Building Meaning

Abstract

This conceptual article seeks to demonstrate the pertinence of corporate architecture as an integrative tool in spatial marketing systems. Architecture is explored in a dialectical perspective, both as a functional built form and a symbolic vector of ideologies. Architecture intersects with micro-level and macro-level marketing systems, as it inherently projects corporate identity while referring to broader artistic, social and historical parameters. It is argued that these macromarketing dimensions and their meaning-generating potential add significant value to market exchanges. A special focus on corporate architecture in the banking sector shows the value of architectural narratives in changing marketing environments. The article makes two contributions to macromarketing research. It (1) firmly establishes corporate architecture within marketing systems and (2) shows how symbolic meaning can be derived from the macro-level environmental, historical and cultural properties of buildings.

Keywords

spatial marketing system corporate architecture macromarketing corporate identity bank architecture.

Introduction

The article mainly aims at establishing architecture in macromarketing scholarship. While buildings are mostly embedded in spatial marketing systems and analyzed in terms of functionalities, this contribution seeks to extend on Kadirov and Varey’s (2011) discussion about meaning and symbolism in marketing systems. In doing so, the symbolic dimension of architecture will be put in the foreground and architecture will be conceptualized as an expressive system.

The article draws on existing theorizations in macromarketing scholarship, notably spatial marketing systems. The social, temporal and geographic dimensions of spatial systems have been discussed in macromarketing literature. For example, Askegaard and Kjeldgaard (2007) correlate global and local spatial references to cultural and reputational capital. D’Rozario and Williams (2005) analyze the practice of redlining, performed by banks and insurances in the United States to delineate their geographic, but also social territory, resulting in the exclusion of some ethnic neighborhoods from service offerings. Ingene (1983) explores space with regard to travel distances to access products and services, based on an empirical analysis of the availability of grocery stores. Markin and Duncan (1981) demonstrate the role of environmental factors in the evolution and adaptation of retail outlets.

Thus, in macromarketing research, architecture is mostly discussed in its physicality, i.e. as a facility and a spatial factor that structures transactions within marketing systems (Layton 2007). While the physical function of architectural space that determines social interactions and power relations is therefore relatively well documented, the meaning-generating and symbolic properties of buildings remain under-theorized.

The multidimensionality of buildings, viewed both as functional objects and symbolic vehicles of brand content, justifies an interdisciplinary methodology, as insights from art history support the integrative perspective of a holistic marketing world view (Layton 2008). Thus, it is the contention of this article that architecture substantially contributes to the generation of meaning at the macromarketing world view level.

Seeking to fill the gap of the signifying dimension of architecture in marketing scholarship, the article explores the sign value of architecture based on the conceptual background of symbolism in marketing systems (Kadirov and Varey 2011).

Extant marketing scholarship has mainly discussed architecture from a micromarketing or meso-level perspective, i.e. as endogenous expressions of corporate biography and culture. Architecture and design are theorized as formal components of Corporate Visual Identity Systems (CVIS) (Melewar and Saunders 2000) or atmospheric sales tools among other sensory marketing elements (Kotler 1973).

However, marketing literature largely disregards the cognitive and symbolic content generated by architecture at the macromarketing level. In contemporary consumer culture, however, these prevailing ‘soft’ issues of consumption related to culture, lifestyle, world view and emotion are gaining importance in market relationships. Innovative marketing scenarios need to integrate a macro-level logic, promoting humanistic, ethical and environmental values and world views to foster sustainability (Mittelstaedt et al. 2014; Fisk 2006; Nason 2006) and social development (Peterson 2006). Architecture potentially plays a significant role in these new marketing paradigms, as it relates brands to ‘soft’ issues, such as artistic expression, aestheticism, and cultural history. Economic profit can be derived from well-designed retail environments that incorporate symbolic sign-value. It is at the macro-level that architectural narratives contribute an artistic dimension and added value to brands.

Contrary to purely artistic creation, however, architecture invariably serves a functional purpose. While art and commerce might be incompatible in many respects (Bradshaw, McDonagh, and Marshall 2005; Holbrook 2005), architecture potentially coalesces functional properties with symbolic and iconographic materializations of space. Built form thus contributes to value-based market exchanges (Hillebrand, Driessen, and Koll 2015; Vargo and Lusch 2004) if conceived as an artistic phenomenon with positive repercussions on its urban and social environment.

Art reveals “market forces, class issues, demand characteristics, value, buyer behavior, and image management” and offers a “largely untapped source for insight into the culture of consumption” (Schroeder and Borgerson 2002, p. 166). Guillet de Monthoux (2004) shows that marketing managers would benefit from adopting innovative artist-inspired methods of value creation.

Architecture catalyzes emotional and cognitive reactions, opening up new branding opportunities. If buildings are aligned with the urban fabric, disrupt conventional building practices, create differentiation through local variations, they articulate brand values and produce idiosyncratic brandscapes.

Contrary to residential architecture, corporate architecture serves as a physical and symbolic mediator between brands and consumers within marketing systems. In changing marketplace configurations, commercial transactions increasingly occur in cyberspace, making physical space ever more redundant for purely operational purposes. Especially in the finance sector, the rapid shift toward digitalization, crypto-currencies and online banking have dematerialized financial marketing systems. To retain their material visibility and competitive positioning in the marketplace, banks increasingly set up flagship venues of significant symbolic and cultural value, while closing down non-descript neighborhood branches devoid of iconographic expression. This transition from functional, micro-level sales venues to interpretive and interactive spaces symbolically connected to macro-level forces, has not yet been extensively investigated in marketing literature.

The argument submitted here is that the production and valorization of creative, meaningful and value-laden architectural spaces accrue the cultural meanings of organizations.

Therefore, the inquiry supplements extant marketing scholarship, insofar as it locates the discussion about corporate architecture within surrounding social and cultural spaces at the macro-level to address the following research questions: (1) How do buildings interact with macromarketing forces and (2) how do buildings generate value-added market exchanges?

The remainder of the article is organized as follows. The next part outlines conceptualizations of architectural aesthetics, including a literature review of marketing aesthetics. In the following section, the concept of Corporate Visual Identity Systems (CVIS) is discussed within branding and marketing scholarship. This part is followed by the presentation of the macromarketing framework, encompassing both the relevance of architecture in innovative branding practices and societal and environmental implications of corporate buildings. Interdisciplinary epistemological resources, drawing on art and architectural theory, illustrate how corporate architecture interfaces with macro-level contexts. The ensuing section contains analyses of bank buildings to illustrate the dialectic reality of buildings as micro-level corporate identifiers and macro-level cultural iconographies. Implications for marketing practice and research are outlined before the discussion and conclusion section.

Corporate Architecture in Marketing Aesthetics

If aesthetic approaches have become conceptual references for a host of theoretical analyses (Taylor and Hansen 2005), they essentially adopt a post-rational stance, derived from the etymological meaning of aisthetikos (‘sensitive, sentient’). They imply that “[a]esthetic knowing is often tacit and hence different from intellectual realizations” (Biehl-Missal 2013a, p. 248). Centered on the emotionally perceiving subject, aesthetic approaches reject the “dominance of the semiotic in aesthetic theory” (Böhme 1993, p. 115). Thus, consumers are viewed as sentient beings, whose experience is enhanced by the seduction and passions of an aestheticized environment (Belk, Ger, and Askegaard 2003). Maffesoli (1996) terms these social configurations “communities of feeling” that develop along an “aesthetic paradigm” (1996, p. 10).

Linstead and Höpfl consider the aesthetic as an epistemic Other of modernity, as it “problematizes the rational” and offers an alternative mode of cognition (2000, p. 1). Aesthetic experiences are defined as the embodied perception of reality, representing sensorial and physical vectors, where mental and corporeal phenomena interconnect (Joy and Sherry 2003). Viewed as “aesthetic subjects” (Venkatesh and Meamber 2008, 2006), consumers seek aesthetic encounters, such as striking store design, memorable events and entertainment when engaging with a brand (Fiore and Kim 2007; Underhill 2004).

In this consumer-oriented perspective, Berlyne’s (1971) theoretical contributions to aesthetics and psychology have been integrated by marketing scholars to explore the aesthetic effectiveness of retail environments with regard to consumer behavior (Mari and Poggesi 2013; Kearney, Kennedy, and Coughlan 2007; Kent 2007; Gilboa and Rafaeli 2003; Babin and Attaway 2000; Donovan et al. 1994). Architecture and spatial design enhance visual communication and branding strategies (Balmer 2008, 2012, 2013; Schroeder 2002, 2003, (2010) [2007]), contribute to retail design and are used as marketing tools in the finance sector (Bargenda 2013, 2014, 2015a, 2015b).

