Communicating the Brand Identity of AIESEC to Attract

New Members

Julie L. Zimmermann

Bachelor’s Thesis

Degree Programme in

International Business

2019

Abstract

28 April 2019

Author Julie L. Zimmermann

Degree programme International Business

Thesis title Communicating the Brand Identity of AIESEC to Attract New Mem-bers

Number of pages and appendix pages 51 + 12

The objective of this thesis was to uncover how Association Internationale des Étudiants en Sciences Économiques et Commerciales (AIESEC) could communicate its brand iden-tity and thereby attract Finnish students to become members of the organization. The aim of this thesis was therefore to determine how to improve the communication of the brand identity to create more consistent messages through different channels to boost the brand image and attract more Finnish students to become members of the organization. The theoretical framework was built on theories and models related to brand identity and communication thereof. Brand identity systems, with a focus on how to establish the iden-tity of a brand, risks related to the process of finding an identity, as well as positioning with the aim of communicating an established brand identity, made up important parts of this study. This was supported with theory from a psychological point of view with insight to the customer’s mind. The research method was qualitative, and data was gathered through two interviews, each with a member holding a managing position in AIESEC, and through a focus group session with Finnish students as a representative sample of 18-to-30-year-old Finnish people. Sec-ondary data research was also carried out. The findings were analysed qualitatively based on categories deriving from findings in the theoretical framework. The findings revealed that the brand image was inconsistent with the brand identity, - lack of coherency and trust being the main drivers for a negative image - making one of the key issues to move the image from messy, unclear and untrustworthy to genuine, clear and trustworthy. Visual inconstancies related to brand logos caused by decisions made on a global level, as well as communication methods which were perceived by Finnish students to be pushy, were also found to contribute to a negative image. In conclusion, it was found that the established brand identity/ positioning statement should be communicated in a way that creates the desired relationship, with the tone of voice based on the brand personality, while speaking to the self-image in people. Furthermore, creating a more coherent visual identity to help the recognition of the brand and its prod-ucts should be considered.

Keywords Brand identity, brand image, communication

Table of contents

1 Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Research objective and aim .................................................................................. 1

1.2 Demarcation ......................................................................................................... 3

1.3 Theoretical framework ........................................................................................... 3

1.4 Methodology ......................................................................................................... 4

1.5 Case company ...................................................................................................... 4

2 From brand identity to brand image ............................................................................... 6

2.1 Identity structures and traps .................................................................................. 7

2.2 Defining brand identity ........................................................................................ 10

2.3 Brand positioning ................................................................................................ 13

2.4 In the mind of customers ..................................................................................... 16

3 Research methodology ............................................................................................... 19

3.1 Empirical research methodology ......................................................................... 20

3.2 Interviews ............................................................................................................ 20

3.3 Focus group ........................................................................................................ 21

3.4 Data analysis ...................................................................................................... 22

3.5 Validity and reliability........................................................................................... 23

4 Results ........................................................................................................................ 24

4.1 Brand identity of AIESEC .................................................................................... 24

4.1.1 Physique .................................................................................................. 24

4.1.2 Vision and values ..................................................................................... 25

4.1.3 Organizational attributes .......................................................................... 27

4.1.4 Core product and attributes ...................................................................... 28

4.1.5 Brand personality ..................................................................................... 29

4.1.6 Relationship ............................................................................................. 30

4.1.7 User reflection and self-image .................................................................. 31

4.1.8 The AIESEC brand identity ...................................................................... 31

4.2 Brand image of AIESEC ...................................................................................... 32

4.2.1 Organizational attributes and physique .................................................... 33

4.2.2 Social media examples ............................................................................ 34

4.2.3 Poster example ........................................................................................ 36

4.2.4 Relationship and personality .................................................................... 37

4.2.5 Reflection and Self-image ........................................................................ 38

4.2.6 The AIESEC brand image ........................................................................ 39

4.3 Comparison of brand identity and brand image ................................................... 40

4.4 Student development suggestions ...................................................................... 42

4.5 Development sugestions based on findings ........................................................ 43

4.5.1 Suggestions for global team ..................................................................... 43

4.5.2 Suggestions for Finnish teams ................................................................. 44

5 Discussion and conclusions ........................................................................................ 47

References ...................................................................................................................... 52

Appendices ...................................................................................................................... 55

Appendix 1. Management interview questions ............................................................ 55

Appendix 2. Focus group questions ............................................................................ 57

Appendix 3 Focus group visual materials .................................................................... 58

Appendix 4. Examples of AIESEC communication materials ....................................... 66

1

1 Introduction

Almost everywhere consumers turn, brands are fighting for their attention, so for a brand

to stand out it must have a strong and clear brand identity. Since everything businesses

communicate adds to the image of the brand - that is, the way the brand is perceived by

people (Aaker 2010, 69) - it becomes important to manage outputs accordingly and com-

municate a single message across channels. This is becoming increasingly difficult as

brands engage with consumers around the world, with activities taking place through sev-

eral channels both offline and online. Thus, a brand must know exactly what image it

wants to project, what so send and how so send it (Kapferer 2008, 174). The brand iden-

tity provides purpose, direction and meaning for the brand (Aaker, 2010, 68). Thus, by

having established a proper brand identity, the delivery of a consistent message through-

out all channels will be facilitated (Miller 2015).

1.1 Research objective and aim

The objective of this thesis is to uncover how the Association Internationale des Étudiants

en Sciences Économiques et Commerciales (AIESEC) successfully can communicate its

brand identity and thereby attract Finnish students to become members of the organiza-

tion. AIESEC is a non-profit organization run by its members, who are often students, and

offers various possibilities for young people including internships and volunteering pro-

grams.

AIESEC Members already receive a lot of guidelines on how to communicate their brand

to deliver a consistent message globally. These include guidelines on visuals, digital lan-

guage, brand attributes and voice, as well as localising value propositions. However, it is

up to each entity in local markets to take care that all channels and materials comply with

the guidelines while at the same time adapted to the local markets. Furthermore, mem-

bers within the organization change their position every year. This results in the need for

members to pick up quickly which leaves limited time to gain deeper understanding and

puts a limit on long-term development projects.

Attracting Finnish students in the metropolitan area to become members of AIESEC has

become a problem which the organization is currently facing. The initial concern was that

the value proposition was not appealing to Finnish students, but after observation it was

found that the problem is more likely to be related to the general understanding and per-

ception of AIESEC. Hence the brand image. This indicates a gap between the identity and

image of the organization.

2

The aim of this thesis is therefore to improve how AIESEC communicates its brand iden-

tity, creating more consistent messages through different channels that will improve the

brand image and thereby attract more Finnish students to become members of the organi-

zation. The research question (RQ) is therefore worded as:

How to communicate the brand identity of AIESEC?

The RQ is divided into five investigative questions (IQs) as follows:

1. What is the brand identity of AIESEC?

2. What is the brand image of AIESEC by the students?

3. How does the brand image compare to the brand identity?

4. What are the development suggestions from the students to AIESEC?

5. What development suggestions can be made on communicating the brand identity

based on the findings?

The theoretical framework chapter, research methods and results chapters for each of the

IQs are presented in table 1.

