the same status.
Unfortunately, an essential positioning tool has been lost if this
perception cannot be changed. On the basis of this research, it seems
that positioning against the competition offers the most viable means
of positioning for credit unions—and there is little to lose in doing
so. Consumers must feel that they have a clear choice between banks
and credit unions. They need to feel that joining a credit union is
vastly different from opening a checking account with a bank. This
41
process starts with understanding what consumers want from a credit
union that they currently are not getting anywhere else, even from
their own credit union. By focusing on building a national credit
union branding community that centers on a compelling positioning
that is simple, personally relevant, and meaningful to consumers, and
then allowing each individual credit union to develop its own unique
positioning based on the value connections to the communities it
serves, a powerful brand and choice for consumers can emerge. The
alternative is to continue to become more like banks until all distinctions are erased.
42
Appendix 1
Methodology
The meaning of a brand exists in the mind of the consumer. This
multidimensional brandscape in the minds of consumers can be
tapped by several qualitative methods. Qualitative methods are
better in this instance because we seek meaning. While quantitative
approaches can assist in confirming or denying preconceived notions,
they do not allow us to probe deep into the minds of consumers to
allow meaning to surface. Similar to Norvaisas (2007), who used an
ethnographic approach to examine members’ behaviors in order to
determine why people choose a credit union, we also rely on qualitative methods in this report to examine the meaning of the credit
union brand to members.
A common method to explore deeper meanings is through the use
of narratives (e.g., Fournier 1998; Giddens 1991; Schouten 1991;
Thompson and Tambyah 1999). Narratives are evidence of consumers’ individual and social experiences. The approach of narratives
based on personal stories is generally regarded as more appropriate
for explaining and constructing personal experiences, particularly
stories one might be sensitive about and would prefer to remain
private. Widdershoven (1994, 2) suggests that “the meaning of life
cannot be determined outside of the stories told about it.” Unstructured depth interviews were conducted in typical phenomenological interviewing fashion over a period of two years. Participants’
stories were allowed to unfold in a natural way with the opening
remark, “Tell us a little about yourself.” Follow-up probes were then
employed to get more details about those experiences. All interviews
were tape-recorded and transcribed verbatim. A second approach
to capture these narratives relied on the participants writing stories
about a specific credit union experience. This task was presented to
them at the end of the interview process, and they mailed it in at
their leisure.
Individual in-depth phenomenological interviews are preferred here
over group interviews (e.g., focus groups) for two reasons: (1) members may be more reticent to allow the true essence of their relationship to emerge in a group conversation and (2) the bandwagon
effect, where some members in a group discussion simply acquiesce
rather than advocate for an alternate position, may be minimized.
Moreover, it is likely that a group discussion will stay at a more
superficial level and not allow deep probing of personal meaning of
the brand name. Additionally, the relationship between a member
43
and his or her credit union is typically a private one, not appropriate
for group discussion.
All individuals who were interviewed are referred to as “participants”
since the interview process is more of a conversation. Participants
were mainly credit union members but did include management.
An appropriate research perspective and method should facilitate the
participants’ reconstruction of their experiences with the credit union
and the brand. Thus, the first part of each interview began with an
unstructured in-depth interview conducted in a relaxed environment, allowing feelings to surface and therefore providing participants time for recollection and reconstruction of their experiences,
encouraging deep reflection, and reducing the social risks of baring
one’s soul (Kvale 1983). Since the description of these experiences as
they were naturally lived is embedded in a social context, the description is rich and illustrative (Thompson, Locander, and Pollio 1989;
Valle and King 1978). The goal here is to use empathetic immersement to put the researcher as close as possible to the lived world of
the participant. It is important that this unstructured component
of the interview be conducted first since it allows the participants to
tell their stories and talk about their experiences in their own way
without any priming or suggestions by the researcher.
In the first phase of each interview, we probed how members think
and feel about their credit union. More generally, the essential nature
