Buying and Belonging

Introduction

In 1983, the American motorcycle manufacturer Harley-Davidson was on the brink of collapse. A quarter of a century later, the company was able to make a full turnaround and rank as a top 50 global brand, holding 7.8 billion dollars in company value (Fournier & Lee, 2009, 105). According to one study, one of the major contributors to this turnaround was the company changing its marketing strategy by embracing a pre-existing concept of a brand community: a specialized, non-geographical community formed around a brand that can foster social relationships through collective identity as well as an encouraged sense of belonging (Muñiz and O’Guinn, 2001, p. 412). Harley-Davidson changed its corporate structure and entire marketing strategy, for instance, by creating a Harley Owner’s Group (H.O.G.) that organizes tours of local areas and opportunities to socialize (what the company calls “rallies”). Part of their turnaround was fueled by the customer familiarity that these “rallies” provided (Fournier & Lee, 2009, 111). Harley-Davidson proves that brands can serve as much more than products for sale through shaping communities and influencing how consumers interact with each other and the brand.

The concept of a crisis of meaning among Western society has been on the rise in multiple waves since the late Middle Ages (Taylor, 1991). Although there have been many potential causes of this phenomenon, a plausible reason is the rise of rationalism following scientific and existential discoveries, such as those of the Enlightenment period during the 17th century. This crisis has led people to wonder what they are truly working towards in life; what is their purpose if not to serve a god or conquer the world?

Alongside the increasing relevance of brand communities, researchers have been wondering what these communities truly bring forth in terms of belonging and identity for societies to provide society with the abundance of fulfillment they have lost: can they provide genuine feelings of belonging, identity, and social support, and can they partially perform the roles traditionally associated with religious or cultural communities? This essay argues that brand communities may serve as a modern sense of meaning by fostering belonging and connection. However, the fulfillment they provide will vary among consumers and should not be solely understood as a complete replacement for a broad source of community and purpose. Their benefits must be considered alongside the risks of commercial incentives orchestrated by the companies that push to cultivate them.

This question will be examined through sociological, psychological, and economic disciplines. Each of these perspectives will contribute to a different type of evidence on brand communities. The sociological perspective aims to ask how brand communities are formed, what allows them to function as genuine communities, and how relationships ultimately develop among the members of these communities. Using observation, in-depth interviews, and case studies organized around different brand communities, the sociological evidence will show that members develop shared identities, social relationships, traditions, and feelings of responsibility towards one another.

The psychological perspective asks how consumers perceive these communities and how participating in them affects their sense of identity, emotions, trust and feeling of belonging. Evidence from scales, testing of psychological theories, and comparison studies suggests that consumers transform community membership into parts of their identities and experience a true, genuine connection between themselves and the members. However, this identification would differ in strength, as less involved members may feel less of these feelings and more involved members may feel them more deeply.

Finally, the economic and marketing perspective aims to discover why companies create and are pushing to support brand communities, and how these groups create value for them too. Using survey research, observational studies, and company case studies, the discipline outlines that the same practices that create social value for the consumers create a secondary social value for the companies. This has proven to happen by strengthening engagement, loyalty, positive word of mouth, and continued consumption. When put together, the evidence from these three disciplines will suggest that brand communities can offer real experiences of belonging and shared identity, but these experiences exist within commercial environments deliberately cultivated by the firm. Brand communities should therefore be understood as an emerging source of modern connection and not a complete replacement for it.

Sociology

The sociological perspective of this paper aims to challenge previous understandings of what makes up a community. Rather than being geographically bound and necessitating in-person interaction, sociological authors argue that brand communities may fulfill a community without a need for these characteristics. This section first examines Muñiz and O’Guinn’s (2001) article, which first coined the term brand community through a study of Saab, MacIntosh and Bronco consumers. It then explores McAlexander et al.’s (2002) article, a mixed-method study of Jeep owners that shows participation in a brand community strengthens social connections between consumers and the brand, firm, and other consumers. Finally, the sociology section will examine Yoshida et al.’s (2021) quantitative survey that showed strong relationships and shared values between consumers are far stronger than brand prestige and other types of marketing. Together, these studies show how brand communities are formed and maintained, and why they may fulfill the traditional characteristics of a community.