Table 1. Overlay matrix

Investigative questions Theoretical

framework

Research method Result

chapter

What is the brand identity of

AIESEC?

2.1

2.2

Qualitative interviews

and analysis of internal

and external secondary

data.

4.1

What is the brand image of AIESEC

by the students?

2.1

2.2

2.4

Focus group session

(qualitative analysis).

4.2

How does the brand image compare

to the brand identity?

2.3 Comparative analysis

of management and

student data.

4.3

What are the development sugges-

tions from the students to AIESEC?

Focus group session

(qualitative analysis).

4.4

What development suggestions can

be made on communicating the

brand identity based on the findings?

2.3 and 2.4

(additional

insight)

Qualitative analysis of

gathered data.

4.5

3

1.2 Demarcation

This study was conducted in the capital area of Finland and as requested by AIESEC the

demographics were young Finnish people ages 18 to 30. It was therefore agreed with the

case company that Finnish students from Haaga-Helia UAS could make up the repre-

sentative sample for the focus group session. It was further requested that these students

would be in their first or second year of studying.

The case company requested that the attitude towards the word “johtajuus” - which is

Finnish for leadership - would also be investigated during the focus group session. Finally,

it was requested that the overall focus of this thesis would be on their membership offer-

ings and not on all offerings by AIESEC. The case company already has a ready value

proposition and therefore it will not be established or analysed. Instead, the existing value

proposition will serve as a part to be included in the brand position.

While this thesis will establish the brand identity of AIESEC as a global organization, the

analysis of the brand image as well as communicating the identity will be focused on Finn-

ish students. In other words, a global brand identity will be established, and suggestions

will be given on how to communicate to Finnish people. This furthermore brings the inter-

national aspect to this study.

1.3 Theoretical framework

In the process of establishing the theoretical framework, the focus was on selecting theo-

ries and models related to brand identity and how communication efforts result in the

brand image, existing only in the minds of the recipient. This resulted in the selection of

Aaker’s (2010), theories on the brand identity system and brand identity implementation

system - with a focus on brand identity and positioning - as well as Kapferer’s (2008),

brand identity prism. Both the brand identity system and the brand identity prism were key

tools in establishing the brand identity of AIESEC as well as important when addressing

the brand image.

Both authors stress the importance of positioning the brand and according to Aaker’s

(2010) brand identity implementation system, position determines what part of the brand

identity and the value proposition should be actively communicated to the target audience.

There is therefore a focus on this theory in the comparative analysis of the image and

identity as well as in the chapter for development suggestions. Finally, both Walvis (2010),

with the theory: three laws of branding as well as Gabay (2015), provided a psychological

angle to this study with insight to the customer’s mind.

4

1.4 Methodology

The methodology for this thesis was qualitative with both analysis of secondary data as

well as primary data via interviews and a focus group session. A qualitative approach was

selected due to limited knowledge of the organization which would have likely resulted in

insufficient data, had a quantitative method been chosen.

The qualitative methods used for this thesis were interviews and a focus group session.

Two face-to-face interviews were conducted with members of AIESEC holding a manag-

ing position and a focus group session was conducted with Finnish students of Haaga-He-

lia UAS and Laurea UAS as a representative sample of Finnish young people in the met-

ropolitan area of Finland.

1.5 Case company

AIESEC was founded in Europe in 1948 by Jean Choplin from France, Bengt Sjøstrand

from Sweden and Dr. Albert Kaltenthaler from Germany. AIESEC describes itself as a

youth leadership organization where young people are given the opportunity to develop

and explore their leadership potential. (AIESEC 2019a.)

AIESEC is a non-profit, non-political, independent organization run by students, and it is

present in more than 120 countries worldwide with little more than 38,000 members and

over 7,000 partner organizations (AIESEC 2019a). According to the AIESEC annual re-

port, the organization had an excess of revenue over expenditure of 64,81 by the end of

the financial year 2018 May 31st (AIESEC 2018a, 40).

AIESEC offers various possibilities for young people including: a global volunteering pro-

gram, international internships, including at start-ups among others, and finally member-

ships (AIESEC 2019b). The members of AIESEC run the organization through the func-

tions: Customer experience for youth and partners, marketing, human resources and fi-

nance (AIESEC 2019c). As requested by AIESEC, this study is focused on how to attract

Finnish students to become members of the organization and work in one of the above-

mentioned functions.

As mentioned, difficulties in attracting Finnish students in the metropolitan area to become

members is what the organization currently faces. The lack of understanding what

AIESEC does and stands for, indicates that there is a gap between identity and the image

by Finnish students, and has led to this study.

5

Establishing a proper brand identity and delivering a consistent message will help AIESEC

to manage and improve the image of the organization in Finland. This is especially im-

portant in a market like the Finnish, since young people here have many opportunities for

volunteering, joining organizations and gaining work experience, thus an improved brand

image would be a competitive advantage.

This would also add value to the current members of AIESEC, as they will receive sug-

gestions on how to communicate to Finnish young people. Furthermore, an improved

brand image is likely to affect the value of the work experience within the organization,

positively affecting both current and future members.

6

2 From brand identity to brand image

Brand identity can be explained as the way an organization wishes for the brand to be

perceived. It is looking forward creating change and not accepting the current perceptions.

(Aaker 2010, 70-71.) When communicating, the brand identity becomes the component

which sends one single message regardless of the amount of actions, products and com-

munications (Kapferer 2008, 172). Furthermore, the identity provides a purpose, direction

and meaning for the brand by identifying its core values, what it wishes to stand for, its

personality traits, and how it wishes to be seen (Aaker 2010, 68).

The brand image on the other hand, exists in the mind of the consumer. The image thus

comes from decoding all messages from the brand including name, visual symbols, prod-

ucts, advertisements, articles and so on. Before an organization can project a specific im-

age, it must know exactly what it wants to project and importantly, what to send and how

to send it. When conducting image research, the goal then becomes to uncover how a

group of people perceive the brand by analysing how they decode all the outputs of the

brand including products, services and communication (Kapferer 2008, 174.)

Figure 1. From brand identity to brand image

With the brand identity specified and a clear value proposition in place, the focus turns to

the brand position which is the part of the brand identity and value proposition that should

be communicated to the target audience (Aaker 2010, 176). Furthermore, the aim of posi-

tioning the brand should be to identify and take ownership of a strong reason to purchase

giving the brand a real perceived advantage (Kapferer 2008, 178). These theories put to-

gether is explained by figure 1.

7

2.1 Identity structures and traps

Aaker (2010), has developed a brand identity planning model (figure 2), where the brand

identity system illustrates how the brand identity should be defined. The identity structure

is built from the core identity and the extended identity. While the core identity represents

the essence of the brand and is most likely to remain throughout time, therefore timeless,

the extended identity may change over time as the brand travels to new markets, adds

products and so forth. Thus, the core identity should be closely linked to the values of the

organization, include elements that make the brand unique and valuable as well as con-

tribute to the value proposition. (Aaker 2010, 86-87.)