The felt experience of retail spaces has been conceptualized by Kotler as “atmospherics”, designating the “emotional effects in the buyer that enhance his or her purchase probability” (Kotler 1973, p. 50). Kotler posits the experiential value of décor and display for purchase decisions, considering the place where a product is bought as “one of the most significant features of the total product” and sometimes even “more influential than the product itself in the purchase decision” (Kotler 1973, p. 48). Atmospherics includes both physical factors (tangibles) and social factors (intangibles) (Heide, Lærdal, and Grønhaug 2009). The creation of atmospheres is a cornerstone of quality architecture (Zumthor 2006, p. 11), as we perceive spaces “through our emotional sensibility” (Zumthor 2006, p. 13).

The concept of the “servicescape” encapsulates “the environment in which the service is assembled and in which the seller and customer interact, combined with tangible commodities that facilitate performance or communication of the service” (Booms and Bitner 1981, p. 36). Baker (1986) extends this notion by establishing a typology of the physical environment, including ambient, design, and social factors. His observations that service consumers are particularly impacted by tangible cues is further developed by Bitner (1992), who includes ambient conditions, spatial layout, signs, symbols, and artifacts into the servicescape. Purchasing is not an isolated act and the physical setting of the sales venue provides distinctive benefits (Oldenburg 2001).

Servicescapes are designed to “facilitate performance or communicate the service” (Bitner and Zeithaml 2003, p. 25), while shaping consumers’ expectations and perceptions about the brand (Baker, Grewal, and Parasuraman 1994). Thus, most marketing studies on the atmospheric environment concern consumers’ emotional responses to the physical properties of the service venue (Orth and Wirtz 2014; Orth, Heinrich, and Malkewitz 2012; Reimer and Kuehn 2004; Turley and Milliman 2000).

Schmitt and Simonson (1997) discuss aesthetics as valuable resources in marketing, providing repertoires of styles and themes in the management of brand identity and image. In the “experience economy” (Pine and Gilmore 1999), buildings are conceived primarily to satisfy consumer preferences. Hence, they become aesthetic commodities in themselves (Böhme (2013) [2006]), as they hold “marketable appeal” (Böhme 2017, p. 136) and are promoted through “advertising and branding” (Böhme 2017, p. 136) as part of integrative marketing processes.

Aesthetic research has also made inroads into Organization Studies and Critical Marketing Theory (Biehl-Missal 2011, 2013a, 2013b; Biehl-Missal and Saren 2012; Strati 2000, 1999, 1996, 1992, 1990) presents the aesthetic resources to explore organizational life as a non-rational, intuitive “form of human knowledge” (1999, p. 2), problematizing “the rational and analytic” (1999, p. 7).

The concept of “new aesthetics” (Böhme 1993, 1995, 2003, 2017) deletes the boundaries between art and aesthetics by incorporating cosmetics, advertising, and interior decoration (Böhme 1993, p. 116). Böhme views architecture as a consumerist phenomenon, as the atmosphere produced holds social power and promotes consumption. When consumers elaborate meaning from a positive aesthetic experience, it translates into favorable repercussions on reputation and identity. Thus, emotional intelligence is considered as the “most synthetic, holistic, integrated, and reliable of our systems of reacting to complex environmental and social situations” (Pallasmaa 2017, p. 66), as we judge complex life situations, including the atmosphere of a space, place or situation, through emotion.

Corporate architecture is also discussed in marketing literature as a formal component of Corporate Visual Identity Systems (CVIS) from the viewpoint of the corporate ‘sender’ of the message.

Corporate Architecture in Corporate Visual Identity Systems (CVIS)

The corporate brand encapsulates values inherent in or associated with the corporation and its products and services. These brand values commonly have strong cultural roots, such as national references, and include tangibles like architecture and logos, often representing a lifestyle linked to the country-of-origin (Balmer and Gray 2003, p. 977).

The initial focus on corporate brand visuals, such as images, logos, and other elements of visual design has subsequently been extended into a larger framework of corporate communications and all forms of outward-facing behavior in the marketplace (Cornelissen, Haslam, and Balmer 2007; Van Riel and Balmer 1997). In this new theorization, marketing and communication literature incorporates values, beliefs, roles and behavior of corporate brands. For example, it has been investigated to what extent cultural codes symbolically produce meaning (Schroeder and Salzer-Mörling 2006).

Melewar and Saunders (1999) have modeled Corporate Visual Identity Systems (CVIS) that comprise name, slogan, logo type and/or symbol, typography and color of corporations. They show how corporate visual identity projects a company’s quality, prestige and style to stakeholders. In their typology of the seven dimensions of corporate identity, Melewar and Karaosmanoglu (2006) have created a separate category for corporate design.

Kirby and Kent (2010) argue that architectural design creates, augments and communicates corporate identity, while Panigyrakis and Vrouva (2015) state that architecture enhances competitive differentiation, corporate image and identity through uniqueness feelings. Thus, the recent emergence of dazzling flagship stores results from the recognized value of a unique, memorable design (Manlow and Nobbs 2013).

In addition to the micromarketing perspectives discussing architecture as a mediator of corporate heritage, values and identity, the social, historic, and political implications of building practices create meaning in a broader macromarketing scope.

Corporate Architecture in Macromarketing Systems

In this perspective, architecture can be viewed as part of an exchange mechanism, where the presence of corporate buildings involves an economic quid pro quo with other participants of a marketing system, defined as:

“a network of individuals, groups, and/or entities linked directly or indirectly through sequential or shared participation in economic exchange that creates, assembles, transforms, and makes available assortments of products, both tangible and intangible, provided in response to customer demand” (Layton 2007, p. 230).

The success of such marketing exchange can be determined by its impact on the “quality of life of the relevant community” (Layton 2007, p. 227). The qualitative aspect of marketing systems represents a core concern for macromarketing research, aiming to promote a “shift from hyperconsumption to sustainable consumption” (Kilbourne, McDonagh and Prothero 1997). Within broader technological, social, political, and economic frameworks, macromarketing exchange mechanisms potentially create mutual positive value for consumers, brands and society (Mittelstaedt et al. 2014). In this perspective, the ideology of consumption is increasingly aligned with a greater purpose to maximize social, environmental and cultural value. Shifting away from quantitative hyperconsumption, consumers, organizations and society are establishing marketing systems that deliver qualitative outcomes. In the sense of Socratic philosophers’ ‘good life’ (Dixon 2002), the value propositions implemented in the macromarketing world view integrate economic development and social well-being, as the “impact and consequences of marketing systems on society, and the impact and consequences of society on marketing systems” are interrelated (Hunt 1981, p. 7).

Arguably, architectural expression used as a marketing conduit has significant consequences on social interaction, and systemically interlocks with consumer behavior and the development of urban infrastructure. It therefore integrates the core determinants of macromarketing systems as location in time and space, physical environment, infrastructure and communication, as well as cultural context (Layton 2007, p. 238).

Mostly, architectural phenomena are discussed in macromarketing literature as physical infrastructure (markets, main streets, shopping malls, cityscapes), or externalities (environmental impacts, waste, sustainability, etc.) (Layton 2007; Layton and Grossbart 2006, p. 200). However, within “essentially ideological” social systems (Kadirov and Varey 2011, p. 160), it is legitimate to consider architecture as a cultural artifact (Dolan 2002), producing meaning in the global sign economy. The intersection of place, authenticity, local and global consumer cultures opens up marketing paradigms for creative and iconic branding and identity construction. Through architectural messages, the value of exchanges in spatial marketing systems is enhanced when marketing exchanges are instilled with symbolic meaning beyond the physical use value of buildings.

Accordingly, the present inquiry focuses on architecture in its symbolic dimension, as architectural sign systems materialize the cultural heritage of people and places. In culturally constituted systems, organizational settings and societal phenomena produce shared meanings that evolve synchronically with the Zeitgeist. Goldberger (2009, p. 174) notes that “every building exists within a social and cultural context, and receives much of its meaning from it […].” Thus, the interrelatedness of the brand, consumers and society in a spatio-temporal paradigm situates corporate architecture in a larger context. Corporate architecture not only makes a special symbolic statement about brand values at the micro-level, but also connects the brand with societal, spatial, environmental and cultural realities at the macro-level. Consequently, it shapes urban landscapes and provokes systemic change, as identity construction evolves as process and dialogue, where physical substance is transformed into meaningful substance (Heilbrunn 2015).