and characteristics of the relationship between members and their
credit union were captured. We explored brand equity in the context
of what it means to be a member of a credit union and how this relationship differs from relationships with other financial institutions.
We asked participants to tell us about themselves and then proceeded
to ask if they would just tell us anything that comes to mind about
their experiences with this credit union. The rest of the interview
proceeded as a conversation as we let the participants speak and tell
their stories with as little intervention as possible. All interviews were
then transcribed verbatim.
A hermeneutical analysis of the verbatim texts involved deep immersion into the life-world of the participants via the transcripts. A
holistic understanding of each participant was first developed,
identifying the essential meanings and the interrelationships among
those meanings, and allowing individualistic themes to emerge
(Hirschman 1992; Holt 1998; Thompson and Hirschman 1995).
We then moved on to more global interpretations grounded in the
complete set of transcripts across all participants. The relationships
among themes were examined, and new global themes were developed. We moved back and forth between individual transcripts,
tapes, individual themes, and global themes as we grasped the essence
of the meanings of these experiences, “relating parts to the whole”
44
(Thompson, Locander, and Pollio 1989, 141). Final themes emerged
that expressed the meaning of the credit union in members’ everyday
lives.
Once the unstructured portion of the interview concluded (determined by interviewees becoming repetitive and revealing little new
information), a more structured interview commenced. In this portion of the interview, participants were all asked identical questions
from a prepared list based on previous methods of studying brands.
This phase of the interview utilized structured interview techniques
to more definitively identify brand identity and qualitatively measure
brand equity. Specifically, free association, metaphorical techniques,
and projective techniques were employed to capture qualitative
insights into the meaning of credit union brand names.
The Interview Process
The interviews were conducted to answer five questions:
1. Do individual credit unions have their own brand identity?
2. If so, what is that identity?
3. Is the brand identity tied to the credit union’s name?
4. Does the term “credit union” in a name have its own significance
and meaning in the context of a brand identity?
5. What does the name “credit union” mean to members?
Most interviews were conducted in a credit union office that was
rearranged to provide a casual and informal atmosphere; some were
conducted in the homes of participants. Although an office is not an
ideal location, it was not possible to conduct all interviews at participants’ homes. For many participants, the researcher was a stranger
from outside the area, and the credit union provided a neutral territory for the interview. All interviews were tape-recorded and transcribed verbatim. For most of the interview, notes were not taken, to
avoid distracting the participants as they narrated their experiences.
Participants were told that the interviewer(s) was trying to understand what credit unions mean to members. The interviews began
with the unstructured portion, in which the interviewer asked the
“grand tour” question, “Tell us a little about yourself.” The next
question asked the participant to tell about their experiences with
this credit union. Thus, the participant’s story was allowed to unfold
naturally, without direction or guidance by the researcher. Follow-up
probes pushed deeper into the relationship between the member and
his or her credit union. The goal was to develop a thick description
of what it means to be a credit union member. These unstructured
phenomenological interviews allowed us to better understand the
deeper and personal meaning of the credit union. Through this
45
phenomenological approach we acknowledge that the participants’
feelings, emotions, and other “less cognitive” elements of living are
important components of the experiences with the brand, and the
organization. These experiences and meanings, often rarely recollected, are tucked deep within members’ minds. Moreover, the
meaning of a credit union to its members exists in a socially defined
cultural context of religion, community, family, work, and play. A
kaleidoscope of influences works in harmony to make the meaning
of a member’s credit union specific to that member as well as general
to the entire group of membership and even the community.
At some point in the interview it became obvious that the participant exhausted anything he or she could tell us without more direct
questions. One telltale sign was repetition. Once the participant
began to repeat earlier statements, the fruitfulness of this portion of
the interview was likely diminished. We then moved on to the more
structured part of the interview.
This part of the interview began with several free-association questions (Hutchinson 1983; Levy 1985). We asked, “What comes to
