【文章內容簡介】 core values) and innovation (through investment and change), creating a synergistic relationship between strong brands and innovation. One fashion pany reports that brand management is an evolving process “ensuring continuity and consistency” with “innovation, collaboration and vision at the heart of any good pany” (Oroton, 2021, p. 5). Several studies identify the danger of strong brands doing so well that they have inertia, resist innovation and inadvertently invite rivals to outmaneuver the leader over time (Christensen, 1997). The solution is the willingness of brand leaders to innovate from time to time, which necessitates corporate rebranding for corporate sustainability. Principle 2 Successful corporate rebranding may require retaining at least some core or peripheral brand concepts to build a bridge from the existing corporate brand to the revised corporate brand. There is always pressure to refresh the brand to maintain contemporary relevance. Noheless, maintaining a nexus between the existing and the revised corporate brand is vital. Kapferer (1997, p. 334) argues that traces of corporate brand memory should not be abandoned when the brand is revised. These traces provide legitimacy to all customers and help make the revised brand acceptable. Keller (2021, pp. 6513) cites Adidas choosing to return to their roots to recapture lost brand equity. This principle suggests that rebranding is an incremental change process as opposed to a radical change, necessitating change management considerations initially at the design level of the new vision formulation. Indirect support for Principle 2 es from brand extension theory. Successful brand extensions e from the successful transfer of brand meaning from one context to another, whereas rebranding is a transfer of meaning from one time to another. Principle 3 Successful corporate rebranding may require meeting the needs of new market segments relative to the segments supporting the existing brand. In revisioning the corporation, the corporate rebranding may need to tap into new market segments or even new markets (Kapferer, 1997, p. 334). Added new attributes could satisfy a new segment, like a need for a more socially responsible pany. Growing the brand might require tapping into additional target markets with different needs from the original brand customer base. The emergence of new market segments reflects the natural evolution of markets over time and the need to keep brands with a contemporary, fresh focus. Principle 1 suggested the need to balance previous and new consumer needs and sometimes the needs can be coded as a new market segment. For example, the Ewing et al. (1996) Mazda case above involved adding a more sophisticated market segment, though this could still coexist with the initial segment with more basic needs. These first three principles of corporate rebranding build on the existing literature and focus on recreating the brand vision to suit a more contemporary market. The existing theory of corporate rebranding covers not just brand revisioning but also internal branding and brand strategy implementation. Formulating another three principles adds specificity to these latter two stages of corporate rebranding. Principle 4 A pany applying a high level of brand orientation through munication, training and internal marketing is more likely to have effective corporate rebranding. Brand orientation occurs when the brand is core to the essence of the pany and its strategies, that is, when all stakeholders (especially employees) have ownership of the brand and live the brand in their daily script (Urde, 1999). Other literature supports the brand orientation concept (see Macrae, 1996。 Upshaw and Taylor, 2021。 Wong and Merrilees, 2021). Stuart and Muzellec (2021) and Kaikati (2021) also emphasize the need for stakeholder “buyin”. Principle 4 actualizes the internal branding aspect of corporate rebranding. Vallaster and de Chernatony (2021) highlight the importance of leadership in facilitating internal branding. Other cases support the role of internal branding in corporate rebranding, including Bergstrom et al.’s (2021) study of Saab. Karmark (2021) provides detailed case examples of processes used by firms to help employees live the brand, as well as situations where the brand may be resisted. Overall, internal stakeholder buyin is vital. Principle 5 A successful pany having a high level of integration and coordination