Defining Brand Experience

Lately, I’ve been researching the concept of ‘brand experience’. First off, what are we talking about when we intellectualise the notion that we can experience a brand?

According to the clever peeps at Wikipedia:

A brand can take many forms, including a name, sign, symbol, color combination or slogan. The word brand has evolved to encompass identity - it affects the personality of a product, company or service.

Brand experience isn't just the design; it's also the usability of a website, the intuitive functionality of a phone app or the approachability of customer service. Our perception as consumers is formed by how we’re able to interact with a brand.

The web is information tapas; a tasting menu for ideas. The function of a brand website is to provide the building blocks for a user to form an opinion about the brand. It is our internalised perception of a brand that motivates us to endorse it. No matter how convincingly an ad tries to persuade us when it comes to online we are in search of convenient information wrapped within an engaging environment.

So how does a brand create an experience? The answer is to get inside the head of the brand's biggest fan. We are defined by our actions. If the majority of your site’s returning visitors are heading to the same page(s) or entering specific terms into the search box the experience needs to reflect this behaviour. The most important expert on consumer behaviour is your site’s regular visitors. Listen to them by studying their actions.

Another element is the experience is the look and feel. Women tend to view the web as a service; while men typically interpret the web as a tool. How does your website represent both the male and female perspectives?

If a website doesn't live up to our expectations than our preception of the brand can become tarnished. As an example, Nike.com is a flash website that is sleek and stylish, but it doesn’t feel like a shopping website. Whereas, Zappos.com is not half as pretty, but it feels like both a service and a tool to use. If the only way to buy Nike shoes was on Nike.com the experience would need to change. But Nike.com doesn't exist to sell; it exists for fans to experience the brand.

Utilitarian shoppers are interested in e-tailing because of four specific attributes: convenience and accessibility, selection, availability of information and lack of sociality (Wolfinbarger and Gilly, 2001).

Most consumers' online purchase decision is based on their motivation and goals. I don’t think Nike.com exists to sell shoes. I believe it exists to promote the brand. The experience on Nike.com is all about exploration and appreciation of design. This is why it has the ability for users to design their own custom shoes, learn about shoe performance, get training tips and fantasise about how their lives might be different with a pair of Nike’s on their feet.

Compared with conventional utilitarian shopping motivations, the merit of hedonic motivation is experiential and emotional. The reason why hedonic consumers do shopping is not for physical objective but for the shopping process instead. (Huang Jen-Hung and Yang Yi-Chun 2010)

The purpose of the website is just as important as observing user behaviour. Many websites intend to be all things to all people and it’s not possible and could damage the brand.

Nike.com is able to remain focused on its goal of creating a unique brand experience because their products are sold through 3rd party websites and their own bricks and mortar stores. Nike.com is all about the brand experience and not about buying shoes; however, there are a select few who are motivated by exclusivity and design. These consumers will take the risk of paying more because they are hardcore fans of the brand. But most consumers will look for the best price on eBay, Zappos or some other 3rd party seller. Nike doesn’t care because the brand website is serving its purpose of engaging with its fans.