mind when you think of [credit union full name]?” and then, “What
does the [credit union full name] name mean to you?” The primary
purpose was to identify the range of possible brand associations in
the minds of current members. We then separated the credit union
name into the basic two components (the specific name and “credit
union”) and inquired as to the meaning each component held for
the participant and what the effect would be if it were changed or
removed. For example, if the name of the credit union was XYZ
Credit Union, we asked how they would respond if “credit union”
were removed from the name. We followed up by asking how they
would feel if “XYZ” was changed. This approach allowed us to tease
out the differential meanings and impacts of different components of
the name.
We followed the free-association test with a metaphorical approach
(Zaltman and Higie 1995). We first asked participants, “If [credit
union full name] was a car, what car would it be?” Then we asked
similar questions for a fabric, an animal, and a magazine. These questions helped us capture the personality of the brand name and even
some of the underlying values attributed to it. Finally we used a projective technique by asking participants to describe in detail “who”
would be the typical or average member of this credit union.
At the close of the interview we gave each member an “assignment”
to be completed within a week of the interview, and provided a
stamped, self-addressed envelope. This assignment included portions
of the Zaltman Metaphor Elicitation Technique (ZMET) (Zaltman
and Higie 1995) as well as other unique components. Members
46
were asked to write a story about a particular experience with their
credit union and include such elements as who was with them, their
age, the location of the credit union, strongest feeling, and so forth.
They were also asked to title the story. This method was recently
used to examine how consumers coproduce brand meanings by
asking respondents to write stories recalling childhood memories
about a brand (Braun-LaTour, LaTour, and Zinkhan 2007). We
further probed the meaning of their credit union using a projective
technique as part of this assignment. Specifically, members were
asked, “If [credit union name] could talk, what would it say about
this experience?” Of the 16 interviews conducted with members,
10 members returned these requests fully completed.
The Participants
Because this study focuses on qualitative insights into the issue of
credit union brand names and brand identities, no attempt was made
to use a large number of credit unions, management, or members,
nor was any quantitative attempt made to control for other influences (in fact, we encouraged them). The value of this study lies
instead in the insights gained into members’ relationships with
their credit union and the role of the credit union name (i.e., brand
identity) at a meaningful level. This study allows us to describe
and characterize the nature of the specific brand identities associated with different credit union name brands, and it also provides
some qualitative assessment of the equity held for each brand name.
Although all credit unions are viable as participants since we are
focusing on the relationships between members and their credit
union, the research was best served by purposive sampling. That is,
we selected credit unions and members to be as maximally different
as possible. For example, we included a range of credit unions that
offered exemplars, or anchors at possible extremes of relevant dimensions. The credit unions selected included some that appear to have
been successful in terms of customer relations, loyalty, and the like,
and others that may not appear to have been so successful. We also
included single-sponsor, multiple-SEG, and community-chartered
credit unions. Finally, a range in size of credit unions was purposively
included.
Participants were recruited through participating credit unions.
Although we expected to conduct about 10–15 interviews with
members only, we ended up also interviewing members of management to see how they “saw” their credit union and its brand identity.
The exact number of interviews was determined by examining each
subsequent interview in terms of its unique contribution. That is,
once the interviewees became repetitive and offered few new insights,
we stopped. The participants were selected to provide a range of
47
experiences, including longtime versus new members, active versus
inactive members, and single-sponsor versus SEG and non-SEG
members. The interviews cut across four credit unions.
A total of 29 interviews were conducted. Sixteen interviews were
with credit union members, and 13 were with management.
Although generalization across age, social class, marital status, and so
forth, is not a goal of this research, nor is it tenable given the methodological approach, the participants did cover a broad spectrum of
demographics, including both male and female; a wide range of ages
(an educated guess would be ages 20 to 75—we didn’t ask); marital