Figure 2. Brand identity planning model (adapted from Aaker 2010, 79)

As the core identity is unlikely to include all the detail required to perform all the functions

of the brand identity, the extended identity should provide the detail to help understand

what the brand stands for. Thus, elements which are or should become visible associa-

tions with the brand, such as a brand personality, can be included. In other words, the ex-

tended identity provides the possibility to add useful details to complete the picture. (Aaker

2010, 88.)

8

Similarly to Aaker’s (2010) view on core identity and extended identity, Kapferer (2008,

183), mentions the “kernel” of brands to distinguish between key identity traits which will

remain the same over time and contributors to the brand which are likely to change as the

brand develops.

From a phycological point of view, Gabay (2015) points to a core consisting of tangible

and authentic beliefs, which a brand must promote in order to matter. Without this strength

the brand’s reputation will crack as an eggshell if questioned. The core belief is sur-

rounded by brand faith which consist of the supporting values of the brand. This is illus-

trated by an egg (figure 3) which as whole shapes the perception and therefore meaning.

For brand faith to thrive, consumers need something to believe in and by believing pas-

sionately in a concept, that does not exist materially, it is created in the mind and therefore

it exists. (Gabay 2015, 129.)

Figure 3. T brand authenticity egg (adapted from Gabay 2015,129)

To cope with various interpretations of the most important principles of the brand, these

beliefs should be both robust and adaptable. This way the brand remains impossible to

question, simply because these beliefs must be true. The values however are free to be

adapted to the different needs in different markets. (Gabay 2015, 129.) According to

Aaker (2010, 76), the key to develop a strong brand identity is to broaden the brand con-

cept by including several dimensions and perspectives. This is important because brands

often end up in one or several identity traps which may lead to ineffective brand strategies

(Aaker 2010, 69).

Brand image, brand position, external perspective, and product-attribute fixation are the

identity traps identified by Aaker (2010). The brand image trap happens when the cus-

tomer perception of the brand (the brand image) becomes the brand identity. The problem

proposed here is that this situation lets the customers dictate what the organization is,

when the identity of the brand should reflect the vision and personality of the brand. The

9

brand identity should look to the future, be strategic and reflect a business strategy which

will lead to a sustainable advantage. (Aaker 2010, 70.)

The brand position is the part of the brand identity and value proposition which should be

communicated to the target audience. The communication is thus guided by the position-

ing of the brand. An organization may find itself in the brand position trap when the search

for a brand identity becomes the search for a position. Due to the need for developing

communication materials, focus may turn to catchy advertising lines hindering the possibil-

ity for a completely developed brand identity because aspects which seem less important

to be communicated, are ignored. (Aaker 2010, 71.)

Part of an effective brand identity is also the ability within the organization to explain the

strengths, vision and values. Employees must understand and believe in the vision if they

are to realize this vision. The focus should therefore be internal as well as external. When

an organization fail to understand the role of the brand identity in helping the employees

understand the basic value and purpose of the organization, it is in the external perspec-

tive trap. (Aaker 2010, 72.) A similar observation was made by Kapferer (2008, 185), who

states that culture is what link the brand to the organization - especially if they have the

same name - thus, brands may find themselves with an amount of freedom which is re-

duced by the corporate culture.

Not being able to distinguish between product and brand, basing the brand identity and

strategy solely on product attributes, and assuming these provide the only basis for cus-

tomer decision, will lead to the product attribute fixation trap. This is according to Aaker

(2010), the most common trap. Understanding that a brand is more than a product has

both implications for pricing, segmentation, and communication strategies. (Aaker 2010,

72-73.) Furthermore, this fixation presents several problems. Attributes are easy to copy,

brands perceived to be equal will fail to differentiate, customers often care more about

style, reassurance and status than the fictional benefits, and finally, this limits the brand’s

flexibility and ability for extension strategies (Aaker 2010, 75-76).

In addition, Kapferer (2008) points out that many organizations may have a graphic iden-

tity with visual guidelines - dictating the brand’s colour, graphic design and type of print -

to harmonize messages and define the visual recognition of the brand. However, Kapferer

(2008), sees this as a first step and points to the importance of uncovering the key mes-

sage that the brand wants to communicate. Furthermore, choosing symbols require a

clear definition of what the brand stands for because the values of the brand must be re-

flected in the external signs of recognition. (Kapferer 2008, 173.)

10

Forming the visual or graphic code before defining the identity of the brand may lead the

brand to be unnecessarily constrained. Contrary, knowing the brand identity will give more

freedom of expression since it emphasises the distinction, superiority and defines what

stays and what is free to change over time, adapting to the diversity of modern markets.

(Kapferer 2008, 173.)

2.2 Defining brand identity

To help organizations avoid these traps, the brand identity system (figure 2) has been de-

veloped. It encourages strategists to consider the brand as a product, an organization, a

person and as a symbol to broaden the brand concept. These four perspectives have

been divided into twelve dimensions which are explained in detail below. However, it is

worth noting that the point is not to utilize all these perspectives, instead the goal should

be to enrich and differentiate the brand identity. All perspectives must therefore be consid-

ered but organizations should use the ones that are helpful in describing what the brand

should stand for in the mind of the customer. (Aaker 2010, 77-78.)

When thinking of a brand as a product, it is important to avoid the product-attribute fixation

trap. However, because of the link to user experience and choice of brand, product asso-

ciations remain an important part of the identity. (Aaker 2010, 78.) With this in mind, we

can look at the ways in which a brand may be looked at as a product.

The association with a product or product group is what is described as the product

scope. The key takeaway here is that the goal is to have the brand associated with a

product category and not the other way around. By offering something better or providing

something extra, like a feature, product related attributes may make up a value proposi-

tion. These features may even provide functional and emotional benefits for customers

when the attributes are directly related to the purchase or use of the product. (Aaker 2010,

80.)

The associations with the use of the brand is the attempt to own a particular use or appli-

cation. Thus, the aim is to make sure that consumers will always purchase your product

for a specific use. Another approach is to position a brand by a user type. Associating the

brand with its country of origin can add credibility to the brand. However, the extend of this

effect will depend on the product class. (Aaker 2010, 81-82.)

11

When viewing the brand as an organization the focus should be on the attributes of the or-

ganization and not on those of the products and services. Organizational attributes like in-

novation, environmental concerns, striving for quality are created by the culture, values,

and people as well as programmes of the organization. These attributes are more difficult

for competitors to copy and if customers already have perceived a gap, it becomes difficult

for competitors to demonstrate that they have come further. Organizational attributes may

also involve emotional and self-expressive benefits - such as environmental concern -

based on respect or liking of the brand. In such case, the attributes may also contribute to

a value proposition. (Aaker 2010, 82-83.)

A brand can, much like a person, be perceived to be impressive, trustworthy, formal, cas-

ual, fun, humorous and so forth. By considering the personality of the brand it is possible

to add more depth and create a stronger brand. A strong brand personality is also the ba-

sis for a relationship between brand and customers. Furthermore, it enables the possibility

for creating a self-expressive benefit which the customers then use to express their own

personalities. (Aaker 2010, 83-84.)

Strong brand symbols may make it easier to gain recognition and can provide structure to

a brand. Visual imagery, metaphors, and brand heritage are all highlighted as strong

brand symbols and especially symbols involving visual imagery may be more memorable.

