Upholding The Essay Through Narration Writing Skill

  The primary purpose of chapter 12, narration, is offering detailed know-how of utilizing such skill to support and concretize the ideas induced in the essay. To meet the goal of avoiding essay from a void but an effective one, readers could get access to six elements of narration and obtain clearer understanding of narration, thereby constructing and using convincing stories in the article. 

Figure 1.1 Six Elements

  Hence, the strengths of this chapter mostly could be contributed to those transparent writing steps to effectiveness; as the figure 1.1 has shown above, each element, though seems not illustrate remarkable writing skills with flowery rhetoric wording, still manifests the nuts and bolts of how a writer being wisely able to quote appropriate length and angle of certain story to grab readers’ attention, making them vividly feel as if living at the scene and being persuaded by writer’s perspective. From initially knowing the purpose to the lastly using dialogue realistically, to me, I especially get habituated to this logical writing arrangement that allows me to easily grasp the essence of proper thinking logic in narration and common writing blunders that should be aware of.

Figure 1.2 Narration Process

  Apart from the six elements, the chapter even draws a sequence (Figure 1.2) to divide narration process into three parts in case that people immaturely misuse the narration skill to court even worse counter effects in essay. Significantly, keeping sufficient comprehension in stories used to sustain in the writing has been a bedrock: while recounting the event, no matter it’s hypothetic or realistic borrowed story material, writers have to be equipped with enough familiarity and control in it so as to secure readers’ firm trust and motivation to keep on reading the piece of writing work; otherwise, the work would just be discarded soon since none of the words and ideas in story strikes a chord with readers. Once without supporting narrative phrases, the essay would probably become nothing but made-up fantasy, which is what this chapter tries to warn the novices.

  In the last few pages is attached with a student sample of narration; however, it would be more perfect if other successful and failing examples of using narrations were suggested in this book, further revealing the sharp contrast between convincing narrative essay and vaunting one as references for individuals’ tryout in narration.

  Consequently, on the whole, the chapter 12 is rather clear and serviceable to demonstrate passable use and effects during narrative writing. For more thorough introduction, it could also attempt to supplement diverse organized process graphic and exhibition of narration samples to expand the completeness

To Integrate Marketers’ and Customers’ Consumption Perspectives for Branding Communication

  After the conference with professor Liang, I’m glad I’ve assigned the theme of four pieces of annotations in advance to make the essay concrete and assembled as blueprint for final presentation. From the first annotation to the forth one, the structure is clearly established; I define and introduce the effects of branding communication in first place, then I respectively cite one thesis to stand in perspectives of customers’ side and markets’ side as reference for illustrating their viewpoint and possible situation of their opinions’ convergence. Finally, I deduce from a dissertation that brings up more precisely two kinds of consumption perceptions to identify the formation and cognition pattern while viewing branding communication.

  For the customers, they may not perceive which sort of perception they are holding or what their tendencies in consumption are underneath sub-consciousness, but it’s rather handy and informative to provide marketing direction and psychology analysis for marketers, thereby formulating the resolution regarding proper communication with authenticity. Carrying on with this base, three parts of discussion might be in final presentation: (1) the preamble and (2) introduction of branding communication, the two sides aspects for branding communication alongside existing branding advertisement case example and (3) possible resolution/conclusion of the paper. Most significantly, to thoroughly display the sharp contrast and transparency of concept quoted from annotations, I’d like to utilize smart arts, such as cycle graphic and process chart where certain vital key words are highlighted. 

  Briefly, I hope the final presentation could shed light on the decisive purchasing points of consumption circumstance to reveal the importance of media communication and related influence capacity. The 21^st century has been a great time that looks up to economic action and monetary circulation the most foremost than ever-past time, and hence our daily life is impossible to exist without any consumptive action. Both the companies and customers have to see through their unmatched roles in purchasing to build a mutual partnership trust bridge. With more authentic and firm foundation supporting our purchasing cycle, the bogus commodity and fraud behaviors would be replaced sooner or later by a win-win new consumption generation’s advent.

How to Formulate Brand Authenticity With Comprehension?

  Nowadays the diversity in contextual society has offered customers plenty of options during consumption, further impacting their demands and emphasis in reference to corporate brands. For illustrating the way to formulate authenticity, two ways of different perceptions for customers distinguishing authenticity should be taken into concern: modern and postmodern perception. The modern perception, according to Pedersen (2013), refers to customer’s tendency of external objectivity in authenticity based on external excellence such as natural, ethical, honest and sustainable features of objects (brands), while the postmodern one constructing authenticity based on internal subjectivity of individuals, including emotion, culture and personality (p. 2).

  Hence, in order to create customers’ loyalty and the demand for brand authenticity, companies need to know their preferences and related resulting factors; marketers must gain an understanding of how to create brand authenticity in respectively modern and postmodern perception (Pedersen, 2013, p. 2). For modern perception, it is sender oriented that does not admit the consumers’ as being active participants of constructing brand authenticity (Pedersen, 2013, p. 11). The only source for customers perceiving authenticity solely comes from external qualities of brands in rational thinking process. With further distinction, products highly paying attention to the heritage and utility comprised within a brand mostly belong to fall in this perception category, such as fine wine or fine water. In contrast, the postmodern perception deems a brand as simply not a lifeless brand but an animated entity with characteristics. Customers start forming a holistic perspective that perceives the creation of meaning in a brand as something subjective and created on foundation of emotional values (Pederson, 2013, p. 19).