statuses such as single or married with various numbers of children
at different ages; a wide range of occupations, from laborer to small
business owners, college professors and doctors; and education from
high school to advanced college degrees. Of course, all credit union
management were employed at the credit union in some supervisory
capacity, but at all credit unions we interviewed the CEO, a marketing manager, and at least one other senior management person. All
member participants were currently employed outside the home
or were retired. All participants had much to say about their credit
union, good and bad. In this report, pseudonyms are used where
needed, and certain information has been disguised to protect the
identity of participants. Additionally, any reference to specific credit
unions has been disguised.
We also collected materials from the credit unions, including brochures, “gifts” (e.g., pens and magnets), and other material that we
thought might help us better understand the credit union. We examined their Web sites and forms such as loan applications.
For those credit unions that participated fully in the project, we provided a “brand sketch.” This written document provided each credit
union with a summary snapshot of how we interpreted the members’
impressions of the credit union in the form of brand identity. Each
brand sketch was unique to each credit union and varied considerably. All were held in strictest confidence.
In this report, we present the results of this research as both an
interpretation of the participants’ narratives, suggesting several key
themes that emerged from the transcripts, and a description of whatever common themes we could derive in terms of brand identity. We
then translate these themes into recommendations for credit union
branding.
48
Appendix 2
Elkhart County Farm
Bureau Credit Union:
The “Abe Lincoln of
Credit Unions”
The Elkhart County Farm Bureau Credit Union6 (aka Farm Bureau
Credit Union and FBCU) as a brand can be described as the “Abe
Lincoln of credit unions.” The phrase is carefully chosen to represent
the main thrust along with three finer characteristics that participants
communicated to us through their conversations. Each is discussed
next as I build the brand sketch.
Culturally Defined
Possibly the most evident result of our interviews is the powerful cultural influence on FBCU. FBCU operates in what might be described
as a fairly limited geographic subculture of America that greatly
emphasizes and reflects traditional American values such as honesty,
fairness, God, strong work ethic, respect, family, values, morality,
kindness, friendliness, and honor. Participants mentioned these words
and phrases as they described themselves, others, community, and
FBCU. However, it is very clear that they don’t just speak of these
values—they live them every day, deep in their hearts and souls.
Needless to say, participants also described FBCU as possessing and
exhibiting these same values. These values, which are primarily personal
in nature, are transposed to FBCU, an organization, in what we call a
“halo effect.” That is, FBCU as a brand reflects the same values as those
of its members and its employees. Although recently it has become
quite trite to say that an organization is only as good as its employees,
FBCU is truly defined by the people who work there, certainly in part
due to its performance but even more so by the culture it embraces.
This strong subculture suffuses the everyday events that occur as FBCU
members and employees interact with one another. This subculture also
defines who FBCU is. Because the employees also generally embrace
and are immersed in the same subculture, there is a commonality and
special link between members and staff that supersedes most other
“banking” relationships. As a result, the brand character of FBCU
6
Shortly after the research study was completed, the Elkhart County Farm Bureau Credit Union changed its name to Interra Credit Union due to
legal challenges from the Farm Bureau system.
49
rides on certain themes or characteristics that are drawn from the main
values of the subculture. FBCU can therefore be described as embracing
old-fashioned values, with a small-town vibe and a family orientation. But
these themes are intertwined in a quite complex manner.
I will discuss these themes first and then illustrate why they integrate
into FBCU: The “Abe Lincoln of Credit Unions.”
Old-Fashioned Values
Part of the culture of the area is steeped in what might be termed
as “old-fashioned values.” Some might bristle at the phrase “oldfashioned,” thinking it suggests being outdated and possibly irrelevant; however, used in this context, it merely denotes a reference to
values that hark back to an earlier time in American history when
people embraced truth, treated others with respect, valued one’s word
and honor, and made an effort to be friendly and personable. One
member put it this way:
“It’s a value system that I’ve got. This place fits my value system.
That’s all.”
So these old-fashioned values resonate with members, employees,
community, and FBCU.