However, anything which represents the brand may be a symbol, including organizational

programmes. It is important to notice that symbols involving a metaphor with the symbol

or a symbol characteristic which represent an emotional, functional or self-expressive ben-

efit become more meaningful. It is also possible to use symbols as the cornerstone for the

entire brand strategy and even use that image to drive the product and name by answer-

ing to what visual image the organization would like people to have of the brand in five

years. (Aaker 2010, 84-85.)

In contrast to Aaker’s (2010), theory on viewing the brand as a product, organization, per-

son and as a symbol, Kapferer (2008) suggests that the identity of a brand should be rep-

resented by a hexagonal prism (figure 4). The prism consists of six elements: physique,

personality, culture, relationship, reflection, and self-image which together make up the

identity of the brand (Kapferer 2008, 182-183).

As noted previously, Kapferer (2008, 183) distinguish between the “kernel” of the brand

which consists of the key identity traits that remains over time and contributors to the

12

brand. Thus, the identity prism does not focus on creating the full picture - including ex-

tended elements which may change over time - but at defining the core of the brand iden-

tity and thereby also setting the limit for what the brand can do.

Figure 4. Brand identity prism (adapted from Kapferer 2008, 183)

The six aspect of the prism form one entity and are all interrelated. Furthermore, the prism

is built on the concept that all brands can speak and that brands only exist if they com-

municate. Thus, a brand can be analysed like any other form of communication. The phy-

sique and personality aspects are thought to help define the sender, whereas reflection

and self-image help to define the recipient. The relationship and culture aspects serve to

fill in the gap between the sender and recipient. As seen in figure 4, the prism also in-

cludes a vertical division to underline the difference between the external and visible ex-

pression and the internal essence of the brand. (Kapferer 2008, 187.)

The first step when determining the identity, using the hexagonal prism, is to define the

physical aspect of the brand. Organizations should define what it is, what is does and

what it looks like. The physical aspect also consists of a flagship product that represents

the qualities of the brand. An easy way to give the brand personality is to give it a figure-

head or a spokesperson, either real or symbolic. However, the personality aspect should

come from the source, hence the brand, but with human characteristics. (Kapferer 2008,

182-184.)

13

The cultural aspect is at the core of the brand. By culture, Kapferer (2008), refers to the

values of the organization and basic principles which governs the outputs. It is the internal

culture which drives the organization but in turn the organization also conveys this culture

and inspires the brand. Adding to this, country of origin is a great cultural force for brands.

The relationship aspect of the prism is especially crucial for brands in the service sector

since service is a relationship. The relationship defines the mode of conduct which has im-

plications for the way the brand acts, relates to the customers, and delivers its services.

(Kapferer 2008, 184-186.)

The reflection should describe how the consumer wishes to be portrayed as a result of us-

ing the product or service. Thus, it is not describing the targeted segment of the brand, in-

stead, it is what consumers would identify as the perceived type of client of the brand.

(Kapferer 2008,186.) In other words, reflection is how the consumer perceives purchasing

or interacting with a specific brand will reflect on him/her.

Self-image refers to how the consumers feel when they interact with the brand and is de-

scribed as an internal mirror. Kapferer (2008), therefore suggests that we develop a spe-

cific inner relationship with ourselves through our attitude towards the brand. (Kapferer

2008,186.)

2.3 Brand positioning

Positioning the brand is key. The aim is to identify and take ownership of a strong reason

to purchase which gives us a real perceived advantage. While the identity expresses the

tangible and intangible characteristics based on the roots, and heritage of the brand, posi-

tioning the brand is competitive. Consumers make a choice when it comes to brands but

with products they compare. Thus, a brand should clarify what area of competition it

wishes to be considered part of, as well as what offerings will become a key-decision

making factor. Communicating this information then becomes the responsibility of the

brand. (Kapferer 2008, 178.)

While positioning may change over time as the brand grows, it still implies the will to take

a long-term position and defend it against competitors. To achieve positioning, target mar-

ket, frame of reference and subjective category, consumer benefit and promise, as well as

the reason to believe must be identified. (Kapferer 2008,178.)

14

This Kapferer (2008) explains as the positioning formula. The target market refers to the

sociological or phycological profile of potential buyers and consumers. The frame of refer-

ence refers to the above-mentioned area of competition of which the brand wishes to be

compared to. Thus, it is a subjective category specifying the nature of competition through

which a competitive advantage is gained. Defining consumer benefit and promise are the

aspects of difference which create the choice of competitive advantage. This may be ex-

pressed in terms of a benefit or an advantage. The final point, reason to believe, should

reinforce the benefit/advantage and explain and provide evidence for why customers

should believe in the benefit/advantage. (Kapferer 2008, 178-179.)

Ideally customers will be able to paraphrase the positioning of the brand. For brands who

do not make any promise or demonstrate any real benefits, imagery is used to make the

brand attractive and the customer satisfaction comes from the participation in this sym-

bolic world of the brand. (Kapferer 2008, 179.)

Figure 5. Positioning a brand (adapted from Kapferer 2008, 176)

Positioning can also be done using Kapferer’s (2008), positioning diamond (figure 5)

which draws on the same logic as the positioning formula. In this two-stage process the

objective is to fist indicate what competitive set the brand should be compared to and as-

sociated with and second, to define the reason for entering the market as well as the es-

sential differences compared to other brands and products (Kapferer 2008, 176).

Tis is supported by Kapferer’s (2008, 175) questions, which were developed to emphasize

the characteristics which make the brand different from its competitors while appealing to

the consumers and thereby positioning the brand:

1. A brand for what benefit? This refers to the brand promise and consumer benefit aspect […]

2. A brand for whom? This refers to the target aspect. […] 3. Reason? This refers to the elements, factual or subjective, that support the

claimed benefit. 4. A brand against whom? In today’s competitive context, this question defines the

main competitor(s), ie those whose clientele we think we can partly capture. […] (Kapferer 2008, 175.)

15

Brand position is the first step in Aaker’s (2010) brand identity implementation system -

which is part of the brand identity planning model (figure 2) - where execution and tracking

make up the two following steps. The brand position is the part of the brand identity and

value proposition which should be communicated to the target audience. Thus, after the

identity has been established and the value proposition is in place, the brand position

statement should be formulated. The main characteristics of the brand position includes

subsets of the brand identity and the value proposition, a target audience, active commu-

nication, and competitive advantage. (Aaker 2010, 176-177.)

From the brand identity and value proposition, the brand position should include elements

of the core identity - to avoid that parts of the communication will differ from the essence

of the brand - and customer benefits that drive the relationship between the brand and

customer. The brand position may also be based on a feature, a sub-brand, or a service.

(Aaker 2010, 178.)

While the target segment may be a large group, the target audience should be specific

and may consist of a subset of the brands’ targeted segment. Depending on the organiza-

tion, it may be feasible to have a primary and secondary target audience as well. By com-

municating actively, Aaker (2010) implies that the specific communication objectives are

focused on either changing or strengthening the brand image of the relationship between

brand and customers. It is furthermore suggested that when creating the brand position,

the brand identity should be compared with the brand image on different “image dimen-

sions” since the result will have three very different outcomes for the communication tasks

in the position statement. The result may either be augmenting, reinforcing and exploiting,

or diffusing, softening or deleting the brand image. (Aaker 2010, 179-180.)