As a culturally-determined conduit, architecture reflects our economy, culture and society (McGoun 2004, p. 1105). For instance, the capitalistic mode of production has generated an urban environment reflective of prevailing economic conditions and dominant social paradigms. While the Fordist model of production conceived commodified and standardized marketing systems, postmodern consumers seek more than the satisfaction of their material needs and wants. In the Fordist model, space configurations were designed to maximize production output and profit. On the contrary, in postmodern economies, the values of architectural narratives, creative lay-out, aesthetic and ergonomic space design, experiential and multi-sensory décor, environmentally-friendly and sustainable building practices, etc. have become constitutive elements of marketing systems. ‘Starchitects’ like Frank Gehry and Rem Koolhaas have established their world-renowned architectural firms as brands in their own right. Their iconic buildings for Louis Vuitton and Prada respectively are not merely sales venues, but project symbolic brandscapes. Purposely branded architectural realizations mediate brand identity and heritage at the micro-level, while interconnecting with architectural history, global consumer culture and cityscapes at the macro-level.

Ideological transformations in consumer behavior have also renewed interest in local and regional production and distribution systems. Similarly, the decline of the international modern style has favored architectural regionalism and locally oriented building techniques, promoting the “enduring significance of symbols of place and location” (Lash and Urry 1994, p. 284). In postmodern urban systems, architectural production is characterized by stylistic variety and visual storytelling. Corporate buildings have transformed from performance and efficiency-driven functional venues to representational, identity-projecting icons (Klingmann 2007, p. 7).

In a sociological perspective, the conception and realization of corporate buildings is mostly viewed in the Bourdieusian tradition as a circuit of capital conversion. Dominant economic and financial elites transform built form into symbolic capital for legitimization purposes and to accrue prestige and honor (Bourdieu 1994).

In their analysis of the architecture of the Royal Bank of Scotland’s corporate campus, Kerr and Robinson (2016, p. 714) show how architecture converts the bank’s economic power into symbolic capital and reproduces asymmetrical power relations. Dovey (2014) emphasizes Bourdieu’s notion of “complicitous silence” (Bourdieu 1977, p. 188), noting that corporate towers are taken for granted and silently accepted as spatial realizations of corporate domination. Within complex cultural systems, architectural representations receive ideological meaning through the cultural territories, historical perspectives, and societal developments in which they are embedded.

Therefore, architects and architecture assume a pivotal role in constructing meanings, social spaces and organizations, as they articulate both material and interpretive forms (Dale and Burrell 2008, p. 32). Architecture is not limited to providing a neutral container, but represents sense-giving materializations of brandscapes (Klingmann 2007; Berg and Kreiner 1990), including brand features, attributes and lifestyle values. The spatial configurations of corporations visually narrate corporate stories, which are impacted by the “spirit of age and the national character” (Pevsner 1956, p. 16). In view of the multidimensionality of architecture, built form invariably translates the “real nature” of its period (Giedion 1967, p. 19) and proclaims “symbolic and metaphorical messages” (Conway and Roenisch 2005, p. 20).

In the increasingly symbolically coded materiality of contemporary market environments, architecture harbors interpretive cues through self-referentiality and reflexivity of surrounding societal and cultural systems. Architecture connects with the temporal and spatial marketing systems, which have been central to market exchanges and to society since the agora of ancient times (Mittelstaedt, Kilbourne, and Mittelstaedt 2006). Suggesting that “macromarketing is the study of the agora, across cultures and through time and that a theory of macromarketing is, in its truest sense, a theory of the agora” (Mittelstaedt, Kilbourne, and Mittelstaedt 2006, p. 131), spatial phenomena can be considered as central to macromarketing research. A specific location, style of building, formal properties or architectural repertoire hold signifying value in that they refer to macro-level canons of architecture and art history (Kornberger, Kreiner, and Clegg 2011).

Thus, it has largely been recognized in architectural theory that aesthetic cues of buildings translate brand content emotionally and cognitively. The following section will elucidate the symbolic dimension of corporate architecture.

Corporate Architecture as a Symbolic Artifact

Operating on the premise that architecture carries signifying properties and decodable regimes of meaning, architectural design is theorized here as a narrative structure, which symbolically translates brand content. Hattenhauer notes that

“architecture not only communicates, but also communicates rhetorically […]. Architectural items not only tell us their meaning and function, but also influence our behavior. Architecture is rhetorical because it induces us to do what others would have us to do. Architecture, then, is a persuasive phenomenon, and therefore deserves to be studied by rhetorical critics” (Hattenhauer 1984, p. 71).

Contrary to the predominant sensual mode of knowing propounded by aesthetic theory, which opposes intellectual and rational knowledge, architectural narratives are cognitively coded as a discursive form of expression. This process of semanticization transforms the physical dimensions of objects (weight, color, volume, etc.) into meaningful substances, such as values, a symbolic universe, a lifestyle, etc. (Heilbrunn 2015, pp. 6-7).

Yanow (1995) notes that architectural styles tell stories in and of themselves that purposely generate meaning. In the sense of an “expressive system” (Bonta 1979), architectural discourse offers an alternative route to the understanding of socially and culturally produced relations between organizations and their historical and economic environments. In his essay Meaning and Building, Rykwert (1982) emphasizes the symbolic narratives of architecture as related to sociology, anthropology, psychology and advertising.

Architectural expression offers symbolic resources for identification (Norberg-Schulz 1963, 2000). When space is made tangible in concrete, qualitative terms, it symbolically carries meaningful content. Norberg-Schulz notes that “the purpose of symbolization is to free the meaning from the immediate situation, whereby it becomes a ‘cultural object”’ (Norberg-Schulz (1996) [1976], p. 421). Architectural signs form a dialectic sign system, as buildings have a primarily utilitarian function, while, as signifying forms, they convey messages.

The multimodal aspect of architecture both as a functional container and a cultural artifact, situates the production of space within micro and macro level forces (Figure 1).

Figure 1.

The micro-macro dialectic of corporate architecture.

In the following, the discussion will center on bank buildings, as they play a significant role in the reorganization of social spaces and the financial marketing system.

Corporate Architecture in the Finance Sector

Faced with increased digitalization, competition from non-financial entities, online banks and global providers, banks evolve in a rapidly changing market environment. The accelerated dematerialization of money has disrupted the conventional circuits of monetary transactions and marshals ersatz systems of exchange. Financial architecture lends itself particularly well to a macromarketing analysis, as many bank buildings represent landmarks in their environment, and powerfully shape social aesthetics and communities. Moreover, bank buildings provide a historical perspective as banks have used art and architecture since the beginning of banking in the Italian Renaissance to project identity and status. Therefore, the typology of bank buildings analyzed subsequently offers both longitudinal and cross-section views on architectural variations.

From an anthropological viewpoint, money is a political and economic “idea” (Crump 1981, p. 1). Given that money always circulates, it has “generated its own distinctive institutions” to facilitate exchange between people (Crump 1981, p. 1). Today, however, scriptural money, which represents merely an accounting unit, makes up for most of the monetary mass in circulation. The financial sphere is undergoing a twofold transformation. First, the transition from cash money to scriptural money physically affects bank architecture, as the functionalities as “money warehouses” (Frandsen, Hiller, and McGoun 2009, p. 12) have become redundant. Second, architecture increasingly counterbalances intangible digital money insofar as built form conveys a sense of permanence and solidity (Ittelson et al. 1974, p. 358).

Thus, the multimodal nature of buildings entails that they “enter the cultural sphere as real estate, as corporate image, and as architecture” (Martin 2010, p. xvii, emphasis in original). Beyond the fact that bank buildings generate rental assets (Leyshon and Thrift 2007), they symbolically communicate “safety” and “security” (McGoun 2004, p. 1104) and speak to the senses “in a way that the cerebral appeal of pure information cannot” (McGoun 2004, p. 1085). Buildings articulate the ideological self-understanding of financial organizations, and perhaps even the financial system as a whole, as suggested by Davison (2009, 2013, 2014). Within the financial ecosystem, bank buildings are purpose-built objects, but also promote plutocratic iconographies as promotional vehicles:

“created by private capital to serve pragmatic functions for its owners, bank architecture at the same time turns a public face to its community in a vigorous attempt to communicate, persuade, assure, impress, and convince […]. Contemporary attitudes regarding money, respectability, security, and corporate aesthetics are reflected […]. Bank architecture thus communicates the importance of banks as institutions, assuring us of their stability, prosperity, and permanence and inviting us inside to do business” (Nisbet 1990, p. 8).

As a material embodiment of the “phenomenology of capital” (Martin 2010, p. xvii.), architecture enhances the attractiveness of retail banks (Allard et al. 2009; Balmer and Stotvig 1997), while symbolically conferring institutional values upon financial organizations.