Muñiz and O’Guinn

Muñiz and O’Guinn (2001) coined the term "brand communities“, where they investigate what constitutes a brand community and the important characteristics that distinguish it from other communities. These authors conducted a research study grounded in the discipline of sociology in the American neighbourhood of Fairlawn, Ohio, on brand communities. This source is useful because it establishes the existence of brand communities, described as a group of consumers formed around shared values and a common interest in a specific brand. It is exemplified that consumers can develop genuine feelings of connection and belonging through the shared attachment to these brands. The article describes brand community as a community of consumers based on a set of social relationships among a brand that is not geographically bound (Muñiz & O’Guinn, p. 412). The study focused on three brands: Saab cars, Macintosh computers, and Broncos. Although the degree of involvement in these brand communities was not explicitly measured, Muñiz and O’Guinn (2001) describe involvement as a shared sense of identity among members. Brand community members referred to one another as “we” and were also recognized and identified throughout the neighbourhood as members (Muñiz & O'Guinn, 2001, p. 417). The researchers first identified groups of people in Fairlawn who expressed this involvement with car brands and proceeded to observe and interview them. They conducted 57 in-depth interviews, both privately and in groups, dispersed among 9 people in the neighbourhood. They asked questions about their general consumption habits, their work lives, and other personal endeavours (Muñiz & O’Guinn, 2001, p. 416). They also analyzed club meetings, dealerships, websites, and user groups that were held in relation to these brands. With the collected data, they were able to establish a clear existence of brand communities, reporting that five of the nine households were involved in at least one brand community, although it wasn’t entirely clear how they arrived at this conclusion (Muñiz & O’Guinn, 2001, p. 418). Their research also denotes a clear presence of upheld traditions and rituals within these communities. For example, participants named George and Mark described making acknowledgments to drivers with the same car brand to further solidify community and belonging, such as making hand gestures, beeping horns, and flashing lights (Muñiz & O’Guinn, 2001, p. 422). Finally, participants reported not needing face-to-face interaction or even geographic proximity within their brand community and felt a strong sense of mutual agreement and connection through a shared identity, despite not having met each other (Muñiz & O’Guinn, 2001, p. 412). From a sociological perspective, the study solidifies that brand communities are not limited to geographical frontiers such as neighbourhoods, towns, or even cities. Instead, these communities can exist and coexist without even hosting official meetups by simply seeing fellow members of a brand community through the car they drive, for example. Meaningful brand communities can emerge through a shared identity and promote belonging along with social relationships through a common interest. This foundational understanding of the nature of these communities can serve as a basis for being able to further assess their ability to fulfill traditional social functions, thus contributing to helping solve the crisis of meaning.

McAlexander et al

Building on Muñiz and O’Guinn (2001)’s definition of a brand community, McAlexander et al. (2002) examine how participation in a brand community influences consumers’ relationships with the brand, the company, the products, and other consumers by suggesting other factors are at play, extraneous to simply the consumer and the “brand”. Although published in the Journal of Marketing, the article will be viewed through the lens of sociology because it examines how social groups function, encouraging collective identity, interpersonal relationships, and community integration among their members. This article is pertinent because it demonstrates that through participating in brand communities, members’ sense of belonging and social relationships with one another become stronger. though Muñiz & O’Guinn (2001) argue that the relationships between a brand and the community passes only between members of the group and the brand itself, McAlexander et al. (2002) argue that the relationship is deeply intertwined through four dimensions: relationship between the customer and other members of the community, the customer and the product, the customer and the brand, and the customer and the firm (McAlexander et al., 2002, p. 39). The article begins by defining brand communities from a customer’s perspective as a web of relationships consisting of those listed above in which the company is embedded, rather than as one direct relationship between consumers and brand. The article used a mixed-method ethnographic case study involving 259 participants of Jeep Jamboree (organized off-roading events for exclusive Jeep vehicle owners) who partook in the study both before, during, and after their event through participant observation, in-depth interviews, as well as pre- and post- questionnaires (McAlexander et al., 2002, pp. 44-45). Participants’ relationships between the brand, the products, the firm, and the community were all measured quantitatively through a self-administered questionnaire completed once before and once after the Jeep Jamboree gathering through a Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Questions in the survey were separated into their four dimensions of consumer relationships (brand, product, firm, and community). For example, questions about community strengthening included: “I have met wonderful people because of my Jeep” and “I feel a sense of kinship with other Jeep owners,” which consumers were asked to rank between strongly disagree and strongly agree (McAlexander et al., 2002, p. 45). The same four dimensions were then combined into a single Integrative Brand Community (IBC) construct (one single dataset) and were compared to both before and after attending the event to see if the event strengthened consumers’ involvement and their interpersonal ties (McAlexander et al., 2002, p. 46). Their results showed that participation in the Jeep Jamboree did, in fact, increase members’ sense of belonging and integration in the community (McAlexander et al., 2002, p. 46). They also concluded that the four relationships (consumer-product, consumer-brand, consumer-company, and consumer-other consumers) were interdependent and reinforcing rather than acting separately (McAlexander et al., 2002, p. 46). Based on the research presented in this article, participation in brand communities ultimately strengthens social relationships, bringing people closer together and allowing them to feel more connected from a sociological perspective. The article further demonstrates that consumers’ relationships with the product, brand, company, and other members operate together rather than independently, which offers a broader perspective on how belonging can develop within brand communities. These findings ultimately support the notion that these communities can fulfill social functions that were traditionally associated with humanity’s prior sense of community by providing people with a greater sense of belonging and identity.

