Skip to main content

Qantas: Could its Australian Story be its Unravelling?

Qantas is an Australian brand that uses its story as a key part of its marketing strategy, this has been effective for a number of reasons; (1) firstly, it has protected Qantas’s brand image from external factors, and (2) secondly, it has fostered a patriotic community investment in the success of the airline. However, there are potential (3) weaknesses associated with an over-reliance on brand story, in my blog I will explain how ‘brand story’ and ‘customer emotional connection’ is linked, and will explain why a customer might develop a negative ‘brand feeling’ (Keller, 2001) in response to a brand story.



1) I believe Qantas’ strong focus on their story as Australia’s most important airline has helped them create a compelling story with a clearly understood central character: the comradery and innovation of the Australian people. This has helped Qantas significantly  throughout the current Covid-19 crisis as brands that do not tell a compelling story ‘risk creating a short-term “brand” that is easily destroyed by external factors’ (Herskovitz, 2010).


2) From my readings, I think that by focusing on their Australian brand history, and by using specific imagery and examples to explain this history, Qantas emphasises a brand story which is more public, shared, and broad-based with the Australian community. In doing so, I believe Qantas transcends generalisations that make up usage imagery (Keller, 2001) and encourages engagement and investment by the broad Australian public (Herskovitz, 2010). This is important during the Covid-19 world health crisis, which is the biggest challenge ever faced by the aviation industry. However, it is possible that this will backfire for Qantas, as I will explain below.


3) I think that Qantas’ over reliance on their history may backfire in times of crisis because I believe that brand story and a consumer’s emotional connection to a brand is deeply linked. If a brand’s story is one that arouses negative emotion, as is possible according to Keller’s formulation of ‘brand feeling’ (Keller, 2001), then it may be difficult for a company to avoid. This is especially true for Qantas, who uses story as a focal part of their strategy. A negative chapter in Qantas’s history may ruin the ability for the brand to tell a consistent story (Herskovitz, 2010), which risks the creation of a weak brand image.


An example of a company that had to abandon its ‘Australian story’ as a result of a negative chapter in the brand’s history was James Hardie. This company now focuses on it’s status as the ‘global leader in floor and wall building products’, rather than its Australian history.


In conclusion, it is very possible that Qantas' over-reliance on its Australian story could be its unravelling. However, there is also a convincing argument that the imagery created from its
story is also what keeps the company from being affected by negative externalities outside of
the company's control, such as the Covid-19 crisis.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

How Can Spotify Build Brand Equity When Music is Free?

Spotify can build brand equity as effectively as Zara, and similar brands, despite the fact that its basic offering is free and intangible in comparison. It does so because, in comparison to Zara (1) it still has the ability to develop strong brand salience, (2) it can demonstrate brand meaning through performance and imagery, and (3) is extremely effective at developing brand resonance through community engagement. Can Spotify Build Brand Identity as Effectively as Zara? Spotify is in a position to develop brand salience (brand awareness) because it can clearly describe what service category the brand competes in, and can ensure customers know which of their needs the brand is designed to satisfy (Keller, 2001). When compared to Zara, although both operate in different industries and provide for different needs, both are in a position to influence the likelihood they will form part of a customer’s usage consideration set, which is an important function of brand salience. Spot...

The Battle for CBBE: How do Other Theories Compare to Keller?

I believe that the CAA Integrated Brand Equity model by Wang et al (2008) is the best modern support for Keller’s CBBE model, and best focuses on the future of this theory. I will compare Keller’s CBBE pyramid to five different customer-based brand equity models, particularly, I will discuss how Aaker and supporting journals differ from Keller’s model, and will explain how these differences might manifest in marketing practice. Aaker (1992) Aaker’s model conceptualizes brand equity as consisting of five different dimensions used to create value. These dimensions are: (1) brand loyalty, (2) brand name awareness, (3) perceived brand quality, (4) brand associations, and (5) brand assets. I think that while Keller’s model focuses largely on emotion, Aaker believes CBBE is built primarily through recognition. Therefore, Aaker believes that the most successful brands are one that drive recognition (e.g. Disney) while Keller believes that the most successful brands are ones that drive ...