The embeddedness of banks in their community and the public space harks back to the founding mission of banks. Built as lending institutions for local farmers in the Renaissance or as capital providers for fast-growing industrial firms in the 19th century, banks are intrinsically linked to the socio-economic environment in which they operate. For example, in France, the principles of Saint-Simon philosophically underpinned the predominant political and economic ideology of industrial capitalism. The collection and reinvestment of savings in burgeoning industrial and financial sectors was believed to advance industrial development, while benefitting the working population. This social vision promoted an economic model for the greater good of society and found its aesthetic counterpart in the stylistic expression of the Beaux-Arts eclecticism. In the mid-19th century, the major department stores in Paris, Galeries Lafayette and Printemps, were built in this style, which featured allegorical figures and classical structural elements.

Beaux-Arts Opulence and the Rise of Financial Capitalism

Banks have largely adopted this lavish decorative and formal repertoire. The headquarters of Crédit Lyonnais, the largest bank in the world in 1900, architecturally emulate the Grands Magasins and were erected nearby in the fashionable historic district of the Opéra. The architecture of the main building of Crédit Lyonnais on the Boulevard des Italiens (Figure 2) illustrates how architectural representation links the bank with its broader urban and cultural environment, as architectonic features are modeled after the central pavilion of the Louvre museum (Figure 3).

Figure 2.

LCL bank, Paris. Photograph by author.

Figure 3.

Louvre Museum, Paris. Photograph by author.

The typical Haussmannian stone cladding perfectly aligns with the surrounding urban space. The building is formally structured in ancient Greek and Roman style, while the interior features some of the most advanced techniques of 19th-century iron and glass industrial architecture. In its classicizing structure of the frontispiece with columns, arches and pediment, the bank refers to a secular model of architecture (de Portzamparc 2006, p. 42), signifying tradition, stability and the prosperity of public institutions. This meta-narrative architectural discourse conveys authentically national cultural preferences of taste, equilibrium and harmony (Pinchon 1992, p. 66).

Postmodern Hubris: Towering Metaphors of Power

Contrary to the 19th-century brick-and-mortar buildings, modern high-rises represent a new era in financial architecture. Harvey (1982, 1985) criticizes the speculative extraction of value from ground, based on “a flow of money capital not backed by any commodity transaction” (Harvey 1982, p. 265). Concomitant with the financial crisis of 2008, iconic skyscrapers were achieved for Société Générale in Paris (Figure 4) and Bank of America in Midtown Manhattan (Figure 5).

Figure 4.

Société Générale, Paris-La Défense. Photograph by author.

Figure 5.

Bank of America Tower, New York. Photograph by author.

Despite the contrasting topographic settings, the interrelation of architecture with capital and engineered materiality are common characteristics of the banks. The erection of monumental glass and steel skyscrapers not only results from technological advancements, but also mirrors the growing immateriality of international capital flows. Jameson (1998, p. 164) suggests that we “elaborate a series of mediations between the economic and the aesthetic”, as they intersect at various levels. For instance, the technological mutations of global monetary circuits find their aesthetic equivalent in the dematerialization of apparent mass, density, and weight of stone buildings. The curtain wall epitomizes the abstraction of the financial marketplace and the “de-centered global network of the third stage of capital” (Jameson 1991, p. 37). It reflects the disembodiment of architectural meta-narratives into computer-designed abstract form, devoid of discursive signifiers. This does that not imply, however, that these towers do not communicate. Stripped off their historical materialism, they project aesthetic systems outside of history, as manifestations of techno-economic progress and social and financial power:

“an architecture of mirrors does not merely reflect […] the protocols of new socioeconomic arrangements. It helps to produce those arrangements, in space and in time. Architecture therefore does not (or does not only) represent or ‘mirror’ late capitalism as its equivalent. It belongs to late capitalism” (Martin 2010, p. 106).

Beyond the aesthetic properties of buildings, the location within the urban context holds signifying content. Within the urban development of Paris, the axis from the city center to the western suburbs structures the extension from the historic quarters to the business district of La Défense. Architecturally, the tower at Société Générale disrupts the historiographic continuity of pre-existing postmodern buildings. The dihedral structure with prism-shaped flanks discards the populist narratives of postmodernism. It suppresses the postmodern space-time paradigm by subsuming all prior, contemporary and future architectural expressions under its elegantly designed abstract form. This “spatialization of the temporal” (Jameson 1991, p. 155) displaces and compresses time into atemporal geometry, thus formulating a universalist claim. Architect Christian de Portzamparc was intent to create a socially and chronologically inclusive space, where urban macro-environments are rationalized into technological building processes:

“I always consider a building as a part of the whole, a piece which creates a collective performance, which is the city […]. My view was to embrace the richness of the city as a phenomenon which contains the past (in many different epochs), the present, and the changes for the future” (de Portzamparc 1994).

In fact, the tower is located at the head of La Défense skyline, and thus symbolically positions the bank as a leading financial organization of the 21st century. In addition, the location coincides with the current urban and economic development of the Grand Paris. It is therefore legitimate to state that the absence of architectural historiography does not necessarily entail meaninglessness. Contemporary buildings generate meaning not through stylistic repertoires, but their status within the community, their impact on urban space and infrastructure, and their commitment to ecological ethics.

If Société Générale adopts a host of environmentally-friendly features, Bank of America uses its environmental stewardship as a strategic brand differentiator. When the bank was looking for a new location for its New York City headquarters, an iconic building was envisioned not only to mark the bank’s presence in the city and the financial industry, but also to continue to recruit and retain world-class talent. In view of the increased social awareness for ecological values, the headquarters should primarily reflect and embody the bank’s commitment to sustainable development (Mueller-Lust 2008, p. 38). The second-generation green skyscraper is largely made of recycled and recyclable materials. Architects Cook+Fox equipped the building with cutting-edge technological resources to make it the leading ecological high-rise building in the world. For instance, renewable energy is generated from the sun, rain, wind, earth, and bio waste from the cafeteria. Floor-to-ceiling insulated glazing contains heat and maximizes natural light. A greywater system captures rainwater for reuse. Air entering the building is filtered, as is common, but the air exhausted is cleaned as well. An underfloor air system provides users with the ability to control the space temperature and ventilation. The Bank of America Tower is the first skyscraper to obtain a Platinum Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design (LEED) Certification.

The main architectural principles were derived from the concept of ‘biophilia’, a term coined by biologist Edward O. Wilson. Biophilia implies that there exists an instinctive bond between human beings and other living systems and that humans feel good when connected to nature. When integrating these building practices, the architects considered that shape was not an arbitrary form, but a material mediator through which the building is experienced. Thus, in order to connect people with nature, the tower was designed as a daylight-infused workplace, offering the most transparent connection possible between indoor and outdoor environments.

Ecological imperatives are changing the functionalist rationality of architecture to conform to the ethical and sustainable demands of contemporary lifestyle. The understanding of humans and architecture as historical and biological beings transforms aesthetic design priorities into a “new understanding of goals and processes, aesthetics and performance, form and function, rationality and beauty, artistic objectives and ethics, and, finally, of ourselves” (Pallasmaa 2017, p. 62).

In this sense, Bank of America engages with ecological, but also social and infrastructural macromarketing systems. For example, the quality of life was impacted by the establishment of a publicly accessible urban garden in the lobby. Access to public transportation was also upgraded by the construction of a new subway station. The bank’s renovation of the adjacent Miller Theater has further contributed to the enhancement of quality of life for the community.

From an aesthetic point of view, the building features a stunning prismatic verticality and crystal design patterns with crisp folds that appear to be sculpted. These crystalline forms replicate forms found in nature and symbolically translate thriving for a clear and ideal vision. Moreover, they carry iconic content in that they are inspired by architectural and art history. Notably, the basic form of the building takes up the plan of the New York Crystal Palace, designed by Karl Gildemeister (1820-1869), and formerly located across the street from Bank of America on Reservoir Square (today’s Bryant Park). The building also reiterates design patterns from Lyonel Feininger’s painting Manhattan II (1940), which represents the typical New York skyscraper tradition.

The verticality of skyscrapers in itself can be considered as an expressive system. Following Bachelard (1947, p. 18), “all valorization is verticalization”, as the vertical form of skyscrapers metaphorically bears virtues and values. The higher the value, the nearer the position to the top, and vice versa (Van Leeuwen 1988, p. 99). Thus, corporate skyscrapers could be interpreted as expressions of social dominance and hubris, self-reliance and superiority, in analogy with anthropomorphic upright positions (Van Leeuwen 1988, p. 101).

