In Susan Fournier's 1998 article, "Consumers and their brands: Developing relationship theory in consumer research," the author posits that customers have relationships with their brands and that brands can be "relationship partners" for customers. This paper will examine Fournier's argument in the light of brand relationships that customers have with Verizon and Disney, asserting that Fournier is indeed correct and customers can have relationships with brands.
Fournier (1998, p. 344) maintains that, in order for customers and brands to have a relationship with each other, there must be interdependence between them, an attribute that is enhanced to the extent that "brands are animated, humanized, or somehow personalized." Moreover, brand relationships(like relationships between people(reflect common qualities between the two participants. In her case study of Jean, Fournier points out that Jean's brand portfolio is consistent with her own "life themes" of "marginality/significance," "affiliation/independence," and "stability/change" (1998, p. 350). Taking the analogy even further, Fournier develops a "typology of consumer-brand relationship forms," in which she correlates certain types of human relationships with similar brand relationships (1998, p. 362). When a new bride begins using her husband's favorite brands, for example, Fournier equates that practice with an arranged marriage (1998, p. 362).
Extending Fournier's concept of brand relationships to cell phone companies, it could be said that the customer's relationship with wireless brands is "enslavement," because it represents a "nonvoluntary union governed entirely by desires of the relationship partner [that] involves negative feelings but persists because of circumstances" (1998, p. 362). While "We love our cell phones" and "Most of us couldn't imagine getting through the day without them," more consumers have com
...