Yoshida et al

While McAlexander et al. (2002) explain how relationships contribute to the overall development of a brand community, Yoshida et al. (2021) provide empirical sociological evidence demonstrating the importance these relationships have in consumers identifying with certain brands. The authors in this article investigate whether social capital (the relationships and values that are shared between members of a brand community) provides a better explanation for how consumers identify with brands compared to traditional marketing factors such as prestige and distinctiveness (Yoshida et al., 2021, p. 481). This article is directly pertinent to the research of brand community because it emphasizes that brand communities provide belonging and identification, making it valuable for understanding how consumer communities can serve as a modern source of meaning. The authors begin by conceptualizing brand community as a social network in which consumers develop a relationship with each other through shared values and beliefs surrounding a brand (Yoshida et al., 2021, p. 481). Their research consisted of two surveys over the course of a 6-month season from Macromill Inc. (a large research firm in Japan), concerning a community of professional Japanese football groups (Yoshida et al., 2021, p. 485). Though the brand is anonymized, it is referred to as a division 1 professional soccer team in Japan’s J. League (p. 485). The researchers initially surveyed 1,030 residents through a letter in the mail from six Japanese cities that served as the home region of a Tokyo-based professional soccer club, with a final survey size consisting of 374 people (p. 485). Participants completed a 7-point Likert scale survey (asking participants how they agreed and disagreed with statements ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree numerically) that prompted subjects of social interaction ties, shared vision, brand prestige, brand distinctiveness, consumer-brand identification, the overall happiness they get from the brand, and their brand loyalty (Yoshida et al., 2021, p. 487).

Sociology Conclusion

The study found that social interaction ties and shared vision on the brand were significant explanatory variables of consumer-brand identification (in both cases, p <0.01) (Yoshida et al., 2021, p. 489). Among the two other marketing aspects tested, brand prestige was also significant, though moderately (p < 0.05), and the other was not statistically significant. This means that relationships between the consumers matter more than the actual reputation of the brand (p. 489). The authors further conclude that social interaction and brand identification first strengthen people’s identification with the brand, then lead to a more long-term brand loyalty, which ultimately reinforces the notion that brand community can have a strong positive impact in creating meaningful attachments to brands and fellow consumers (Yoshida et al., 2021, p. 490). These findings show that brand communities can provide consumers with a sense of belonging and identity, which makes the study extremely valuable for research on a true sense of belonging within communities.

These sociological findings collectively demonstrate that brand communities function as legitimate social groups and communities which are capable of fostering belonging and identity. Through defining the fundamental components of a brand community, explaining how relationships are formed around them and strengthened, and finally demonstrating the importance of having these bases of social interaction and shared values, the sociological literature presented shows that brand communities have a strong ability to foster interpersonal connection and belonging within a group, ultimately suggesting they may be able to serve as an effective replacement for traditional community.

Psychology

After having established how communities are formed through the sociological perspective, a psychological narrative is crucial to understanding why consumers develop meaningful connections with brand communities and ultimately why they choose to remain a part of these communities. These psychological perspectives examine internal ways in which people feel a sense of belonging and attachment rather than analyzing the structure as a whole. Beginning with Carlson et al. (2008), survey-based research is used to demonstrate a perceived sense of community through a brand, even without direct interaction with other members. Mousavi et al. (2017) then distinguish between the different ways one can be a part of a brand community by looking at active “posters” and passive “lurkers,” showing that even passive members who observe an online brand community can develop strong social identities and feelings of connection. Finally, Zhang et al. (2022) analyze online interaction within a Xiaomi brand community forum to see how emotional contagion spreads between members of the community and members of the company. The union of these articles ultimately explains the psychological ways in which brand communities keep people emotionally interconnected and attached, helping understand how they fulfill the same psychological needs as traditional sources of community.

Carlson, Suter, and Brown

Carlson, Suter, and Brown (2008) examine frequent visitors of one amusement park to illustrate the differences between what the authors call “social brand communities” (which are when consumers interact with each other face-to-face without necessarily any intervention of the company) and “psychological brand communities” (a user’s sense of connection to other consumers of a brand community in the absence of any interaction). They aimed to discover the degree to which an individual perceives relational bonds with another user of the same brand. This article is pertinent to the study because it shows that brands can foster a sense of belonging without even meeting the members involved, indicating that for certain users, simply having the same branded item allows them to imagine themselves part of a brand community.

Using survey-based empirical research rooted in the discipline of psychology, the researchers found that even consumers of a brand who had never interacted with another similar consumer (psychological brand community) sometimes reported a strong sense of belonging. They collected their data through a web-based survey and first divided their study into two parts: social brand community and psychological brand community (Carlson et al., 2008, p. 288). The sample for the social brand community was extracted from members who frequented a theme park, comprising 314 respondents to the survey (Carlson et al., 2008, p. 288). Respondents used the circle overlap measure, a method developed by Bergami & Bagozzi (2000), where participants are presented with a series of overlapping circles to indicate their feeling of identification towards a brand community. Some circles represented their self-image, and others represented the brand. Survey members were asked to pick from eight circle sequences, ranging from no overlap (weak identification) to complete overlap (almost complete identity overlap) (Carlson et al., 2008, p. 286). The psychological brand community portion consisted of 158 respondents (Carlson et al., 2008, p. 289). Using structural equation modelling (SEM), researchers found that although the brand consumers had no direct interaction with one another (members of a psychological brand community), they still exhibited strong brand commitment comparable to what was found in social brand communities (p < 0.001), showing a sense of community can develop even without a face-to-face interaction (Carlson et al., 2008, pp. 290-291). They also confirmed, using SEM, that identification with a group has a positive impact on consumer behaviours such as event participation, word-of-mouth promotion, and brand preference (Carlson et al., 2008, p. 290). This source ultimately demonstrates that brands can create community and belonging psychologically without even interacting with other consumers. This supports strong evidence of brand communities filling the voids of traditional community functions in modern society.