Some architectural theorists argue that the accumulation of finance capital, socio-technological progress, and computerized design methods have emptied out architecture from human meaning and empathy: “Parallelopipeds of glass and synthetic materials, the inhuman dandy-purism of the big cities, has led irrevocably to a fashionable architecture, which is a dead end” (Aalto (1985) [1958], p. 161).

To reconnect with shared and lived social ground and the continuum of tradition, local and regional forms of architecture offer alternative building types to establish an idiosyncratic brand identity.

Regional and localized iconographies

Starkly contrasting with the prevailing model of universalized high-rise bank buildings in the global economy, some architectural practices seek to preserve and revitalize local cultures. (Figure 6).

Figure 6.

Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena, Siena. Photograph by author.

Resisting the technoscientific myth of accelerated progress, computer-aided design and the growing de-materialization of the cultural territory, regional architecture conflates materiality with locality. Thus, a bank in Italy promotes its site-specific headquarters whose Gothic architecture is evocative of cultural geography, folklore, and regional history. Within the scale of the region, resources of artistic, historical, and political organization are available macro references. They relate the brand to human life, theories of individual and cultural identity, authenticity, meaning, and the structure and governance of society (Canizaro 2007, p. 18). The Monte dei Paschi di Siena bank, founded in 1492, is the world’s oldest bank and projects its plurisecular existence through the architectural aesthetics of its founding period. This style perfectly aligns with the prevalent building practices of Siena and articulates cultural values such as tradition, longevity and social commitment, as the bank’s founding mission consisted in providing credit to local farmers.

Contrary to the universalizing International Style of modernism and architectural mass production, regionalism postulates an architectural model, which perpetuates the tradition and culture of regional heritage. Rather than deterritorialized universalist high-rise buildings, regional aesthetics formulate a place-based architectural idiolect. Against the possibly dehumanizing qualities of technological architecture, regionalism values the local milieu and building traditions as reflections of specific geographic and cultural conditions. Taking into account pre-existing local and regional characteristics signifies resistance to standardized forms, a concern for authenticity, and the fostering of connectedness among people of the specific culture, history, identity, and ecology of their region (Canizaro 2007). It further represents an antithesis to the generalized glass and steel structures of the global financial capitalism and is therefore particularly apt at conveying a more human side of finance. In this sense, Moore argues that “[s]uch a place is a memorial to the forgotten or as yet untried modes of non-capitalist production” (Moore 2010, p. 381).

When organizations opt for this architectural typology, they communicate a value proposition rooted in an authentic human experience of the historicity and reality of a specific culture. The integrity and meaning of the local setting promote social exchange and usually enhance the quality of the environment, following Pallasmaa’s claim that “the task of architecture is to slowly and patiently improve the inherited human habitat” (Pallasmaa 2017, p. 62).

Vernacular architecture establishes a relationship of trust between brands and stakeholders, through cultural continuity of the past, present and future. As a locus for historical references, it legitimizes the “instant acquisition of the values of family, tradition and social status” (McLeod 2000, p. 687). Anti-urban, anti-metropolitan regional artifacts offer a broad array of macro level social implications, as collective memory is materialized in the sense of a “lieu de mémoire” (Nora 1997). In the perspective of a declining ideology of consumerism (Schultz and Kitchen 2000), locally recognizable architectural styles build social and human value, engage brands with their communities, preserve the environment and create a sense of temporal continuum.

Implications for Marketing Practice and Research

The present study has shown that, beyond its functional value, architecture holds symbolic sign value. It provides micro-level branding and identity resources, while integrating macro-level cultural and social dimensions. Whether a bank is located in a traditional stone building, a contemporary high-rise building or a regional venue, built materiality conveys discernible brand values to stakeholders. Corporate architecture is usually not part of a marketer’s tool kit, but could be included in the marketing mix as a non-traditional form of a marketing practice. The strategic use of architecture could provide innovative identity-building potential to establish trust, build long-lasting stakeholder relationships, deliver social value for the community and preserve cultural and environmental heritage. A host of related marketing initiatives could supplement the use of architecture as a marketing instrument. For instance, employee volunteer programs to protect the environment, philanthropic initiatives in the cultural sector, or the engagement in the restoration of architectural heritage.

Concerning implications for research, corporate architecture remains a widely under-researched field in marketing literature. It is hoped that this article will inspire scholars to pursue further avenues of research on the aesthetic, social, economic, environmental and cultural impacts of corporate building practices. For example, an intercultural study could examine local architectural preferences and elaborate on the dichotomy between globalized and regionalized architectural practices. Or else, an interdisciplinary approach incorporating urban studies could further elucidate the dialectic between corporations and their urban context in terms of public policies, building regulations, etc. An inquiry into the relationship between built and natural environments would equally be relevant for the analysis of the relationship between culture and nature in integrated spatial marketing systems. Future research could conceptualize specific typologies of buildings (commercial, residential, corporate, public, etc.), environments (megacities, rural areas, small towns, etc.), building purposes (leisure, sports facilities, cultural venues, etc.) to discuss social and environmental implications.

Empirical studies could analyze consumer attitudes and prevailing beliefs with regard to corporate architecture and research to what extent and in what way architecture impacts on consumer behavior. Future investigation could also perform longitudinal studies to correlate a brand’s historic and economic development with the evolution of its architectural expression.

Discussion and Conclusion

Underpinning the purpose of the article was the fact that, within innovative marketing systems, architecture has become a spatial and symbolic nexus, where micro and macro forces interact. While corporate architecture remains mainly conceptualized within the boundaries of brand aesthetics or formal Corporate Visual Identity Systems (CVIS) at the micro and meso levels, the article sought to integrate a broader macromarketing perspective.

Macromarketing research demonstrates that the perceived quality of life is moderated by cultural beliefs, based on the dominant social paradigm, and that meaning is constructed in marketplaces (Kadirov and Varey 2011; Kilbourne, McDonagh and Prothero 1997). The analysis shows that corporate architecture should avert functional commodification by crystallizing meaning through value-based exchanges and artistic inspiration. A culture-driven practice is not antagonistic to commercial interests, but, on the contrary, adds value to marketing systems by producing aestheticized environments (Bradshaw, McDonagh, and Marshall 2006; Schroeder 2005; Guillet de Monthoux 2004).

In this article, the symbolic power of buildings was therefore connected to a broader world view, encompassing social, cultural and historic dimensions. Value-laden marketing systems create inclusive spaces that connect places, buildings and people as an alternative to the meaningless and social fragmentation of mass-consumption and the pervasive standardization of sales outlets. Thus, the activity of designing new spatial marketing systems through iconic architecture contributes to the cultural transformation of brands into icons (Holt 2004).

Architecture produces new mutations in environmental, social and cultural macro-level systems. In reference to the research questions concerning value-added market exchanges and the interaction of buildings with the macromarketing forces of the urban context, the findings clearly indicate the dialectic of architecture as buildings not only represent functional containers, but complex symbolic networks derived from aesthetic, spatial, ecological and social systems at the macro-level (Figure 7).

Figure 7.

The impact of corporate architecture on macro-level systems.

Representative examples of bank buildings have illustrated how aesthetic components emblematize brand attitudes at the micro-level in connection with interpretive macro-level cues derived from specific cultural and temporal contexts. For example, the Beaux-Arts iconography of 19th-century bank architecture is embedded in the wider network of the Industrial Era, where glass and steel as building materials symbolize technical and social progress. Structural and formal analogies with the lavish department stores of the Belle Epoque translate a shared spirit of positivism and can be viewed as landmarks to the emerging modern capitalist economy.

The analysis has shown that through their culturally-embedded presence, buildings carry figurative messages that receive their meaning beyond commercial exchanges and buyer-seller relationships. A constructive engagement of marketing systems with society is achieved through the symbolic unfolding of architecture within existing marketing systems (Kadirov and Varey 2012).

Hence, the article complements the discussion on symbolism in marketing systems initiated by Kadirov and Varey (2012) by extending it into the realm of spatial marketing systems. Referring to Giddens (1991), Kadirov and Varey (2012) observe that all forms of symbolisms are circular and oscillate between problem solution and generation. Symbolic architectural expression constitutes an adaptive process toward the optimization of space configurations in varying global sign systems. For instance, sustainable building materials project ecologically responsible brand values to stakeholders as they mitigate the potentially detrimental environmental impacts of construction practices. Stylistic properties of buildings refer to cultural paradigms and architectural ‘canons’ through continuity or disruption and therefore also formulate a dynamic message. The very location of a building provides interpretive cues as to the social and cultural reach of the brand and the populations it seeks to address.

