It is suggested there is a need to broaden theorizing about brands to include service, relational and social perspectives as well as the traditional managerial perspective. Rather than attempt to develop a grand theory about brands, a more productive approach is to focus on the interface between theory and practice, provided by the managerial, service, relational and social perspectives to develop a federation of theories. This paper provides nine perspectives which serve as a basis for this middle range thinking.
American Marketing Association (AMA) (2004 ) Marketing Definitions: A Glossary of Marketing Terms, Chicago, IL: American Marketing Association.
2.
Brodie R.J., Glynn, M.S., and Little, V. (2006) `The Service Brand and the Service Dominant Logic: Missing Fundamental Premise or the Need for Stronger Theory', Marketing Theory6(3): 363-79.
3.
Keller, K. and Lehmann, D.R. (2006) `Brands and Branding Research: Research Findings and Future Priorities', Marketing Science25(6): 740-59.
4.
Merton, R.K. (1967) On Theoretical Sociology: Five Essays, Old and New. New York: Free Press.
5.
Saren, M. and Pels, J. (2008) `A Comment on Paradox and Middle-range Theory: Universality, Synthesis and Supplement', Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing23(2): 105- 7.
6.
Stern, B.B. (2006) `What Does Brand Mean? Historical-Analysis Method and Construct Definition', Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science34(2): 216-23.
7.
Sutton, R.I. and Staw, B.M. (1995) `What Theory is Not', Administrative Science Quarterly40(3): 371-84.
8.
Vargo, S. and Lusch, R. (2004) `Evolving to a New Dominant Logic for Marketing' , Journal of Marketing68(1): 1-17.
9.
Weick, K.E. (1989) `Theory Construction as a Disciplined Imagination' , Academy of Management Review14(4): 516-31.
10.
Weick, K.E. (1995) `What Theory is not, Theorizing is', Administrative Science Quarterly40(3): 385-90.