In another sense, a “do what is right” attitude exists. Although it is
common in our culture today for many people to debate what is
right and what is wrong, in this old-fashioned value system, everyone
seems to share a common sense of right and wrong, and it is well
defined.
Participants speak of FBCU as being “straight and true” and consistent with their values. They place a great deal of trust in FBCU and
feel that FBCU looks out for them.
“The basic thing is I feel like they really have my interest in mind.”
Another old-fashioned value commonly mentioned is a strong work
ethic. Members characterize themselves and the FBCU employees
as hard workers. Moreover, they credit FBCU management with
working very hard to get the credit union where it is today. Sharing
this common value of hard work makes FBCU more comfortable for
members. In fact, one member who was asked, “If FBCU was an animal, what animal would it be?” replied with an answer that captures
much of the essence of this old-fashioned value character:
“I see it like a horse. It’s out there in the corner for you. It’s doing a lot
of work for the people it tries to serve, and it does it in a very down to
earth way.”
50
It is interesting that no participants commented on the new building.
It appears that despite the seeming conflict between old-fashioned
values and a slick new building, buildings are insignificant when it
comes to old-fashioned values.
Small-Town Vibe
The less FBCU appears to share with “big city banks,” the more
members feel pride and seem to connect with FBCU. The staff at
FBCU are characterized as
“down to earth people. It [the credit union] pulls away from that big
city feel . . . nothing high-pressured.”
Members know the people at FBCU. Employees are described as
accommodating, friendly, and willing to go out of their way. Management is even applauded for
“being more hospitable, more willing to go the extra mile, more willing to step out and take a chance on you.”
Participants also like the consistency in the staff. They like knowing
they will see familiar faces every time they walk in.
That small, hometown feel—being true, down to earth, looking out
for one another, and working hard to make life better for family,
friends, and community—is inextricably intertwined with the prior
theme of old-fashioned values. One might characterize this interaction as “we are all in this together.” One participant noted,
“I think of them as more of a community, a part of the community
and not a bigger bank.”
This small-town vibe expands on the theme of old-fashioned values
by extending this value system from individuals to a community.
Along the way a few other values associated with small-town life are
added in.
Family Orientation
Given the themes of old-fashioned values and small-town vibe, it
is not surprising that a theme of “family” also emerged from the
interviews. Participants described FBCU as family oriented and as a
family affair, noting that FBCU embraces family values.
“I mean, all the tellers know me well. I bring my little kids with me.
The other day I was in here and four tellers were bringing candy.”
“They have an annual meeting and they invite families. They’re family oriented.”
Participants really do feel as though they are part of family. They
talk about being able to see the president of FBCU whenever they
51
want, even “running into” the president while at the credit union or
in the community. They know the families of the people who work
there and the families of the directors. And family is a very important
value in this subculture.
Contrary to today’s modern cultural movement into the “me” era,
it is clear that these participants are less focused on themselves and
more focused on family and community. Personal success and individual careers take a back seat to contributions to family and community. FBCU is attributed with embracing these same values.
The “Abe Lincoln of Credit Unions”
Taken together, these themes culminate in a brand image that resembles the image and characteristics of one of our most famous presidents, Abraham Lincoln. Almost every description of “Honest Abe”
includes character traits such as honesty, fairness, commitment to
God, strong work ethic, respect, family, morality, kindness, friendliness, “doing what is right,” straight and true, and honor. Abe Lincoln
epitomizes the very same characteristics that define the brand image
of FBCU.
However, being so closely tied to a subculture also presents some
limitations. This credit union is not about offering the most and
best products and services, or even the best rates; this credit union
is about sharing and embracing a common cultural value system
that makes members comfortable and motivates them to join and
remain active members. Although it has been uncommon so far in
this research, this clearly is one credit union that cannot afford to
distance itself in any way from the culture of its current members.
Participants told us that the word “farm” in the name is important to them because it stands for a set of values that come from a
simple way of life that they embrace. They also told us that “credit
union” is an important part of the FBCU name since it presents a