To create desirable and relevant marketing systems in changing environments, definitions of form and style were radically transformed from modernist universalism, functionalism, and rationalism to postmodern fluid design, mixed styles, and local variations (Venkatesh 1999). The production of buildings as symbolic mediators reflects the mostly hedonistic and communicative priorities of postmodern consumption processes (Schaefer and Crane 2005). In emerging innovative marketing systems, value is added to marketing exchanges when aesthetic form converges with ethical, social and ecological imperatives. In the rapidly evolving and dynamic marketplace, architectural narratives represent new opportunities for organizations to project a value-laden, meaningful brand identity that positively connects organizations with society at large.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References

Allard

Thomas

Babin

Barry

Chebat

Jean-Charles

Crispo

Martine

(2009), “Reinventing the Branch: An Empirical Assessment of Banking Strategies to Environmental Differentiation,” Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 16 (6), 442–50.

Aalto

Alvar

((1985) [1958]), “Instead of an Article”, in Alvar Aalto, Schildt

, ed. Cambridge, MA: Sketches, 161–2.

Askegaard

Søren

Kjeldgaard

Dannie

(2007), “Here, There, and Everywhere: Place Branding and Gastronomical Globalization in a Macromarketing Perspective,” Journal of Macromarketing, 27 (2), 138–47.

Babin

Barry J.

Attaway

Jill S.

(2000), “Atmospheric Affect as a Tool for Creating Value and Gaining Share of Customer,” Journal of Business Research, 49 (2), 91–99.

Bachelard

Gaston

(1947), L’air et les songes. Paris, France: J. Corti.

Baker

Julie

(1986) “The Role of the Environment in Marketing Services: The Consumer Perspective,” The Services Challenge: Integrating for Competitive Advantage, 1 (1), 79–84.

Baker

Julie

Grewal

Dhruv

Parasuraman

Ananthanarayanan

(1994), “The Influence of Store Environment on Quality Inferences and Store Image,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 22 (4), 328–39.

Balmer

John M. T.

(2013), “Corporate Heritage, Corporate Heritage Marketing, and Total Corporate Heritage Communications: What are They? What of Them?,” Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 18 (3), 290–326.

Balmer

John M. T.

(2012), “Strategic Corporate Brand Alignment: Perspectives from Identity Based Views of Corporate Brands,” European Journal of Marketing, 46 (7), 1064–92.

10.

Balmer

John M. T.

(2008), “Identity Based Views of the Corporation: Insights from Corporate Identity, Organisational Identity, Social Identity, Visual Identity, Corporate Brand Identity and Corporate Image,” European Journal of Marketing, 42 (9/10), 879–906.

11.

Balmer

John M. T.

Gray

Edmund R.

(2003), “Corporate Brands: What Are They? What of Them?,” European Journal of Marketing, 37 (7/8), 972–97.

12.

Balmer

John M. T.

Stotvig

Snorre

(1997), “Corporate Identity and Private Banking: A Review and Case Study,” International Journal of Bank Marketing, 15 (5), 169–84.

13.

Bargenda

Angela

(2015a), “Space Design as an Expressive Device in Ambient Marketing,” Journal of Marketing Communications, 21 (1), 78–90.

14.

Bargenda

Angela

(2015b), “Corporate Heritage Brands in the Financial Sector: The Role of Corporate Architecture,” Journal of Brand Management, 22 (5), 431–47.

15.

Bargenda

Angela

(2014), Communication visuelle dans le secteur bancaire européen. L’Esthétique de la Finance. Paris, France: L’Harmattan.

16.

Bargenda

Angela

(2013), “Corporate Architecture as a Branding Tool,” in Managing Corporate Communication: A Cross-Cultural Approach, Gambetti

Quigley

, eds. London, UK: Pelgrave Macmillan, 337–57.

17.

Belk

Russell W.

Ger

Güliz

Askegaard

Søren

(2003), “The Fire of Desire: A Multisited Inquiry into Consumer Passion,” Journal of Consumer Research, 30 (3), 326–51.

18.

Berg

Per Olof

Kreiner

Kristian

(1990), “Corporate Architecture. Turning Physical Settings into Symbolic Resources,” in Symbols and Artifacts, Gagliardi

, ed. New York: de Gruyter, 41–67.

19.

Berlyne

Daniel E.

(1971), Aesthetics and Psychobiology. New York, NY: Appleton-Century-Crofts.

20.

Biehl-Missal

Brigitte

(2013a), “Art, Fashion, and Anti-Consumption,” Journal of Macromarketing, 33 (3), 245–57.

21.

Biehl-Missal

Brigitte

(2013b), “The Atmosphere of the Image: An Aesthetic Concept for Visual Analysis,” Consumption Markets and Culture, 16 (4), 356–67.

22.

Biehl-Missal

Brigitte

(2011), Wirtschaftsästhetik. Wie Unternehmen die Kunst als Inspiration und Werkzeug nutzen. Wiesbaden, Germany: Gabler.

23.

Biehl-Missal

Brigitte

Saren

Michael

(2012), “Atmospheres of Seduction: A Critique of Aesthetic Marketing Practices,” Journal of Macromarketing, 32 (2), 168–80.

24.

Bitner

Mary Jo

(1992), “Servicescape: The Impact of Physical Surroundings on Customers and Employees,” Journal of Marketing, 56 (2), 57–71.

25.

Bitner

Mary Jo

Zeithaml

Valarie A.

(2003), Services Marketing: Integrating Customers Focus Across the Firm. New York: McGraw Hill.

26.

Böhme

Gernot

(2017), The Aesthetics of Atmospheres. New York: Routledge.

27.

Böhme

Gernot

((2013) [2006]), Architektur und Atmosphäre. Munich, Germany: Wilhelm Fink.

28.

Böhme

Gernot

(2003), “Contribution to the Critique of the Aesthetic Economy,” Thesis Eleven, 73 (1), 71–82.

29.

Böhme

Gernot

(1995), Atmosphäre. Essays zur neuen Ästhetik. Frankfurt, Germany: Suhrkamp.

30.

Böhme

Gernot

(1993), “Atmosphere as the Fundamental Concept of a New Aesthetics,” Thesis Eleven, 36 (1), 113–26.

31.

Bonta

Juan

(1979), Expressive Systems in Architecture and Design. London, UK: Lund Humphries.

32.

Booms

Bernard H.

Bitner

Mary Jo

(1981), “Marketing Strategies and Organisation Structures for Service Firms,” in Marketing of Services, Donnelly

George

W. R.

, eds. Chicago, IL: American Marketing Association, 51–67.

33.

Bourdieu

Pierre

(1994), “Rethinking the State: Genesis of Structure of the Bureaucratic Field,” Sociological Theory, 12 (1), 1–18.

34.

Bourdieu

Pierre

(1977), Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

35.

Bradshaw

Alan

McDonagh

Pierre

Marshall

David

(2006), “The Alienated Artist and the Political Economy of Organised Art,” Consumption, Markets & Culture, 9 (2), 111–17.

36.

Bradshaw

Alan

McDonagh

Pierre

Marshall

David

(2005), “Response to ‘Art versus Commerce’ as a Macromarketing Theme,” Journal of Macromarketing, 26 (1), 81–83.

37.

Canizaro

Vincent B.

(2007), Architectural Regionalism: Collected Writings on Place, Identity, Modernity, and Tradition. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Architectural Press.

38.

Conway

Hazel

Roenisch

Rowan

(2005), Understanding Architecture: An Introduction to Architecture and Architectural History. Hove, UK: Psychology Press.

39.

Cornelissen

Joep P.

Alexander Haslam

Balmer

John M. T.

(2007), “Social Identity, Organizational Identity and Corporate Identity: Towards an Integrated Understanding of Processes, Patternings and Products,” British Journal of Management, 18 (s1), S1–16.

40.

Crump

Thomas

(1981), The Phenomenon of Money. London, UK: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

41.

D’Rozario

Denver

Williams

Jerome D.

(2005), “Retail Redlining: Definition, Theory, Typology and Measurement,” Journal of Macromarketing, 25 (2), 175–86.

42.

Dale

Karen

Burrell

Gibson

(2008), The Spaces of Organization and the Organisation of Space: Power, Identity and Materiality at Work. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

43.

Davison

Jane

(2014), “Visual Rhetoric and the Case of Intellectual Capital,” Accounting, Organizations and Society, 39 (1), 20–37.

44.

Davison

Jane

(2013), “The Visual Organization: Barthesian Perspectives,” in The Routledge Companion to Visual Organization, Bell

Warren

Schroeder

J. E.

, eds. London, UK: Routledge, 33–44.