Mousavi et al

Mousavi et al. (2017) delve deeper into the psychological impacts of an online brand community by examining the effects it has on the social identity of social media community posters (active social media members who post online) and lurkers (social media members who do not post or interact) (Mousavi et al., pp. 376-377). Unlike other researchers who aim to understand the effects of active contribution within a brand community, Mousavi et al. (2017) primarily aim to understand what social media lurkers receive from limiting themselves to watching and reading posts in the community rather than showing active involvement, while also comparing this data to the effects of social media posters, thus making it highly pertinent to the understanding of a person’s psychological perception of a community. The researchers describe online brand communities (OBC) as a group of individuals who interact online over a shared interest in a brand (Mousavi et al., p. 376). They draw on Social Identity theory, which posits that people define themselves by associating with groups that reflect their identities, (Tajfel & Turner, 1979) to suggest that people develop an identity through three main components: cognitive (how people perceive themselves), affective (people’s emotional attachment to an organization), and evaluative (how one feels about themselves with respect to the community they are part of) (Mousavi et al., p. 377).

The researchers collected data through an online survey sent to members of a brand community throughout the United States. Respondents were first asked to identify an online brand community they had accessed, though it was not directly specified how, in the past 3 months, and were also asked if this community revolved around a specific brand (Mousavi et al., p. 382). The brand being analyzed was deliberately not held constant to ensure that the survey reached a wide range of online brand communities focused on different things to “increase generalizability of the results” (p. 382). Their survey size consisted of 4,065 people, with the final sample size consisting of 752 respondents, who were filtered into 337 participants as posters (people who regularly participated in discussion), and 415 participants as lurkers, who did not participate in discussion (Mousavi et al., p. 382). Once they had responded to these questions and confirmed they were in fact part of an online brand community, the respondents were asked to answer a nine-point Likert-scale questionnaire measuring their association with brand prestige, brand distinctiveness, self-categorization, community-based self-esteem, affective commitment, brand commitment, positive word-of-mouth and negative resistance (Mousavi et al., p. 383). They then used Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) to make correlations between these psychological factors and derive their findings. Through their study, they found that brand commitment was slightly stronger for lurkers than for posters when examining the relationship between community affective commitment and affective brand commitment (p < 0.05), though they did not provide exact supporting values (Mousavi et al., p. 386). The rest of the evidence proved that although lurkers do not actively participate in the online brand community, they are almost just as likely to feel a sense of belonging towards the community as posters (Mousavi et al., p. 386). These findings suggest that observing a brand community alone can satisfy the need for belonging, even without active participation (Mousavi et al., 2017, p. 380–381, p. 386–387). The article ultimately reinforces that meaningful connection through online brand communities is, in fact, possible while also proving that interaction is not entirely necessary and a perceived sense of community through spectating is enough for members to feel a sense of belonging to the same degree as members who do contribute.

Zhang et al

Expanding on the psychological processes that underlie brand communities, Zhang et al. (2022) investigate how emotions spread between members of online brand communities and brand administration based in China through a web of emotional contagion. This article is pertinent to the research of brand communities because it examines the psychological processes of how emotions are spread within levels of a community. Unlike other articles that may focus on trust or identification with a brand, Zhang et al. (2022) study the psychological involvement of emotional contagion specifically, showing how the emotional interactions within brand communities function. The researchers describe an online brand community as a group of consumers who share enthusiasm for the brand, have a collectively well-developed identity, and express a similar commitment to said brand (Zhang et al., 2022, pp. 1-2). The article analyzed user interactions from an online brand community (OBC), with their dataset consisting of 17,622 posts and 99,426 replies extracted from the MIUI discussion forum created by the Xiaomi community. Xiaomi is a company that creates technological products such as cell phones, as well as home appliances and cars. The MIUI forum is described as a hub where people can report bugs and troubleshoot, as well as interact with other fans of the technology (Zhang et al., 2022, 4). The study measured two dimensions of emotion and how they affect each other: emotional valence (whether emotional responses were positive or negative) and emotional volatility (the fluctuation between these emotions over time) (Zhang et al., 2022, 5). The emotions they received came from three sources: members’ posts, members’ replies, and the company’s replies. The researchers utilized Python-based sentiment analysis software to categorize data into these categories and filter words based on their positive and negative emotional associations with the posts or material (Zhang et al., 2022, p. 5). Through this sentiment analysis, the researchers found that the valence and volatility of a consumer’s post, comments, and firm responses influenced one another. For example, the emotional tone used by the company would significantly influence the tone of the community members. From this research, it was derived that the emotions expressed by a community and those expressed by the company influence each other, rather than operating independently (Zhang et al., 2022, pp. 12-13). These findings are important to the research because they establish that online brand communities function as social environments rather than merely spaces for the discussion of a product, which could suggest a greater sense of connection and engagement on a psychological level. The exchange of emotions between members of a community and members of the company suggests that shared emotional expression is paramount to the shaping of these communities as well as their success as a whole. From a psychological perspective, this suggests that brands can foster emotional connection and reinforce a sense of collective identity, ultimately strengthening people’s sense of belonging. This can be done through, for example, the firm bringing forth positivity within the brand community, which would have a positive reactive impact on the consumers of the brand. Companies also have a strong influence on the tone of brand communities as well as a significant motivation to do so, which can incentivize them to strengthen members’ sense of connection with both the product and each other.

