【正文】
the individual39。ve seen one, you39。s Current Offerings Some firms attach a single brand name to a wide variety of products in several different categories. Other firms use one brand name for one current offering. Henceforth, tJiese endpoints of the breadth continuum will be referred to as umbrella vs. niche brands, respectively. Because there are advantages and disadvantages associated with each of these ilternatives, strategy selection calls for an analysis of costs and benefits. One advantage of the umbrella strategy is that the miuufacturer is likely to be perceived as having a wide variety of strengths and skills in several different product categories. Such a firm may be perceived to have the requisite knowledge and skills for entering new markets, and, consequently, brand extensions should seem legitimate. A firm adopting a nichi strategy, on the other hand, may be perceived to possess highly specialized knowledge and skills tliat cannot be transferred readily to new markets. Of course, an umbrella firm runs the risk of being perceived as a jackofalltrades (master of none)。rentiated。s current offerings (., umbrella vs. niche brands), and (b) the peiceived variability of extant brands in an entry category. Perceptions of variability may be formed for several different dimensions of an existing categoiy. We focused on one key dimension: perceived quality. Quality judgments of parent brands should generalize more readily to brand extensions when perceived variability is low in entry categories. To investigate the role of perceived variability in consumer inference, an experiment was conducted in which brand name and new product concept information was manipulated. Subjects received either an umbrella brand name, a niche brand name, or no brand name, paired with concepts for six different packaged goods (., the entry categories). On the basis of idiothetic ratings (Jaccard and Wood 1986), the entry categories were split into high and low perceived variability groups. Hence, a 3 (umbrella, niche, or no brand name [betwesubjects]) X 2 (high or low perceived variability in the entry category [withinsubjects]) factorial design was employed. This design has several advantages over previous correlational research on brand extensions: (a) subjects were randomly assigned to brand name conditions, (b) reactions to all possible binations cf brsmd name and concept infonnation were examined, and (c) the no brand name control condition enables one to measure inferences about a new product concept while controlling for prior knowledge about a brand. DISCUSSION Together,the quality inference,causal inference,an dconditional inference data suggests that brand extension can tarnish global evaluations of a parent brand. Even when favorablyevaluated parent brand name are paired with favorablyevaluated brand ixtensions, a less favorable overale impression of the parent brand can result. Furthermore,tliis negative reaction seems more pronounced for umbrell a brand. Thus, an umbrell a brand does not automatically provide more leverage than a niche brand. When a parent brand name is stretched too far, additional extensions can have negative repercussions on judgm