In cases where the brand image is too restrictive - it might be viewed as appropriate for a

certain application or one age group only - the brand may want to augment the image by

adding associations and soften the restrictions. If the image turns out to be consistent with

the identity Aaker (2010) suggests that the strong image should be reinforced or even ex-

ploited as creating a new position may prove risky and difficult. Finally, the need for defus-

ing, softening or deleting the brand image is the result of the image being inconsistent with

identity and here it may be useful to specify what the brand is not. (Aaker 2010, 181-182.)

The brand position should furthermore demonstrate an advantage. This point should be a

part of the value proposition which is of superiority while differentiate from competitors and

resonate with customers now as well as in the future. A brand can differentiate from com-

petitors by positioning itself against the functional benefits by calming different benefits, or

16

to be superior or comparable at a lower price. However, a point of differentiation can also

be based on self-expressive or emotional benefits, a customer relationship, a brand per-

sonality as well as organizational attributes. Finally, it is important to note that it is not nec-

essary for a brand to be superior on all dimensions, instead efforts should be made on

avoiding an inferior image that is a disadvantage. (Aaker 2010, 182-183.)

With the above mentioned in mind, the following four sets of questions have been devel-

oped by Aaker (2010), and should be addressed when formulating the brand position

statement:

1. Which elements of the brand identity and value proposition should be a part of the position, a part of the active communication program? Which will resonate with customers, and differentiate the brand from competitors?

2. Who is the primary target audience? Who are secondary target audience? 3. What are the communication objectives? Does the current image need to be aug-

mented or strengthened, reinforced and exploited or diffused or deleted (that is what does the brand not stand for)?

4. What will be the points of advantage? What will be the point where parity or near-parity is the best the brand image should strive for?

(Aaker 2010, 183.)

2.4 In the mind of customers

Gabay (2015), states that all individuals at any age want to feel exclusive without feeling

excluded. Furthermore, he notes that the youth want it all, young adults expect it all, mid-

dle aged have seen it all, and the elderly have done it all. When communicating with dif-

ferent age groups, brands must appreciate what Gabay (2015), calls The Age Continuum

in order to appear sincere. As children we belief in Santa Claus, as teenagers we might

think that we are part of the next generation who will change the world, in midlife we be-

come more cynical towards the world, before moving towards acceptance. Thus, the

younger a person is, the greater his/her acceptance is of abstract beliefs. (Gabay 2015,

115-116.)

This requires brands to have a different attitude depending on the phase of life. During

young adulthood (19-40 years), people in their twenties find themselves torn between ma-

turity and adulthood resulting in emotional conflict. There is a tendency to remain in edu-

cation longer, postponing parenthood and marriage, resulting in a strong sense of self.

The major concern for ages between 19 and 40 is to build close committed, intimate or

loving relationships. Furthermore, on Social media they search for support and ac-

ceptance from people regardless of what people do and say. (Gabay 2015, 120.)

When addressing this group, brands must be understanding, responsive, offering 24/7 vir-

tual access, and a way of escaping a tedious reality. Brands should also offer a sense of

17

community, security and optimism. Finally, the tone of voice should be respectful, aspira-

tional, pioneering and cool. (Gabay 2015, 121.)

A brand that fits our purpose, has signalled to us most often in the past and that we have

interacted most strongly with, is the brand we are most likely to choose because of how

the brain makes brand choices. These three points are explained as the brain’s brand-

choice algorithm. This algorithm does not change from person to person or from one situ-

ation to another since all brains work alike. It is not possible to influence this algorithm and

it should therefore be accepted as is, however, it is possible to structure marketing efforts

to make sure that the brand will be chosen. To facilitate this, three laws of branding have

been identified: relevance, coherence and participation. (Walvis 2010, 11-12.)

The brain quickly retrieves information that it finds relevant and important to the task or sit-

uation at hand, while supressing less relevant impressions. This way most of people’s

brand choices are made automatically and quickly. Furthermore, the brain may selectively

forget certain information to make it easier to remember more important things, making

relevance a key criterion for the way the brand structures and restructures itself as well as

how it stores and retrieves information. (Walvis 2010, 50.)

The process of choosing a brand starts with the activation of a mix of goals which acti-

vates the brands in the memory that may be able to fulfil these goals. The networks of

neurons representing the brand must be connected with those representing the customer

goals, in order for the brand to be chosen. This way the brand will automatically be acti-

vated - based on the brain’s pre-set evaluations of the brand - once the goals are acti-

vated. Thus, it is important to position the brand in a way that it will satisfy the mix of

goals. (Walvis 2010, 50.)

The way this can be done is by promising and then proving the brain that the brand will

provide important rewards such as shelter, nutrition, social contact and status as well as

security (Walvis 2010, 52). Thus, in order to apply the first law, the customer brain must

be educated on the rewarding features of the brand by associating it with existing needs

before gradually replacing these needs with more abstract ones (Walvis 2010, 60).

Coherence is crucial for brands. Part of this second law of branding is having a clear busi-

ness strategy that drives everything the organization does. (Walvis 2010, 90.) A brand

must be stored in the long-term memory in order for it to be at top of our mind when we

make a brand choice (Walvis 2010, 92). In coherent branding the brand promise, which

18

must be relevant, is repeated and fulfilled throughout all communication channels and

there should therefore be no inconsistencies. (Walvis 2010, 93).

If the message is not repeated with a certain interval, the associations will grow weaker

and the customers will start to forget the brand (Walvis 2010, 92). Furthermore, incon-

sistent messages will spoil the brand image and send conflicting signals in the brain which

will lower the chances of the brand being selected by the brain’s algorithm (Walvis 2010,

103). However, the messages should not just be repeated, instead they should vary

around a theme which may help assure that the messages will not get boring (Walvis

2010, 94-96).

Applying participation will affect the strategy of the business since this third law will require

having an ongoing relationship with customers (Walvis 2010, 159). Since participation will

help activate the brand more frequently in the brain, brands that are able to enrich interac-

tion with customers are more likely to be chosen by the brand-choice algorithm (Walvis

2010, 145). The characteristics associated with an enriched environment can be divided

into five factors: making participation rewarding, providing opportunities for learning, giving

control to customers, making the interaction socially stimulating, and minimising stress

and pain (Walvis 2010, 146).

Participating in a meaningful and rewarding activity in the context of a brand, results in the

brain storing it as something to repeat in the future, after the activity ends (Walvis 2010,

146). There are several reasons why people like to participate, however, the five most

common drivers are: expressing status and confirming identity (gain recognition), having

fun, connecting with other people, and contributing (Walvis 2010, 153-144). However, in

order to persuade customers to participate, the interaction must be rewarding, and the

brand must be of value to them as customers do not participate for the sake of participat-

ing (Walvis 2010, 155).

Therefore, the first law of relevance must be in place for participation to work. Further-

more, coherence (the second law) should be applied to make sure that customers will not

take control over the brand and do whatever they want with it. This makes participation

the most challenging law since it requires that both relevance and coherence are imple-

mented. (Walvis 2010, 155.)