These findings made through the psychology discipline demonstrate that brand communities can fulfill consumers’ needs for belonging and emotional connection. By showing that these consumers can develop a profound level of commitment without needing face-to-face interaction with other brand consumers, that passive observers can experience a similarly strong sense of belonging in the community, and that emotions can spread between members and companies, the literature identifies how these brand communities can keep consumers emotionally attached. Ultimately, the findings suggest that brand communities are able to satisfy many of the same psychological needs as traditional communities did, allowing them to function as an alternative source of belonging.

Economics

While sociological and psychological perspectives provide insight into how brand communities are formed and how people perceive them psychologically for them to function as actual communities, the economic and marketing perspective of brand communities offers an understanding of how incentives for these communities are created from a marketer’s or brand’s perspective. Rather than asking how brand communities are formed, this perspective aims to understand how companies are incentivized to intentionally cultivate this experience to strengthen their brand loyalty, customer purchase rate, and many other pertinent variables. Four economics articles make up this section. First, Schmidt and Iyer (2015) begin by conceptualizing the value of traditional marketing advertisement over brand community exposure, underlining that the perceived reputation of their product increases among consumers when shared through a brand community compared to online advertisements. Using survey evidence, they found that participants generally reported more feelings of trust in the advertising through brand communities compared to through traditional advertising. Schau et al. (2009) then argue that brand communities create social value for individuals while simultaneously creating economic value for firms and companies. They collected their evidence through 169 interviews and engaged in intense participant observation among nine different brand communities. From these, they identified that social value felt by members of a brand community can produce valuable outcomes for marketers, such as brand loyalty and word of mouth promotion. To build on this framework, Prònay and Hetesi (2016) discuss symbolic consumption, arguing that consumers buy products for their symbolic meaning, which coincides with the effectiveness of brand communities. They create a theoretical framework that ends with recommendations of various marketing approaches that can complement different types of brand communities. Finally, Arnone and Decrop (2011) use a case study of a French travel company that exemplifies the results of a successful company-founded online brand community, while also providing more insight into how firms can create a successful brand community. Together, these articles demonstrate that while brand communities provide consumers with genuine connection and social value, they can also represent important strategic marketing tools for businesses that organizations intentionally look to develop.

Schmidt and Iyer

Schmidt and Iyer (2015) conducted a research study through the discipline of economics to determine how people perceived the reliability of brands through regular advertising compared to through brand communities. This article is pertinent to the study, as it suggests that marketers may be increasingly inclined to invest in brand communities to engage consumers. To collect their research, they first collected a sample size of 400 people from both the United States and France (Schmidt & Iyer, 2015, p. 434). Participants then answered a quantitative survey consisting of 21 questions that assessed the perceived reliability, credibility, and accuracy of brand communities on Facebook and general online advertising (Schmidt & Iyer, 2015, p. 434-435). For their first test of verifying the fluctuation in trust levels from both American and French participants, they used ANOVA tests to study their interaction, concluding there was no difference between the two nationalities. They then used t-tests to look for the perceived credibility of the brand community versus online advertising. The results concluded that out of 10 pairs of tests, 8 pairs showed results in favour of the legitimacy of brand communities (Schmidt & Iyer, 2015, p. 436). The authors concluded that social media platforms have enabled consumers to rely more on each other’s testimony and word of mouth than on advertisements, suggesting that consumer-to-consumer information may induce as much, if not more, trust than traditional company-to-consumer information marketing (Schmidt & Iyer, 2015, p. 432). This research suggests marketers need to strengthen their online presence and observe the activity in their brand’s community, intervening where beneficial, rather than letting it take its course. If companies begin to see these groups as marketing tools, encouraging these communities may be prioritized. As these brand communities flourish, the value they create for consumers (providing a genuine and much-needed sense of belonging) may also bring value to the companies they surround.

Schau et al

Schau et al. (2009) aimed to discover how practices within brand communities create value both socially (for other consumers) and for the brand itself through the disciplines of economics and marketing. They begin by describing brand communities as consumer groups centred on a specific brand that provide members with the opportunities to strengthen their sense of identity, and build social meaning through a shared interest in said brand (Schau et al., p. 30). The value created through these brand communities is described as social support and shared sympathies for the people, which simultaneously generates value for the firms through increased consumer engagement and word-of-mouth promotions (promotional dialogue spread positively or negatively in the context of the product) (Schau et al., pp. 30-31). The article employed a qualitative, multiple-case study design to collect its research through participant observation and in-depth interviews with the participants. They conducted a total of 169 in-depth interviews, and a total of 65 years' worth of naturalistic and participant observation run consecutively among the brand communities (Schau et al., pp. 33-34). Though the interview questions were never shared or discussed, the researchers examined nine brand communities through these observations and interviews, including BMW mini, Garmin, Jones Soda, Apple Newton, 3com Audrey, Lomo, Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers, StriVectin, and Xena: Warrior Princess (Schau et al., p. 32). The brands were chosen intentionally to cover a wide range of communities, rather than being specific to one set of products.