45.

Davison

Jane

(2009), “Icon, Iconography, Iconology: Visual Branding, Banking and the Case of the Bowler Hat,” Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 22 (6), 883–906.

46.

De Portzamparc

Christian

(2006), Architecture: Figures du monde, figures du temps. Paris, France: Collège de France/Fayard.

47.

De Portzamparc

Christian

(1994), Acceptance Speech for the Pritzker Prize. Columbus, IN: Ceremony at the Commons.

48.

Dixon

Donald F.

(2002), “Emerging Macromarketing Concepts: From Socrates to Alfred Marshall,” Journal of Business Research, 55 (9), 737–45.

49.

Dolan

Paddy

(2002), “The Sustainability of “Sustainable Consumption,” Journal of Macromarketing, 22 (2), 170–81.

50.

Donovan

Robert J.

Rossiter

John R.

Gilian

Marcoolyn

. (1994), “Store Atmosphere and Purchasing Behavior,” Journal of Retailing, 70 (3), 283–94.

51.

Dovey

Kim

(2014), Framing Places: Mediating Power in Built Form. London, UK: Routledge.

52.

Fiore

Ann Marie

Kim

Jihyun

(2007), “An Integrative Framework Capturing Experiential and Utilitarian Shopping Experience,” International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, 35 (6), 421–42.

53.

Fisk

George

(2006), “Envisioning a Future for Macromarketing,” Journal of Macromarketing, 26 (2), 214–18.

54.

Frandsen

Ann-Christine

Hiller

Tammy B.

McGoun

Elton G.

(2009), “Money Reloaded: The Architecture of Trust,” (accessed February 7, 2017), [available at http://mngt.waikato.ac.nz/ejrot/cmsconference/2009/Stream2/Money%20Reloaded%20-%20The%20Architecture%20of%20Trust.pdf.]

55.

Giddens

Anthony

(1991), Modernity and Self-Identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern Age. Cambridge, MA: Polity.

56.

Giedion

Siegfried

(1967), Space, Time and Architecture: The Growth of a New Tradition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

57.

Gilboa

Shaked

Rafaeli

Anat

(2003), “Store Environment, Emotions and Approach Behaviour: Applying Environmental Aesthetics to Retailing,” International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, 13 (2), 195–211.

58.

Goldberger

Paul

(2009), Why Architecture Matters. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

59.

Guillet de Monthoux

Pierre

(2004), The Art Firm: Aesthetic Management and Metaphysical Marketing. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.

60.

Harvey

David

(1985), The Urbanization of Capital: Studies in the History and Theory of Capitalist Urbanization. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

61.

Harvey

David

(1982), The Limits to Capital. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

62.

Hattenhauer

Darryl

(1984), “The Rhetoric of Architecture: A Semiotic Approach,” Communication Quarterly, 32 (1), 71–77.

63.

Heide

Morten

Lærdal

Kirsti

Grønhaug

Kjell

(2009), “Atmosphere as a Tool for Enhancing Organizational Performance: An Exploratory Study from the Hospitality Industry,” European Journal of Marketing, 43 (3/4), 305–19.

64.

Heilbrunn

Benoît

(2015), Market Mediations: Semiotic Investigations on Consumers, Objects and Brands. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

65.

Hillebrand

Bas

Driessen

Paul H.

Koll

Oliver

(2015), “Stakeholder Marketing: Theoretical Foundations and Required Capabilities,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43 (4), 411–28.

66.

Holbrook

Morris B.

(2005), “Art versus Commerce as a Macromarketing Theme in three Films from the Young-Man-with-a-Horn Genre,” Journal of Macromarketing, 25 (1), 22–31.

67.

Holt

Douglas B.

(2004), How Brands Become Icons: The Principles of Cultural Branding. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press.

68.

Hunt

Shelby D.

(1981), “Macromarketing as a Multidimensional Concept,” Journal of Macromarketing, 1 (1), 7–8.

69.

Ingene

Charles A.

(1983), “Consumer Expenditures and Consumer Satisfaction with the Spatial Marketing System,” Journal of Macromarketing, 3 (2), 41–54.

70.

Ittelson

William H.

Proshansky

Harold M.

Rivlin

Leanne G.

. (1974), An Introduction to Environmental Psychology. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

71.

Jameson

Fredric

(1998), “The Brick and the Balloon: Architecture, Idealism and Land Speculation,” in The Cultural Turn: Selected Writings on the Postmodern, 1983-1998, Jameson

, ed. London, UK: Verso, 162–90.

72.

Jameson

Fredric

(1991), Postmodernism, Or the Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

73.

Joy

Annamma

Sherry

John F.

Jr . (2003), “Speaking of Art as Embodied Imagination: A Multisensory Approach to Understanding Aesthetic Experience,” Journal of Consumer Research, 30 (2), 259–82.

74.

Kadirov

Djavlonbek

Varey

Richard J.

(2011), “Symbolism in Marketing Systems,” Journal of Macromarketing, 31 (2), 160–71.

75.

Kearney

Treasa

Kennedy

Aileen

Coughlan

Joseph

(2007), “Servicescapes: A Review of Contemporary Empirical Research,” in Sixteenth Annual Frontiers in Service Conference in San Francisco, CA. https://arrow.dit.ie/buschmarcon/4/

76.

Kent

Tony

(2007), “Creative Space: Design and the Retail Environment,” International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, 35 (9), 734–45.

77.

Kerr

Ron

Robinson

Sarah

(2016), “Architecture, Symbolic Capital and Elite Mobilisations: The Case of the Royal Bank of Scotland Corporate Campus,” Organization, 23 (5), 699–721.

78.

Kilbourne

William

McDonagh

Pierre

Prothero

Andrea

(1997), “Sustainable Consumption and the Quality of Life: A Macromarketing Challenge to the Dominant Social Paradigm,” Journal of Macromarketing, 17 (1), 4–24.

79.

Kirby

A. E.

Kent

Antony M.

(2010), “Architecture as Brand: Store Design and Brand Identity,” Journal of Product and Brand Management, 19 (6), 432–39.

80.

Klingmann

Anna

(2007), Brandscapes: Architecture in the Experience Economy. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

81.

Kornberger

Martin

Kreiner

Kristian

Clegg

Stewart

(2011), “The Value of Style in Architectural Practice,” Culture and Organisation, 17 (2), 139–53.

82.

Kotler

Philip

(1973), “Atmospherics as a Marketing Tool,” Journal of Retailing, 49 (4), 48–64.

83.

Lash

Scott M.

Urry

John

(1994), Economies of Signs and Space. London, UK: Sage.

84.

Layton

Roger A.

(2008), “The Search for a Dominant Logic: A Macromarketing Perspective,” Journal of Macromarketing, 28 (3), 215–27.

85.

Layton

Roger A.

(2007), “Marketing Systems - A Core Macromarketing Concept,” Journal of Macromarketing, 27 (3), 227–42.

86.

Layton

Roger A.

Grossbart

Sanford

(2006), “Macromarketing: Past, Present and Possible Futures,” Journal of Macromarketing, 26 (2), 193–213.

87.

Leyshon

Andrew

Thrift

Nigel

(2007), “The Capitalization of Almost Everything: The Future of Finance and Capitalism,” Theory, Culture and Society, 24 (7-8), 97–115.

88.

Linstead

Stephen

Höpfl

Heather J.

(2000), “Introduction,” in The Aesthetics of Organization, Linstead

Höpfl

, eds. London, UK: Sage, 1–11.

89.

Maffesoli

Michel

(1996), The Time of the Tribes: The Decline of Individualism in Mass Society. Transl. Smith

. London, UK: Sage.

90.

Manlow

Veronica

Nobbs

Karinna

(2013), “Form and Function of Luxury Flagships: An International Exploratory Study of the Meaning of the Flagship Store for Managers and Customers,” Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal, 17 (1), 49–64.

91.

Mari

Michela

Poggesi

Sara

(2013), “Servicescape Cues and Customer Behaviour: A Systematic Literature Review and Research Agenda,” The Service Industries Journal, 33 (2), 171–99.

92.

Markin

Rom J.

Duncan

Calvin P.

(1981), “The Transformation of Retailing Institutions: Beyond the Wheel of Retailing and Life Cycle Theories,” Journal of Macromarketing, 1 (1), 58–66.

93.

Martin

Reinhold

(2010), Utopia’s Ghost. Architecture and Postmodernism, Again. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

94.

McGoun

Elton G.

(2004), “Form, Function, and Finance: Architecture and Finance Theory,” Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 15 (8), 1085–107.

95.