19

3 Research methodology

The research design for this thesis is made up of four phases which includes both analy-

sis of secondary data as well as primary data via interviews and a focus group session

(figure 6). Before the first phase, relevant theories related to brand identity and brand im-

age were identified by conducting secondary research. This research resulted in the theo-

retical framework which is structured based on main theories and to match the investiga-

tive questions.

Figure 6. Research design

Two AIESEC representatives were interviewed, and together with secondary data analy-

sis this make up the first and second phase of the research design. The secondary data

was provided by AIESEC and consists of internal documents such as brand guidelines as

well as external data including communication material consisting of presentations and

posters.

A focus group session was conducted with four Finnish students as a representative sam-

ple making up for the third and fourth phase. A comparative analysis of the management

and student data was then conducted to identify any gaps between brand identity and im-

age and based on these findings, development suggestions were given.

20

3.1 Empirical research methodology

The research methodology is qualitative, with data was gathered through interviews, a fo-

cus group session and by conducting secondary data research. This approach was cho-

sen due to a general limited knowledge of the organization which would have been likely

to result in insufficient data if a quantitative method would have been chosen.

Qualitative research is less structured than quantitative and is therefore more researcher

dependent since it is the researcher who needs to extract meaning from the responses

(Zikmund, babin, Carr & Griffin 2010, 133). In qualitative research, the focus is further-

more on listening, observing and interpreting answers making the researcher a part of the

process of constructing the results (Zikmund & al. 2010, 135).

Qualitative research is appropriate when a new fresh approach is needed and when quan-

titative research will not give satisfying results (Zikmund & al. 2010, 134). It is due to the

limited knowledge of AIESEC amongst Finnish students – which would make it impossible

to receive quality data from conducting a survey – that this qualitative, exploratory ap-

proach was selected.

3.2 Interviews

Two in-depth interviews were conducted, each with a member of AIESEC holding a man-

aging position. The first interview was held with Chikezie (2019), who is currently head of

marketing in Finland and responsible for both online and offline activities, as well as sup-

porting the local teams in activities such as local promotion and campaigns (Chikezie 9

March 2019). The second interview was conducted with Srbova (2019), who is the vice

president of outgoing global volunteer programme in Helsinki and is leading the team that

takes care of the young people going abroad with this AIESEC programme (Srbova 11

March 2019).

The first interview was not recorded due to a challenging environment however, thorough

notes were written down. The location of the second interview permitted a recording and

supporting notes were written. It was requested by both interviewees that their individual

answers would be anonymous, thus result chapter 4.1 does not include references to the

interviewees.

The interview questions (appendix 1), were designed based on both Kapferer’s (2008)

Identity prism and Aaker’s (2010) Brand identity system to gain a more detailed and board

21

understanding of the organization. Based on these theories, eight categories were identi-

fied, and a subset of questions were formulated for each category. In addition, a few back-

ground questions were added.

3.3 Focus group

A focus group is a free-flowing and unstructured interview with a small group of people

(Zikmund & al. 2010, 141). However, in this case a loos structure was made to control the

stage in knowledge of AIESEC by the participants. Five participants for were found

through Helga tutors and by randomly approaching students at the Pasila campus of

Haaga-Helia UAS. Due to difficulties in finding students willing to participate, a few friends

of the author were asked to spread the word which resulted in one participant from Laurea

UAS.

Unfortunately, two students did not show up for the focus group session. The representa-

tive sample of Finnish young people (18 to 30 years) living in the metropolitan area of Fin-

land was thus made up of four Finnish 20-26-year-old students from Haaga-Helia UAS

and Laurea UAS living in Helsinki or the greater capital area (Espoo or Vantaa). Further-

more, the participants were all first or second year students, as requested by the commis-

sioning company.

The focus group questions were designed based on the six dimensions of Kapferer’s

(2008) Identity prism and further questions were added to determine if there was any pre-

vious knowledge about the organization (appendix 2). This idea of an ‘image’ prism -

viewed entirely from the recipient’s point of view - was thought to be an interesting way of

gaining insights on how AIESEC’s communication efforts reflect on the brand. This fur-

thermore builds on a similar logic to the previously established viewpoint of Kapferer

(2008,187), that a brand can be analysed like any other kind of communication, since the

identity prism is built on the concept that all brands speak and only exist if they communi-

cate.

When conducting image research, the goal is to uncover how a group of people perceive

the brand by analysing how they decode all the outputs (Kapferer 2008, 174.) Thus, ques-

tions were compiled in a power point presentation together with images and examples

from the secondary external material provided by AIESEC, as well as randomly picked ex-

amples from secondary external available data including Facebook, Instagram, Twitter

22

and the Finnish website of AIESEC (appendix 3). Finally, the participants were encour-

aged to discuss how AIESEC could improve its communication and give development

suggestions.

The session was carried out at Haaga-Helia UAS in Pasila campus and was 70 minutes

long. Visual examples were presented, and in between participants asked to discuss the

questions. The participants were not obliged to answer every question as this would have

resulted in a ridged structured session. Instead, the questions were presented in groups of

two or three to spark conversation thus, providing a loose structure while allowing the par-

ticipants to freely discuss whatever came to their minds. The focus group session was

recorded and supporting notes were written. Due to the little knowledge of AIESEC it be-

came necessary to explain and clarify a few things about the organization during the ses-

sion. This situation was unfortunate since the author - who also acted as the moderator

and observer - is not a member of AIESEC and is therefore not a proper representative for

the organization.

3.4 Data analysis

The qualitative data analysis of both interviews and the focus group session was done

based on the before mentioned categories deriving from findings in the theoretical frame-

work. Thus, the answers of the interviewees were compared, analysed and interpreted

based on the eight categories, setting the structure for result-chapter 4.1. The data from

the focus group session was analysed based on a pre-structure determined by Kapferer’s

(2008) identity prism, as well as the discussion on development suggestions. Further-

more, the interview findings were compared with the internal secondary data obtained via

AIESEC to gain a clearer picture of the organization and a comparative analysis of the

management and student data was carried out.

It was decided not to include secondary external data such as social media posts in the

identity analysis since these already convey an image which is not necessarily in line with

the brand. Instead, the focus was on internal communication material such as the AIESEC

(2018b) Blue Book. The same approach was chosen when analysing the brand image.

Here external secondary data such as Finnish social media posts, posters and Power-

Point presentations were included in the focus group session since these would be the

materials students would be likely to encounter making these materials contributors to the

image of the brand.

23

3.5 Validity and reliability

Qualitative research is researcher-dependant meaning that different researchers may find

different results based on the same interview, a characteristic which brings different in-

sights to qualitative research. It is furthermore difficult to test traditional hypothesis due to

the small samples, subjective analysis and judgement as well as the unstructured inter-

view formats, which are associated with qualitative research. These qualitative research

procedures are advantageous in discovery-oriented research when possible explanations

need to be found, but they are not the best for drawing definite conclusions and ideas

should therefore be tested before adopted. (Zikmund & al. 2010, 135-36.)