Across all nine communities, the authors found that practices of communicating with brand members through community engagement (a collective practice of documenting and reinforcing engagement within the community), impression management (members acting as ambassadors for the brand and helping individuals with questions), and social networking (creating ties among brand community members) created value by strengthening people’s relationships with one another, reinforcing identities within the community, and encouraging shared participation (Schau et al., p. 34-36). For example, in online discussions between the StriVectin brand community, users shared personal concerns about aging and offered sympathy and emotional support to other members with similar experiences (p. 34).

The authors additionally argue that the practices of brand communities create value for firms because they increase consumer engagement, brand loyalty, and continued consumption (Schau et al., p. 30-32). This article is pertinent to the research on brand communities because it demonstrates that they can benefit both consumers and companies simultaneously. While members benefit from gaining social support, interaction, and encouragement, firms benefit from the strengthening of brand loyalty. This source further suggests that companies have the incentive to foster group activity and provide users with incentives to join said communities as an additional way of marketing, such as engaging in event sponsorship or encouraging other group activities with respect to the brand.

Prònay and Hetesi

Prònay and Hetesi (2016) examine brand communities through the lens of symbolic consumption under economics and marketing. Their research suggests that consumers are increasingly purchasing brands for the symbolic meaning of the products and the social connections they offer, rather than solely for their functional use. This is imperative to the research of brand communities because it tells marketers exactly what approach they should apply to their marketing process, making brand communities more successful and helping increase the chances of company-founded communities. The authors did not conduct an empirical study; instead, they performed a theoretical analysis and literature review that analyzes research in consumer behaviour and marketing to develop a theoretical model of communal consumption (Prònay & Hetesi, 2016, p. 95). The authors do not explain their formal selection process, with no methodology section explaining how they selected their literature, however the literature review drew on a total of 33 previously published scholarly sources which had a common background in consumption or brand community (Prònay & Hetesi, 2016, pp. 101-102) Their theoretical model identifies two different reasons for communal consumption, with one being “brand-based communities”, described as a community where the brand and its image are what maintain the community and the other being “brand subcultures”, described as members of the community being more committed to each other than to the brand itself (Prònay & Hetesi, 2016, p. 98). They note in their theoretical model that there is a negative correlation between brand dominance and community dominance in brand communities (p. 98). The authors arranged different brand communities on a spectrum to better conceptualize the intensity of brand subcultures. They placed Nokia (a phone company) at one end of the spectrum, as an example of a simple brand community, because it is mostly held together by the belief in the brand and its value. Harley Davidson (a motorcycle manufacturer) was placed at the very other end of the spectrum, suggesting that this company is an active organizer of the community, more of a brand subculture or “brand cult” rather than a community held together by the intricacies of the brand (Prònay & Hetesi, 2016, pp. 99-100). Their research suggests that some brand communities can offer a deeper level of connection than others and can resultantly be more attractive to consumers to become a part of these communities from the perspective of brand managers and marketers (p. 100). They also conclude that different brand communities would benefit from different marketing approaches, with simple brand communities responding to more centralized communication, such as eagerly sought-after information about the company, whereas brand subcultures, such as the one around Harley Davidson, follow their own norms and hold more power to influence the company (p. 100). It is therefore paramount that marketers categorize what type of brand community exists around their company to determine the best approach. This article suggests that brands derive a lot of symbolic value from the brand community itself rather than the products that initially brought them together. From a marketing perspective, this suggests that organizations increasingly recognize consumers’ desire for belonging and identity through their brand’s community and would thus intentionally cultivate groups that strengthen these social and psychological connections.

Arnone and Decrop

Building on previous research that demonstrates how consumers can form and sustain brand communities, Arnone and Decrop (2011) provide an example of how a company itself can create a meaningful brand community through the lens of marketing. Using monLookéa (the brand community formed by French travel company LookVoyages) as a qualitative case study, the researchers develop a four-step framework, exemplifying how to design, launch, and maintain a brand community while analyzing its market benefits. The brand community first emerged in 2007, when LookVoyages created the form that encouraged individuals to reconnect after their vacation stay via the brand’s website (Arnone & Decrop, 2011, p. 38). At the time of the study, the brand community’s size had grown to 25,000 members after only four seasons and served as an online platform in which customers could share stories, travel experiences, pictures and videos (p. 38). The exact questions asked during their interview process, as well as interview length, time, or the number of interviews conducted, were not included. The authors claimed to have conducted multiple interviews with people involved at both strategic and operational levels of the project (Arnone & Decrop, 2011, p. 37). The information from these interviews was then triangulated with the LookVoyages’ internal documents and used DSA (decision system analysis; a software that maps out the decision and actions involved in the decision-making process), including strategic briefs, website layouts, and proposals made by the web agency whom were responsible for developing the online brand community platform to reconstruct the decision-making process of these key actors (p. 37). From the analysis of this decision-making process, the authors reconstructed the forum founders’ decision-making processes and identified a four-stage framework for creating a brand community done by the founding company, which consisted of: “analyzing the market situation, defining the community project, launching the platform, and daily management of the platform” (p. 38). They found that the brand community created significant marketing value for the company, generating over 150,000 photos posted and 2,500 videos uploaded (Arnone & Decrop, 2011, p. 42).