Figure 1.1 Modern Perception V.S. Postmodern Perception

   In 2013, Coca-cola company, as an instance for postmodern perception, launched a commercial campaign with the slogan: “If crazy is being nice to strangers- Then call me crazy- Have five everyone.” In this message this company has transformed their core value into conveying a sense of emotional advocacy for happiness, which is easy to be understood; most significantly, the very advertising is no longer product-focused but tangible in norm and interpretation absorbed by customers. Provided by the example of promodern strategy above, Coca-cola has adjusted marketing leverage to construct customers’ positive affirmation and familiarity in their brand, thereby formulating the authenticity. It is a highly contextual process in which customers are vigorously co-constructers all along.

  Gilmore and Pine (2007) once implied the transitional change from modern tendency to postmodern tendency, namely meaning customers today live in a world that is becoming increasingly staged but also increasingly unreal, thus customers choosing to buy or not buy is dependent on how real they perceive an offering to be (p. 1). The decisive reason causing such change lies in the growing existence of social process or, to be more specific, social constructivism. It indicates that customers' are getting used to incorporating knowledge and culture into making contact with brands; the authenticity determined by individuals has a lot to do with people’s interaction in the course of daily social life, which has challenged the viewpoint of unbiased objectivity during consumption in the past era. The marketers should value the nature of social constructivism to obtain further knowhow about constructing real brand authenticity rather than always bragging the brands’ excellence via those overused mass media channels.

  Briefly speaking, in the future, the corporates and marketers seem obligatory to think of customers neither modern or postmodern type, but instead think of understanding what the customers want for their best in the relationship with corporates as “purchasing partners” during consumption (Pedersen, 2013, p. 28). In other words, the effectiveness to render authenticity realistically depends on what the customers buy from the company and how they view the merchandise in mindset.

Key Words:

*Social constructivism

*Modern perception

*Postmodern perception

Gilmore, J.H., & Pine II J. B. (2007). Authenticity: What consumers really want. Boston, USA: Harvard Business School

Pedersen, T. (2013, December). Brand Authenticity in modern and postmodern consumption. [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://pure.au.dk/portal/files/69756266/Brand_Authenticity_f_rdig.pdf

How to Formulate Brand Authenticity With Comprehension?

    Nowadays the diversity in contextual society has offered customers plenty of options during consumption, further impacting their demands and emphasis in reference to corporate brands. For illustrating the way to formulate authenticity, two ways of different perceptions for customers distinguishing authenticity should be taken into concern: modern and postmodern perception. The modern perception, according to Pedersen (2013), refers to customer’s tendency of external objectivity in authenticity based on external excellence such as natural, ethical, honest and sustainable features of objects (brands), while the postmodern one constructing authenticity based on internal subjectivity of individuals, including emotion, culture and personality (p. 2).

  Hence, in order to create customers’ loyalty and the demand for brand authenticity, companies need to know their preferences and related resulting factors; marketers must gain an understanding of how to create brand authenticity in respectively modern and postmodern perception (Pederson, 2013, p. 2). For modern perception, it is sender oriented that does not admit the consumers’ as being active participants of constructing brand authenticity (Pedersen, 2013, p. 11). The only source for customers perceiving authenticity solely comes from external qualities of brands in rational and logical thinking process. With further distinction, products highly paying attention to the heritage and utility comprised within a brand mostly belong to fall in this perception category, such as fine wine or fine water. In contrast, the postmodern perception deems a brand as simply not a lifeless brand but an animated entity with characteristics. Customers start forming a holistic perspective that perceives the creation of meaning in a brand as something subjective that is created on foundation of emotional values (Pederson, 2013, p. 19).

   In 2013, Coca-cola company, as an instance for postmodern perception, launched a commercial campaign with the slogan: “If crazy is being nice to strangers- Then call me crazy- Have five everyone.” In this message this company has transformed their core value into conveying a sense of emotional advocacy for happiness, which is easy to be understood; most significantly, the very advertising is no longer product-focused but tangible in norm and interpretation absorbed by customers. Provided by the example of promodern strategy above, Coca-cola has adjusted marketing leverage to construct customers’ positive affirmation and familiarity in their brand, thereby formulating the authenticity. It is a highly contextual process in which customers are vigorously co-constructers all along.

  Gilmore and Pine (2007) once implied the transitional change from modern tendency to postmodern tendency, namely meaning customers today live in a world that is becoming increasingly staged but also increasingly unreal, thus customers choose to buy or not buy is dependent on how real they perceive an offering to be (p. 1).  The decisive reason causing such change lies in the growing existence of social process or, to be more specific, social constructivism. It indicates that customer’s are getting used to incorporating knowledge and culture into making contact with brands; the authenticity determined by individuals has a lot matter to do with people’s interaction with the course of daily social life, which has challenged the viewpoint of unbiased objectivity during consumption in the past era. The marketers should value the nature of social constructivism to obtain further knowhow about constructing real brand authenticity rather than always bragging the brands’ excellence via those overused mass media channels.

