What Makes the Best Branding Company?
Four outputs of branding work that research supports, and the evidence a team can be asked to show for each.
Answer to the question
What makes the best branding company?
The best branding company is the one whose work shows four outputs: it is built to be noticed and remembered, it is relevant and different in its category, it is both original and fitting, and its core idea can be repeated over years. Studies on brand perception, creativity and repetition support each.
Key takeaways
- Andrew Ehrenberg and colleagues argued in 2002 that brand advertising chiefly raises a brand's profile, keeping it top of mind, and that few advertisements actually persuade.
- Natalie Mizik and Robert Jacobson reported in 2008 that relevance and energy added information about stock returns beyond accounting measures, and that changes in differentiation signalled later accounting performance.
- Sara Rosengren and colleagues pooled 93 data sets from 67 papers in 2020 and found robust positive effects of advertising creativity, with originality and appropriateness both mattering.
- Kevin Lehnert and colleagues reported in 2013 that creative commercials were recalled better and were less prone to wearout under repetition.
- David Ogilvy wrote that no idea is big unless it can run for thirty years, a practitioner's standard and not a tested one.
A branding contract ends with a set of drawings and a story. A year later the work is what buyers actually meet: a name, a colour, a voice, an idea that keeps turning up. The best branding company is the one whose work holds up at that point. Four lines of research, on awareness, perceived difference, creativity and repetition, each describe an output that can be inspected in a finished portfolio. A buyer does not need to know how the work was made to check them, and David Ogilvy's own book on advertising applied the same test, that creative work is there to sell.
Is the work built to be noticed before it persuades?
Brand advertising chiefly raises a brand's profile, and few advertisements actually persuade, according to a 2002 paper by Andrew Ehrenberg and colleagues. In competitive markets a brand has to stay broadly top of mind as one that people buy or consider, and that rests on awareness, memory associations, familiarity and trust. They proposed that agency briefs should put getting noticed ahead of the persuasive pitch, and that this should shape how results are judged.
The same thinking sits behind the idea of mental availability, the chance that a brand comes to mind in a buying situation. A best branding company working from this view would show how its identity is meant to be seen, remembered and recognised across the places a buyer meets it, before it shows how the identity argues.
Relevance and difference can also be set against results. The question put by Natalie Mizik and Robert Jacobson in 2008 was which perceptual brand attributes add information about stock returns beyond what accounting figures already show. They used five attributes from a long-running survey-based brand measure: differentiation, relevance, esteem, knowledge and energy. Relevance and energy added information beyond the accounts. Esteem and knowledge did not, because their effects already appear in current results. Changes in differentiation signalled later accounting performance, which in turn bears on returns, and the findings held across alternative performance measures and risk adjustments.
Relevance and difference are two qualities a team can measure and track over time. Perceived differentiation is the term for how far buyers see real differences between rival brands.
Creative work needs originality and a fit with its purpose
A 2020 meta-analysis in the Journal of Marketing pooled 93 data sets from 67 papers, with 878 effect sizes in all. Sara Rosengren and colleagues found robust positive effects of advertising creativity, and stressed that originality and appropriateness both matter. The effects were stronger for high-involvement products. Reactions to the advertisement, though not to the brand, were marginally stronger for unfamiliar brands.
The authors account for the results through affect transfer, processing and signaling. Originality works mainly through affect transfer, and appropriateness mainly through signaling. A fresh idea that does not suit its category or task meets one of the two conditions the research describes, and the best branding company will be able to show both conditions in the same piece of work.
Repetition adds a further test. In a television programme built to simulate natural viewing, creative and control commercials were shown and recall was measured a week later, in work led by Kevin Lehnert. Creative commercials were recalled better, although repetition reduced that advantage. They were also better liked, reached their wear-in effects more quickly and were less prone to wearout.
Ogilvy asked the same question of whole campaigns. He called the durable kind a big idea, wrote that no idea is big unless it can run for thirty years, and said that fewer than one campaign in a hundred has one. That is a practitioner's standard, not a tested one, and it points to something a portfolio can show: work for the same client across several years, with the core elements still in use and still recognisable. Guidelines that make the core easy to repeat are part of what the best branding company hands over, since a client's own staff will be applying the idea long after the project team has moved on.
What the best branding company leaves behind for its clients
The table sets each output beside the research behind it and the evidence a team can be asked to show.
| Output | Research behind it | Evidence to ask for |
|---|---|---|
| Noticed and remembered | Ehrenberg and colleagues, 2002 | A plan for how the brand will be recognised across occasions and channels, and how recognition will be tracked |
| Relevant and different | Mizik and Jacobson, 2008 | Measures of how buyers see relevance and difference in the category, taken before and after launch |
| Original and fitting | Rosengren and colleagues, 2020 | Work that pairs a fresh idea with reasons it suits the category and the task |
| Repeatable over years | Lehnert and colleagues, 2013; Ogilvy on Advertising | Cases where the same core idea ran across several years, with guidelines that keep it consistent |
Each row asks for something a team can show or explain, and none depends on reputation. The same table works for a studio of three or a team of three hundred, and it sits beside the questions on running a selection in How to Choose the Top Branding Agency in Dubai and the stages and cost drivers in Branding Agency UAE: What to Expect, Costs and Process.
A practical way to use the table is to open a portfolio and look for each row in turn, asking the team to point to the page where the output shows, who judged it and when. A team that answers plainly, with dates and a stated purpose for each piece, is easier to compare than one that answers in general terms.
The best branding company can be read against the four, and measures taken before launch and again a year or two later are the plainest record of the result.
Common questions
What makes the best branding company?
The best branding company is the one whose work shows four outputs: it is built to be noticed and remembered, it is relevant and different in its category, it is both original and fitting, and its core idea can be repeated over years. Studies on brand perception, creativity and repetition support each.
Does creative work help a brand sell?
Rosengren and colleagues found robust positive effects of advertising creativity across 93 data sets, and the authors call for more research linking creativity to sales. The evidence shows better reactions to creative work, and it does not yet show a sales figure for any one piece.
Why does consistency matter in branding?
Lehnert and colleagues found creative commercials were recalled better and were less prone to wearout under repetition, and David Ogilvy argued that a durable idea should be able to run for decades. A consistent core gives memory something to hold from one exposure to the next, and the best branding company builds its guidelines around that core.
Can brand perception be tied to financial results?
Mizik and Jacobson found that relevance and energy added information about stock returns beyond accounting measures, and that changes in differentiation signalled later accounting performance. The study is observational, so it shows an association and not a cause.
Sources
Ogilvy, D. Ogilvy on Advertising. Seed book; vault hub Books/Ogilvy on Advertising.
Ehrenberg, A., Barnard, N., Kennedy, R., & Bloom, H. (2002). “Brand advertising as creative publicity.” Journal of Advertising Research, 42(4). doi:10.2501/JAR-42-4-7-18 https://doi.org/10.2501/JAR-42-4-7-18
Mizik, N., & Jacobson, R. (2008). “The financial value impact of perceptual brand attributes.” Journal of Marketing Research, 45(1). doi:10.1509/jmkr.45.1.15 https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.45.1.15
Rosengren, S., Eisend, M., Koslow, S., & Dahlén, M. (2020). “A meta-analysis of when and how advertising creativity works.” Journal of Marketing, 84(6). doi:10.1177/0022242920929288 https://doi.org/10.1177/0022242920929288
Lehnert, K., Till, B. D., & Carlson, B. D. (2013). “Advertising creativity and repetition.” International Journal of Advertising, 32(2). doi:10.2501/IJA-32-2-211-231 https://doi.org/10.2501/IJA-32-2-211-231