They argue that successful brand communities must be founded on a product containing sufficient “valeur de lien” (linking value), meaning that it allows for the creation and maintenance of relationships within a brand community(Arnone & Decrop, 2011, p. 37). They further conclude that companies should avoid over-controlling the community, stating that overemphasis on intervention in the brand community by the firm may backfire and appear less attractive to a consumer wanting to join (Arnone & Decrop, 2011, p. 40). Instead, they argue that the best success of a brand community comes when the organizers consider a more balanced approach (Arnone & Decrop, 2011, p. 44). This article demonstrates that companies and organizations can create brand communities for their own companies in order to create an environment surrounded by their brand. From a marketing perspective, these companies can therefore bring forth a sense of belonging and community through forming these brand communities by following the article’s process, which a company would use to successfully create one. It thus proves that marketers are increasingly seeing consumers’ needs of social connection and belonging and deliberately cultivate brand communities to satisfy these consumer needs while simultaneously strengthening the company’s customer loyalty.

These economic and marketing findings jointly demonstrate that brand communities create significant value for both the members of the community and the businesses. By transforming social interaction into brand loyalty and word-of-mouth promotion, as well as equipping companies with the skillset to cultivate successful brand communities, the literature shows that businesses are strongly incentivized to foster belonging and interpersonal connection with one another surrounding their brand of preference. Ultimately, although these communities can provide genuine social value, they also function for businesses as important marketing tools that are designed to strengthen continued consumption and brand loyalty.

Recommendations

The findings made by the economic literature suggest that recommendations should be directed towards both the organizations and the consumers of brand communities. For marketers and brand owners, brand communities should be cultivated ethically and responsibly, ensuring the authentic social value is prioritized over commercial and profit-backed incentives. Organizations should recognize that their long-term success depends heavily on their degree of brand loyalty and consumer value, and therefore make it imperative to view these communities as less than a mere consumer retention or sales increase and more as a meaningful, long-lasting community that can provide infinitely more coverage. As Arnone & Decrop (2011) demonstrate, controlled communities that are perceived as overly controlling, and by extension, profit-driven, are less likely to derive value from the community and are more likely to discourage participation. Consequently, firms must be aware of the benefits created by these communities and ultimately strive to balance their intervention to successfully create a long-term, interconnected sense of community surrounding their brand.

From the consumer's perspective, an equally balanced approach towards brand communities should be considered. The literature in sociology and psychology consistently demonstrates that these communities can provide genuine friendships and human connections, as well as a positive sense of belonging and identity, all of which contribute to better overall individual well-being. However, participants in brand communities must remain aware that these groups were either created by companies or contribute to the benefit of companies, with similar sales and product value benefits to a company-sponsored advertisement that generates true, measurable market value. Staying informed through recognizing these commercial incentives surrounding the brand community they wish to join is backed by encouraged consumerism and the goal of brand loyalty. Confronting this information would not devalue the brand community itself but rather encourage members to appreciate the relationships it can provide while remaining conscious that their involvement in the community additionally contributes to broader marketing objectives.

These consumer recommendations should be directed specifically toward young adults aged 16-25 who participate in online brand communities through platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, and Reddit. This information could be spread through Quebec’s Office de la Protection du Consommateur, which should publish a public article explaining how brand communities' social relationships coincide with brand marketing objectives*.* The article could be titled Votre communauté en ligne est-elle aussi une stratégie marketing? And be published in the information section of their website. The article should present a balanced message about brand communities, ensuring they do not completely discourage consumers from entering them, but simply advise readers of the marketing narratives that one possesses. Drawing firstly on Muñiz and O’Guinn (2001), it will be established that brand communities can and do function as genuine communities by encouraging participants to develop a shared identity, have common traditions and rituals, and a shared responsibility among members. It could also draw on McAlexander et al. (2002) and Schau et al. (2009) to demonstrate that participation in these communities creates personal social value for participants. However, the article should also explain, using Schau et al. (2009), that those same community practices will simultaneously create commercial value for the brand by boosting consumer engagement, loyalty, and promotion, as well as continued consumption to remain a part of it. Schmidt and Iyer’s (2015) findings should warn consumers that the advice and recommendations received from their own brand community could be more impactful than advertisements themselves. Prònay and Hetesi (2016) could be used to explain how marketers are being advised to cater to these brand communities in different ways, while Arnone and Decrop (2011) could demonstrate the role that companies have to establish and manage these communities. Taking this initiative and writing this article on the Office de la Protection des Consommateurs could ultimately help Quebec consumers enjoy their social benefits from brand communities while also helping them make informed decisions about the potential commercial activity.

