What are brand communities, and how are the interests of companies and community members balanced within them?
Abstract
mechanisms through which corporate and individual interests are balanced. Brand communities, defined as social networks centered around
shared brand affiliations, have evolved into critical platforms for value co-creation, driven by digital collaboration and user-generated content
(UGC). The analysis traces the transformation from traditional consumer-producer dichotomies to decentralized, community-driven economies, where consumers actively participate in product development, marketing, and innovation. Case studies such as Xiaomi and Gymshark
illustrate how virtual communities foster brand loyalty through emotional engagement, offline-online integration, and user empowerment.
Key findings reveal that individuals join brand communities to fulfill utilitarian needs (e.g., exclusive benefits), social identity, and social
capital acquisition, while companies leverage these interactions to enhance customer loyalty, reduce retention costs, and innovate iteratively.
The study highlights the emergence of a “community share” business model, where profitability hinges on trust-building, personalized user
profiling, and collaborative ecosystems. Ultimately, the equilibrium between corporate objectives and member interests is achieved through
reciprocal value exchange: consumers gain belonging and influence, while brands secure advocacy and sustainable growth. This research underscores the imperative for firms to adopt psychologically informed strategies to optimize co-creation in the mobile internet era.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
[1] Algesheimer, R., Dholakia, U. M. and Herrmann, A. (2005) ‘The Social Influence of Brand Community: Evidence from European
Car Clubs’, Journal of Marketing, 69(3), pp. 19–34. doi: 10.1509/jmkg.69.3.19.66363.
[2] Arvidsson, A. (2005) ‘Brands: A critical perspective’, Journal of Consumer Culture, 5(2), pp. 235– 258. doi:
10.1177/1469540505053093.
[3] Bauman, Z. (2001) Community: Seeking Safety in an Insecure World. Oxford, UNITED KINGDOM: Polity Press. Available at:
http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/goldsmiths/detail.action?docID=1187719 [Online](Accessed: 14 April 2021).
[4] Billard, T. J. (2016) ‘Transgender communication studies: Histories, trends, and trajectories’, Journal of Communication, 66(2), pp.
E11–E13. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12224.
[5] Boorstin, D. J. (1973). The Americans: The Democratic Experience. New York: Vintage Books
[6] Bourdieu, P. (1990) The Logic of Practice. Stanford University Press.
[7] Cova, B. and Cova, V. (2002) ‘Tribal marketing: The tribalisation of society and its impact on the conduct of marketing’, European
Journal of Marketing, 36(5/6), pp. 595–620. doi: 10.1108/03090560210423023.
[8] Cova, B. and White, T. (2010) ‘Counter-brand and alter-brand communities: the impact of Web 2.0 on tribal marketing approaches’,
Journal of Marketing Management, 26(3–4), pp. 256–270. doi: 10.1080/02672570903566276.
[9] Flanagin, A. J. and Metzger, M. J. (2001) ‘Internet use in the contemporary media environment’, Human Communication Research,
27(1), pp. 153–181. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468- 2958.2001.tb00779.x.
[10] Kates, S. (2006). ‘Researching brands ethnologically: An interpretive community approach’. Handbook of qualitative research
methods in marketing. Edited by: Belk, R. Cheltenham, England: Edward Elgar. pp. 94–105.
[11] McAlexander, J. H., Schouten, J. W. and Koenig, H. F. (2002) ‘Building Brand Community’, Journal of Marketing, 66(1), pp.
38–54. doi: 10.1509/jmkg.66.1.38.18451.
[12] McKenna, K. Y. A. and Bargh, J. A. (1999) ‘Causes and Consequences of Social Interaction on the Internet: A Conceptual Framework’, Media Psychology, 1(3), pp. 249–269. doi: 10.1207/s1532785xmep0103_4.
[13] Muniz, A. M., Jr. and O’Guinn, T. C. (2001) ‘Brand Community’, Journal of Consumer Research, 27(4), pp. 412–432. doi:
10.1086/319618.
[14] Newman, D. M. and O’Brien, J. (2008) Sociology: Exploring the Architecture of Everyday Life Readings. Pine Forge Press.
[15] Prahalad, C. K. and Ramaswamy, V. (2004) ‘Co-creation experiences: The next practice in value creation’, Journal of Interactive
Marketing, 18(3), pp. 5–14. doi: 10.1002/dir.20015.
[16] Vargo, S. L. and Lusch, R. F. (2004) ‘Evolving to a New Dominant Logic for Marketing’, Journal of Marketing, 68(1), pp. 1–17.
doi: 10.1509/jmkg.68.1.1.24036.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18686/fm.v10i1.13924
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.