It is therefore important to note that definite conclusions should not be drawn from this

study and thus development suggestions should be tested before applied on a national

scale. The representative sample for the focus group was rather small and as mentioned

some interference such as explanations and clarifications were furthermore required dur-

ing the session. It would therefore have been ideal to conduct s second session. Unfortu-

nately, this was not possible due to lack of time as well as volunteer students.

It may be worthwhile for the commissioning company to seek out students for a second

focus group session during summer or in the beginning the semester, since students are

less busy during this time. With more students to pick from it should be possible to put to-

gether a more diverse sample with many universities and degree programmes repre-

sented in the focus group. Furthermore, it would be recommended to have a member of

AIESEC hold a presentation after the initial questions related to the brand recognition, and

before discussing deeper topics such as personality, tone of voice and so on.

24

4 Results

This chapter will focus on uncovering the IQs, with one sub-chapter assigned for each

question. First the brand identity of the commissioning company will be analysed and es-

tablished. The image of the AIESEC brand will then be uncovered and a comparative

analysis of the two will be conducted, with the aim of identifying a possible gab. Improve-

ment suggestions raised by the students will then be presented and finally, development

suggestions will be given for the commissioning company, both on a global level and for

the local Finnish team.

4.1 Brand identity of AIESEC

To uncover the brand identity of AIESEC, questions were based on both Kapferer’s (2008)

Identity prism as well as Aaker’s (2010) brand identity system to gain a more detailed and

board understanding of the organization (appendix 1). With these theories in mind eight

categories (physique, vision and values, organizational attributes, core product and attrib-

utes, brand personality, user reflection, relationship and self-image) with a subset of ques-

tions were identified. In addition, a few background questions were added. In this sub-

chapter each of these categories will be discussed and finally the brand identity of

AIESEC will be established.

4.1.1 Physique

When asked about the AIESEC logo, colour and meaning, the two interviewees had differ-

ent opinions about the symbolism behind. It was mentioned that the seven people in the

logo represent the seven founders while the other interviewee admitted not to have given

it much thought, but then reasoned that the people in the logo are walking and that it must

be related to personal development and moving forward. According to AIESEC (2018b,

13) the logo represents young people heading towards their future with a clearer and

stronger vision for themselves enabled by AIESEC. Apart from not having the same un-

derstanding of the logo and its meaning, the seven people in the logo could not represent

the founders since there were three founders of AIESEC.

As previously established, strong brand symbols facilitate recognition, provides structure

to a brand and when visual imagery is involved, the symbol becomes more memorable

(Aaker 2010, 84). It becomes clear that AIESEC has not given much thought to the im-

portance of its logo, building recognition as well as communicating the meaning behind

symbols. Apart from the original brand logo, AIESEC has also developed a symbol called

the AIESEC human and a logo with the capital letter a which are both used across social

25

media channels. As demonstrated in appendix 3 slide 2, there is furthermore a logo for

each of their three products, another three logos for Engagement with AIESEC (EwA) and

finally, the United Nations’ logo for Sustainable Development Goals is also used in associ-

ation with AIESEC where a logo to illustrate “youth for global goals” has been created.

One might question if this kind of token endorsed brand architecture is truly the best fit for

an organization with products that are all designed around the same values and with the

same goal: to develop leadership qualities in young people but more importantly, this ap-

proach requires that a clear strategy is set on how to use the logos together and what to

focus on, something which AIESEC (2018b, 34), has partly addressed by stating that

product brands should include a “powered by AIESEC” logo.

Furthermore, the interviewees associated the blue colour of AIESEC with the sky, peace,

and possibilities whereas according to AIESEC (2018b, 17), the blue colour represents

the youthful nature of the organization. This might indicate that the very basics of the

AIESEC brand are not well enough communicated to the members, leaving them with too

much freedom to reflect on meaning, metaphors, and creating an identity which is more a

reflection of themselves rather than the brand.

4.1.2 Vision and values

Both interviewees understood the vision which is according to AIESEC (2018b, 4), “peace

and fulfilment of humankind’s potential”. However, when it came to the values driving the

organization the interviewees had different opinions. One interviewee was able to name

all six values of AIESEC while the other explained that the willingness to do something

greater good for the world, is a common value amongst members of the organization.

Interestingly when asked about what the AIESEC brand stands for, one interviewee imme-

diately explained that AIESEC does not have a clear set brand in Finland because people

do not know what the brand does and what it provides. The other interviewee explained

that the brand stands for engaging and developing young people. Parallels could be

drawn between this and the vision of AIESEC however, neither of the interviewees

demonstrated to have a crystal-clear understanding of what the brand stands for, suggest-

ing that there is not a clear understanding amongst members within the organization, of

the vision and mission of AIESEC and how these translate into their work. In some sense

AIESEC may have underestimated the importance of using its brand identity to help mem-

bers within the organization understand the basic values, vision and purpose and thereby

be able to realize this vision. As previously discussed, this situation is described by Aaker

(2010, 72), as the external perspective trap.

26

It could also be discussed whether lack of clear communication of the brand identity to the

members in the organization, is leading to some sort of brand image trap. By not having a

clear understanding, members look to the people around them for an identity resulting in

conclusions such as “AIESEC does not have a brand”, which leaves members in a posi-

tion where they can do nothing but accepting the situation and attempt to sell their prod-

ucts solely based on value propositions and benefits. The very problem with this kind of

situation is that it lets the customers dictate who AIESEC is when the identity should come

from the vision and personality of the brand (Aaker 2010, 70).

When asked about the customer promise one answer was developing leadership qualities

while the other explained that it is, “contributing to the social and economic issues of the

planet while developing yourself”. However, looking at internal documents provided by

AIESEC this matter is not explained in a clear manner; The global value proposition is ac-

cording to AIESEC (2017, 6), “Develop leadership through practical team experiences in a

global environment, by improving your personal and professional competence”. There are

then two sub value propositions for each product - one for the target group and one for po-

tential partners - amounting to six different value propositions, each of which has three to

four benefits to be communicated and if necessary, also localized (AIESEC 2018b, 23-

33). It is therefore not surprising if members do not themselves have clarity.

Table 2. Possible identity traps of AIESEC

Trap Issue Solution

External

perspective

Failure to understand that the

brand identity plays an im-

portant role in helping employ-

ees understand the basic val-

ues and purpose of the organi-

zation they work for (Aaker

2010, 72).

Communicate the brand identity within

the organization and make sure that

members buy into the vision so that

they can realize it (Aaker 2010, 72).

Brand

image

Brand identity becomes the

customer’s perception of the

brand (image), letting custom-

ers dictate what the brand is

(Aaker 2010, 70).

Keep in mind that the brand image re-

flects what has been and therefore

looks to the past whereas the brand

identity looks to the future, is strategic

and reflects a business strategy while

representing the vision and personality

of the brand (Aaker 2010, 70).

27

Brand

position

The search for a brand identity

becomes the search for a posi-

tion. The focus turns to catchy

advertising lines. (Aaker 2010,

71.)

Use the positioning of the brand - The

part of the identity and value proposi-

tion to be communicated - to guide the

communication (Aaker 2010, 71).