Conclusion

This paper aimed to examine the intricacies of brand communities as a whole to address whether they served as an effective modern form of meaning by evaluating whether they foster identity, social relationships and connections, and a sense of belonging. The sociological, psychological, and economic disciplines ultimately argue that they can. From the sociological perspective, the analyzed literature suggests that brand communities can function similarly to a traditional community by fostering a shared sense of belonging and shared rituals, thus creating an interconnected web of social networks surrounding a common interest that was formed and sustained through these habits. The psychological perspective furthermore explains why brand communities become so meaningful and emotionally binding, showing that members ultimately internalize their membership as part of their self-image and exhibit genuine feelings of emotional attachment and responsibility for members of the community, as well as feelings of belonging and encouraged social support. Finally, the economics and marketing perspective reveals why companies are increasingly investing in cultivating these environments for their consumers by demonstrating that companies benefit from increased brand loyalty and brand engagement, alongside creating social value for individuals.

These findings collectively suggest that brand communities can fill the position of more than a mere consumer group or marketing technique. Instead, they often serve as a means for genuine social relationships by providing an opportunity for friendship and gathering, constructing social needs through promoting collective identity and belonging surrounding a common interest, and fulfilling psychological needs for belonging through creating social attachment and reliability amongst members of the brand community. As traditional senses of community have arguably declined since the 1950’s (Putnam, 2000), brand communities are emerging groups that may fill a portion of this social void by providing consumers with opportunities meant for connection.

Ultimately, the evidence suggests that brand communities are helpful and provide genuine feelings of happiness and belonging for a community. However, for most people, outside of a zealous few, there isn’t evidence to show that brand community is more than a small part of their identity. And so the amount of fulfillment gained should, in many cases, not be overstated. The amount of commitment varies not only by person but also by brand: it is stronger among the H.O.G. crowd at the Harley-Davidson rallies than it is perhaps around Garmin, a maker of GPS products. Moreover, the company behind the brand has incentives to promote these branded community relationships, backed by consumerism and profit maximization. Consumers should keep this commercial aspect in mind, or else they may risk overinvesting emotionally and financially in communities that are designed partly for consumer consumption, mistaking brand loyalty for a complete and long-lasting source of meaning. Brand communities should thus serve as groups that reflect the evolved ways in which people seek belonging and fulfillment, rather than a foolproof replacement.

Works Cited

Arnone, L., & Decrop, A. (2011). Construire une communauté de marque : le cas des clubs de vacances Lookéa. Décisions Marketing, 64, 35–46. [https://doi.org/10.3917/dm.064.0035]{.underline}

Bergami, M., & Bagozzi, R. P. (2000). Self‐categorization, affective commitment and group self‐esteem as distinct aspects of social identity in the organization. British Journal of Social Psychology, 39(4), 555–577. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466600164633

Carlson, B. D., Suter, T. A., & Brown, T. J. (2008). Social versus psychological brand community: The role of psychological sense of brand community. Journal of Business Research, 61(4), 284–291. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2007.06.022]{.underline}

[Fournier, S., & Lee, L. (2009). Getting brand communities right. Harvard Business Review, 87(4), 105–111.]{.mark}

McAlexander, J. H., Schouten, J. W., & Koenig, H. F. (2002). Building brand community. Journal of Marketing, 66(1), 38–54. [https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.66.1.38.18451]{.underline}

Mousavi, S., Roper, S., & Keeling, K. A. (2017). Interpreting social identity in online brand communities: Considering posters and lurkers. Psychology & Marketing, 34(4), 376–393. [https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.20995]{.underline}

Muniz, Jr., A. M., & O’Guinn, T. C. (2001). Brand Community. Journal of Consumer Research, 27(4), 412–432. [https://doi.org/10.1086/319618]{.underline}

[Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–47). Brooks/Cole.]{.mark}Prónay, S., & Hetesi, E. (2016). Symbolic consumption in the case of brand communities. Society and Economy, 38(1), 87–102. [[https://doi.org/]https://doi.org/10.3917/dm.064.0035{.mark}](https://doi.org/10.1556/204.2016.38.1.6?urlappend=%3Futm_source%3Dresearchgate.net%26utm_medium%3Darticle)]{.underline}

[Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. Touchstone Books/Simon & Schuster. https://doi.org/10.1145/358916.361990]{.mark}

Schau, H. J., Muñiz, A. M., & Arnould, E. J. (2009). How Brand Community Practices Create Value. Journal of Marketing, 73(5), 30-51. [https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.73.5.30]{.underline}

Schmidt, K. N., & Iyer, K. S. (2015). Online behaviour of social media participants and perception of trust, comparing social media brand community groups and associated organized marketing strategies. Procedia - Social and Behavioural Sciences, 177, 432–439. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.02.389]{.underline}

Taylor, C. (1992). The Malaise of Modernity in the 21st Century. House of Anansi Press.

Yoshida, M., Gordon, B. S., & James, J. D. (2021). Social capital and consumer happiness: toward an alternative explanation of consumer-brand identification. Journal of Brand Management, 28(5), 481–494. [https://doi.org/10.1057/s41262-021-00240-y]{.underline}

Zhang et al. (2022). The analysis of dynamic emotional contagion in online brand communities. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 946666. [https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.946666]{.underline}