  Briefly speaking, in the future, the corporates and marketers seem obligatory to think of customers neither modern or postmodern type, but instead think of understanding what the customers want for their best in the relationship with corporates as “purchasing partners” during consumption (Pedersen, 2013, p. 28). In other words, the effectiveness to render authenticity realistically depends on what the customers buy from the company and how they view the merchandise in mindset.

Key Words:

*Social constructivism

*Modern perception

*postmodern perception

Gilmore, J.H., & Pine II J. B. (2007). Authenticity: What consumers really want. Boston, USA: Harvard Business School

Pedersen, T. (2013, December). Brand Authenticity in modern and postmodern consumption. [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://pure.au.dk/portal/files/69756266/Brand_Authenticity_f_rdig.pdf

How to Manage Brand to Preserve the Values?

  The durable values of brand amongst customers is the key to maintain a brand’s appeal and authenticity; otherwise, even an influential and hot brand might plummet to nothing but a least favorite one overnight due to increasing loss of support of customers and endorsers. The brand values, as William Neal stated (n.d.), are the general perception of customers referring to the assessment of physical and readily identifiable features (i.e. the fast and standardized food of Macdonald’s), intangible and intrinsic values associated with brand name (i.e. high social status and eminence of Louis Vuitton), and the price or cost (the always price-low of commodity of Wal-Mart), of the brand. In order to maximize brand effect to seize and appeal more profits, brand managements must take good care of these three components above, thereby knowing better to refine its marketing operation to hold on to supporters’ loyalty to itself and attract more recommendation.

                                                    Figure 1.1 Three components of Brand Values

  Mainstreaming a brand to secure customers’ purchase and everlasting revenues might be the ultimate stage where most of brand developments, but marketers must first understand the value system underlying this adoption and then fit the marketing program to these values. (Beverand and Ewing, 2005, p, 385) In the case analysis of Dunlop Volley, it used to be the most striking Australian hippest teen shoes brand in late 20th century. Resisting alluring attempt to quickly capitalize on mass markets for bigger profits has assured it to preserve credibility and loyalty in customers procrastinate the diffusion process into mass marketplace while also lengthening profitable period in primary niche market to enhance brand repositioning. Four key constituents are identified in case analysis to extend fashion cycle of brand values: rejection of hard sell, being authentic, targeting alternative distribution channels and the appropriate of timing getting into mainstream.

                                                     Figure 1.2 Dunlop Volley

  The strategy of marketers back then was to target the small audience with high ability of economic consumption and, for a period of time, they all stick to producing teen shoes and through brand communication to make it applied to teenagers’ subculture, which reflected on the product’s design and advertisements’ slogan. It is Dunlop’s customer-led view in marketing to make them get access to filter deeply into teenagers’ market segments before jumping into mainstream mass marketplace and selling out products to reap profits, and yet usually the credibility and authenticity established in customers were squandered too.

  In December 2002, nevertheless, most of its early adopters gradually turned to prefer other shoes brands, such as Nike or Adidas, due to their growing and changes in preference, Dunlop had leveraged the opportunity to reposition the brand in the mainstream marketplace to cope with shakeout. It gradually put more emphasis on mass markets’ layout and catered to average taste of mass customers while, without giving up on certain small niche markets by customizing its product with particular use and utility. Investments in quality have helped improve perceptions of the brand, and support the positioning around value for the money and an active healthy lifestyle. As such, the Volley has achieved product parity with Nike and other big brands for all but a few extreme uses, such as professional marathons. (Beverland and Ewing, 2005, p, 386 )

  To sum up, rather than seeing a brand in short-term fad, the marketers should manage brand by interrogating brand values into customers’ life style as long as possible and provide chances to participate in developing new brand identity with creation of authenticity. Once customers’ feel exploited and perceive the brand diffusing into mainstream at speedy pace, it is likely of them to forsake the original preferred brand and go seek for another “authentic” one which matches their taste the best. Hence, it’s decisive to adopt a soft approach, according to Beverland and Ewing (2005), to view brand as “a two-way conversation rather than a top-down communication exercise, and most significantly, help the brand reposition in market properly to innovate customers such as a desire for individuality, creative expression, identification among peers and a search for authenticity” (p. 391). The less commercial intent and more authentic compassion towards the communication recipients, the possible it is to strike a chord for customers’ sense of identification.

Key Word:

*Brand value

Reference:

Neal, W. (n.d.). Modeling Brand Equity. [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://www.sdr-consulting.com/article12.html

Beverland, M., & Ewing, M. (2005). Slowing the adoption and diffusion process to enhance brand repositioning: The consumer driven repositioning of Dunlop Volley. Business Horizon, 48, 385-391.