community-oriented organization.
To some extent, all organizations are defined and constrained by the
culture in which they exist; in this particular case it is more dramatic. By being a part of this culture, FBCU has an “inside track”
to the population of the area. FBCU is who they are, with their
old-fashioned values, small-town vibe, and family orientation.
Postscript
After this research had concluded, FBCU was required to change its
name due to legal requirements. After a long and rigorous process,
it finally settled on the name Interra Credit Union. In represents
the state of Indiana, and terra means “land.” Thus, “Interra” is to
52
be interpreted as “Indiana land.” The management of the credit
union made certain that members were heavily involved with the
name-change process, and the credit union still emphasizes its focus
on values with the tag line “Times change. Values don’t.”
53
References
Braun-LaTour, Kathryn A., Michael S. LaTour, and George M.
Zinkhan. 2007. “Using Childhood Memories to Gain Insight into
Brand Meaning.” Journal of Marketing 2(April): 45–60.
Credit Union National Association (CUNA). 1999. The National
Credit Union Brand Strategy: A Promise to the American People. Washington, DC: Credit Union National Association.
Fournier, Susan. 1998. “Consumers and Their Brands: Developing
Relationship Theory in Consumer Research.” Journal of Consumer
Research 24(March): 343–73.
Giddens, Anthony. 1991. Modernity and Self-Identity: Self and Society
in the Late Modern Age. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Hirschman, Elizabeth. 1992. “The Consciousness of Addiction:
Toward a General Theory of Compulsive Consumption.” Journal of
Consumer Research 19(September): 155–80.
Holt, Douglas B. 1998. “Does Cultural Capital Structure American
Consumption?” Journal of Consumer Research 25(June): 1–25.
Hutchinson, J. Wesley. 1983. “Expertise and the Structure of Free
Recall.” In Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 10., edited by
Richard P. Bagozzi and Alice M. Tybout, 585–89. Ann Arbor, MI:
Association for Consumer Research.
Keller, Kevin Lane. 2008. Strategic Brand Management: Building,
Measuring, and Managing Brand Equity, 3rd ed. Upper Saddle River,
NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Kvale, Steinar. 1983. “The Qualitative Research Interview: A
Phenomenological and a Hermeneutical Mode of Understanding.”
Journal of Phenomenological Psychology 14(Fall): 171–96.
Levy, Sidney J. 1985. “Dreams, Fairy Tales, Animals, and Cars.”
Psychology and Marketing 2(Summer): 67–81.
Muniz, Albert M. Jr., and Thomas C. O’Guinn (2001). “Brand
Community.” Journal of Consumer Research 27(March): 412–32.
Norvaisas, Stefanie. 2007. Why Choose a Credit Union? An Ethnographic Study of Member Behaviors. Madison, WI: Filene Research
Institute.
Schouten, John W. 1991. “Selves in Transition: Symbolic Consumption in Personal Rites of Passage and Identity Reconstruction.”
Journal of Consumer Research 17(March): 412–25.
55
Thompson, Craig J., and Elizabeth C. Hirschman. 1995. “Understanding the Socialized Body: A Poststructural Analysis of Consumers’ Self-Conceptions, Body Images, and Self-Care Practices.” Journal
of Consumer Research 22(September): 139–53.
Thompson, Craig J., William B. Locander, and Howard R. Pollio.
1989. “Putting Consumer Experience Back into Consumer Research:
The Philosophy and Method of Existential-Phenomenology.” Journal
of Consumer Research 16(September): 133–46.
Thompson, Craig J., and Siok Kuan Tambyah. 1999. “Trying to
Be Cosmopolitan.” Journal of Consumer Research 26(December):
214–41.
Valle, Ronald, and Mark King. 1978. “An Introduction to
Existential-Phenomenological Thought in Psychology.” In Existential-Phenomenological Alternatives for Psychology, edited by Ronald
Valle and Mark King, 6–17. New York: Oxford University Press.
Weick, Karl E. 1988. “Enacted Sensemaking in Crisis Situation.”
Journal of Management Studies 25(4): 305–17.
———. 1995. Sensemaking in Organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications.
Widdershoven, G. A. M. 1994. “Identity and Development: A
Narrative Perspective.” In Identity and Development: An Interdisciplinary Approach, edited by H. A. Bosna, T. L. G. Graafsna, H. D.
Grotevant, and D. J. de Levita, 103–17. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
Zaltman, Gerald, and Robin Higie. 1995. “Seeing the Voice of the
Customer: Metaphor-Based Advertising Research.” Journal of Advertising Research 35(July/August): 35–51.
56
ISBN 978-1-932795-52-3
ideas grow here
PO Box 2998
Madison, WI 53701-2998
Phone (608) 231-8550
PUBLICATION #173 (12/08)
www.filene.org
ISBN 978-1-932795-52-3
Clarkson University

The Credit Union Brand: What Is It Good For?

Transcription

Similar documents

to our marketing flyer

Change is good, exchange is better

the brandbank service makes it quick, easy and cost

Video GameMercials

Barcalounger =The Preferred Consumer Brand Choice

Chalking, Wheat pasting, Stenciling and other non

#MoreBusiness - phoebe chongchua

Conscious Solutions case study: Harneys

News Release - The Flexitallic Group

PDF