McLeod

Mary

(2000), “Architecture and Politics in the Reagan Era: From Postmodernism to Deconstructivism,” in Architecture Theory Since 1968, Hays

M. K.

, ed. New York: Columbia Books of Architecture, 678–702.

96.

Melewar

Tengku C.

Karaosmanoglu

Elif

(2006), “Seven Dimensions of Corporate Identity: A Categorisation from the Practitioner’s Perspectives,” European Journal of Marketing, 40 (7/8), 846–69.

97.

Melewar

Tengku C.

Saunders

John

(2000), “Global Corporate Visual Identity Systems: Using an Extended Marketing Mix,” European Journal of Marketing, 34 (5/6), 538–50.

98.

Melewar

Tengku C.

Saunders

John

(1999), “International Corporate Visual Identity: Standardization or Localization?,” Journal of International Business Studies, 30 (3), 583–98.

99.

Mittelstaedt

John D.

Shultz

Clifford J.

Kilbourne

William E.

Peterson

Mark

(2014), “Sustainability as Megatrend: Two Schools of Macromarketing Thought,” Journal of Macromarketing, 34 (3), 253–64.

100.

Mittelstaedt

John D.

Kilbourne

William E.

Mittelstaedt

Robert A.

(2006), “Macromarketing as Agorology: Macromarketing Theory and the Study of the Agora,” Journal of Macromarketing, 26 (2), 131–42.

101.

Moore

Steven A.

(2010), “Technology, Place, and Nonmodern Regionalism,” in Constructing a New Agenda. Architectural Theory 1993-2009, Sykes

K. A.

, ed. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Architectural Press, 365–84.

102.

Mueller-Lust

Andrew

(2008), “Crystal Clear,” Civil Engineering, 78 (12), 38–71.

103.

Nason

Robert W.

(2006), “The Macromarketing Mosaic,” Journal of Macromarketing, 26 (2), 219–23.

104.

Nisbet

Robert

(1990), “Men and Money: Reflections by a Sociologist,” in Money Matters: A Critical Look at Bank Architecture, Gill

, ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 7–13.

105.

Nora

Pierre

(1997), Les lieux de mémoire. Paris, France: Editions Gallimard.

106.

Norberg-Schulz

Christian

(2000), Principles of Modern Architecture. London, UK: Andreas Papadakis.

107.

Norberg-Schulz

Christian

((1996) [1976]), “The Phenomenon of Place,” in Theorizing a New Agenda for Architecture: An Anthology of Architectural Theory, Nesbitt

, ed. New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 412–28.

108.

Norberg-Schulz

Christian

(1963). Intentions in Architecture. Oslo, Norway: Universitetsforlaget.

109.

Oldenburg

Ray

(2001), Celebrating the Third Place. New York: Marlowe & Company.

110.

Orth

Ulrich R.

Wirtz

Jochen

(2014), “Consumer Processing of Interior Service Environments: The Interplay among Visual Complexity, Processing Fluency, and Attractiveness,” Journal of Service Research, 17 (3), 296–309.

111.

Orth

Ulrich R.

Heinrich

Frauke

Malkewitz

Keven

(2012), “Servicescape Interior Design and Consumers’ Personality Impressions,” Journal of Services Marketing, 26 (3), 194–203.

112.

Pallasmaa

Juhani

(2017), “Architecture and Biophilic Ethics,” Cloud-Cuckoo-Land, 22 (36), 59–69.

113.

Panigyrakis

George

Vrouva

Antigone

(2015), “Impression Communication through Architecture: A Framework for Architecture as a Process of Marketing Communications,” International Conference on Corporate and Marketing Communications, 2–18.

114.

Peterson

Mark

(2006), “Focusing the Future of Macromarketing,” Journal of Macromarketing, 26 (2), 245–49.

115.

Pevsner

Nikolaus

(1956), The Englishness of English Art. London, UK: Architectural Press.

116.

Pinchon

Jean-François

(1992), Les palais d’argent. Paris, France: Edition de la Réunion des Musées Nationaux.

117.

Pine

P. Joseph

Gilmore

James H.

(1999), The Experience Economy. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

118.

Reimer

Anja

Kuehn

Richard

(2004), “The Impact of Servicescape on Quality Perception,” European Journal of Marketing, 39 (7/8), 785–808.

119.

Rykwert

Joseph

(1982), The Necessity of Artifice. London: Academy Editions, 9–16.

120.

Schaefer

Anja

Crane

Andrew

(2005), “Addressing Sustainability and Consumption,” Journal of Macromarketing, 25 (1), 76–92.

121.

Schmitt

Bernd

Simonson

Alex

(1997), Marketing Aesthetics: The Strategic Identity of Brands, Identity and Image. New York: Free Press.

122.

Schroeder

Jonathan E.

((2010) [2007]), “Visual Analysis of Images in Brand Culture,” in Go Figure! New Directions in Advertising Rhetoric, Phillips

B. J.

McQuarrie

, eds. New Delhi: Reference Press, 277–96.

123.

Schroeder

Jonathan E.

(2005), “The Artist and the Brand,” European Journal of Marketing, 39 (11), 1291–305.

124.

Schroeder

Jonathan E.

(2003), “Building Brands: Architectural Expression in the Electronic Age,” in Persuasive Imagery: A Consumer Response Perspective, Scott

Batra

, eds. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 349–82.

125.

Schroeder

Jonathan E.

(2002), Visual Consumption. New York: Routledge.

126.

Schroeder

Jonathan E.

Borgerson

Janet L.

(2002), “Innovations in Information Technology: Insights from Italian Renaissance Art,” Consumption, Markets and Culture, 5 (2), 153–69.

127.

Schroeder

Jonathan E.

Mörling

Miriam Salzer

, eds. (2006), Brand Culture. New York: Routledge.

128.

Schultz

Don E.

Kitchen

Philip J.

(2000), Communicating Globally: An Integrated Marketing Approach. New York: McGraw Hill Professional.

129.

Strati

Antonio

(2000), “The Aesthetic Approach in Organization Studies,” in The Aesthetics of Organization, Linstead

Höpfl

, eds. London, UK: Sage, 13–34.

130.

Strati

Antonio

(1999), Organization and Aesthetics. London, UK: Sage.

131.

Strati

Antonio

(1996), “Organizations Viewed through the Lens of Aesthetics,” Organization, 3 (2), 209–18.

132.

Strati

Antonio

(1992), “Aesthetic Understanding of Organizational Life,” Academy of Management Review, 17 (3), 568–81.

133.

Strati

Antonio

(1990), “Aesthetics and Organizational Skill,” in Organizational Symbolism, Turner

B. A.

, ed. Berlin, Germany: de Gruyter, 207–22.

134.

Taylor

Steven S.

Hansen

Hans

(2005), “Finding Form: Looking at the Field of Organizational Aesthetics,” Journal of Management Studies, 42 (6), 1211–31.

135.

Turley

Lou W.

Milliman

Ronald E.

(2000), “Atmospheric Effects on Shopping Behavior: A Review of the Experimental Evidence,” Journal of Business Research, 49 (2), 193–211.

136.

Underhill

Paco

(2004), Call of the Mall: On the Geography of Shopping. New York: Simon & Schuster.

137.

Van Leeuwen

Thomas A. P.

(1988), The Skyward Trend of Thought Five Essays on the Metaphysics of the American Skyscraper. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

138.

Van Riel

Cees B. M.

Balmer

John M. T.

(1997), “Corporate Identity: The Concept, its Measurement and Management,” European Journal of Marketing, 31 (5/6), 340–55.

139.

Vargo

Stephen L.

Lusch

Robert F.

(2004), “Evolving to a New Dominant Logic for Marketing,” Journal of Marketing, 68 (1), 1–17.

140.

Venkatesh

Alladi

Meamber

Laurie A.

(2008), ‘“The Aesthetics of Consumption and the Consumer as an Aesthetic Subject,” Consumption Markets and Culture, 11 (1), 45–70.

141.

Venkatesh

Alladi

Meamber

Laurie A.

(2006), “Arts and Aesthetics: Marketing and Cultural Production,” Marketing Theory, 6 (1), 11–39.

142.

Venkatesh

Alladi

(1999), “Postmodernism Perspectives for Macromarketing: An Inquiry into the Global Information and Sign Economy,” Journal of Macromarketing, 19 (2), 153–69.

143.

Yanow

Dvora

(1995), “Built Space as Story,” Policy Studies Journal, 23 (3), 407–22.

144.

Zumthor

Peter

(2006), Atmosphere: Architectural Environments – Surrounding Objects. Boston, MA: Birkhäuser Verlag.