One might question whether these value propositions were created because of the need

for a position in the market and to have something to communicate. If this is the case, it

could be argued that AIESEC finds itself in the brand positioning trap as according to

Aaker (2010, 71), the search for an identity has become a search for a position when in

fact it is the positioning which should guide the communication. The possible identity traps

discussed, which AIESEC might be facing, as well as what to keep in mind to steer out of

these traps in future, have been summarized in table 2.

4.1.3 Organizational attributes

When asked about the organizational competencies, the values and how these affect the

work, the two interviewees had different opinions. A competence model including core

competencies, self-reflection and functional skills was mentioned as AIESEC strives to de-

velop these areas within their members, which would in turn function as a driver of

AIESEC as an organization. The other interviewee explained that AIESEC is accessible to

everyone with the only limitation being the age limit (18-30-year-old). This interviewee also

stated that there is no judgement in the organization, the work environment is nice, and

that members in the Helsinki area are friends, much like a community.

Both interviewees stated that what drives them in their work for AIESEC, as a member, is

the possibility to enable other people. Both interviewees have travelled and developed

themselves and now want to help others to go through a similar journey. This is interesting

because it suggests that it may be easier to find engaged members amongst the people

who have already travelled abroad with AIESEC and want to give back, to keep this expe-

rience alive by working for the organization. Furthermore, when asked about what they

thought motivates other members of the organization, self-development, learning new

skills, finding new friends, being part of a community and paying back were mentioned. Fi-

nally, it was found that in the local teams and local committees (LC), the relationship be-

tween members is more like a community whereas on a national level it becomes less of a

community and one interviewee stated that the relationship between the member commit-

tee (MC) and LC is authoritarian.

28

This kind of commitment - to enable others, give back and do something for people and

the environment as well as a no judgment attitude - that the members of AIESEC demon-

strates stems from the very culture within AIESEC and is what drives the organization for-

ward. As stated by Kapferer (2008, 184-185), the organization also conveys this culture

and inspires the brand. In fact, as part of the core values of the AIESEC brand we find ac-

tivating leadership, living diversity as well as acting sustainably (AIESEC 2018b, 7). As

previously noted, organizational attributes are difficult for competitors to copy and in case

customers already have perceived a gap, it becomes challenging for competitors to prove

they have overcome this gap (Aaker 2010, 83). These two points therefore become im-

portant part of the organizational culture and part of the AIESEC identity.

4.1.4 Core product and attributes

The Global Volunteer programme is the focus product in Finland. According to one of the

interviewees, this product is most closely related to the values of AIESEC since the goals

are made in agreement with AIESEC, focusing on one of the United Nations’ 17 Global

Goals for Sustainable Development. Furthermore, the Global Volunteer programme is not

paid whereas the other two programmes may be, and therefore the working conditions are

set by these partnering organizations and not by AIESEC. The cost of going abroad as a

Global Volunteer is 400 euros, a price which according to the interviewee is in the low end

of the market. In addition, customers participate in a preparation seminar and are given a

debriefing, assistance in setting goals and are encouraged to reflect on personal develop-

ment. The reason for purchase was found to be the possibility to develop yourself, gain

work experience in an international environment and working on something meaningful.

Similarly, members of the organization receive tools and guidance in evaluating their skills

and setting goals to move forward.

Based on this information, the Global volunteer programme could be interpreted as the

flagship product representing the qualities of the brand and should therefore, as sug-

gested by Kapferer (2008, 183), be included in the identity of AIESEC. This product would

also be the obvious start if the objective is to have the AIESEC brand associated with a

product group which Aaker (2010, 80) suggests should be the goal when thinking of the

brand as a product scope. Thus, the objective becomes to have young people think of

AIESEC when they think of going abroad to volunteer.

29

4.1.5 Brand personality

Describing the AIESEC brand as a person, was challenging for both interviewees. One in-

terviewee stated that AIESEC is rather unstable and inconsistent since it is run by stu-

dents and because of the constant flow of new young people joining the organization. In-

terestingly, when asked to describe the ideal personality of AIESEC, this interviewee re-

sponded that ideally AIESEC would have a clear idea of who the target audience is and

what kind of projects s/he could work on, elaborating that this would mean no questioning

if a project or an organization would be suitable to work and collaborate with in order to

comply with the values of the organization. Thus, the interviewee expressed a longing for

clarity in the areas of vision, identity and communication, as well as how to comply with

these to be aligned with AIESEC on a global level. This further supports the previous

question as to whether AIESEC is in the external perspective trap.

It is explained by AIESEC (2018b, 9), that the organization is a youthful source of energy,

and that when engaging with people, both message and design should be simple and

genuine (AIESEC 2018b, 9). In terms of the design of the communications materials, pro-

vided by local teams in Helsinki, it is far from simple. The power point presentation (ap-

pendix 4) used to recruit new members for AIESEC is an example of this is; the layout

changes in colour, heavy use of images and different font styles results in an unclear mes-

sage which is not exactly in line with the AIESEC brand. However, according to AIESEC

(2018b, 17-18), apart from the traditional blue colour, eight other colours can be used

across all channels, and four other colour gradients are allowed for digital use. Although

some of the colours used in this presentation are not according to guidelines, this vast

amount of colour options and lack of specification for their use, do not set any clear limits

for the brand and leaves members with too many options of interpretation and application.

Adjectives used by the interviewees to describe the brand personality included open, hon-

est, flexible, self-aware in terms of morale, as well as having cross-cultural understanding.

According to AIESEC (2018b, 9), the brand personality is energetic, engaged, inclusive,

simple, and genuine. It could be questioned again, whether these personality traits were

established as sorts of guidelines for the communications. AIESEC is sending young peo-

ple abroad and claims to develop leadership qualities in their customers and members. It

is therefore surprising that adjectives such as trustworthy, professional, reliable and re-

sponsible are not mentioned as these are attributes that an organization would want to

demonstrate in order to create trust. As previously noted, a strong brand personality may

be the basis for a relationship between brand and customers and enables the possibility

for creating a self-expressive benefit, which the customers then use to express their own

30

personality (Aaker 2010, 83-84). Thus, it is important to establish a brand personality

which both members and customers can mirror themselves in, and which describes the

ideal personality required to build a long-term relationship.

4.1.6 Relationship

The relationship between members and AIESEC was described as close to the point

where members are obsessed with the organization, while AIESEC’s role is the mentor

who enables development. When it comes to the relationship with customers, it was found

that AIESEC is merely the enabler, allowing young people to work for a common purpose.

When asked about the tone of voice, the two interviewees had different opinions. One

stated that it varies according to the purpose but that it should be assertive, confident

while encouraging the audience to explore and experience. The other interviewee ex-

plained that the tone of voice should be friendly, warm and honest. According to AIESEC

(2018b, 10), the tone of voice should be conversational and friendly, while members

should aim to be inclusive, activating, daring, conversational, relevant and relatable.

Furthermore, when creating content members should strive to be representative, purpose-

ful, truthful, activating, open, inclusive, inspirational, personal (but not too personal), play-

ful (but not too playful), and simple (AIESEC 2018b, 39). As established, the relationship

defines the mode of conduct and has implications for the way the brand acts and relates

to customers (Kapferer 2008, 185-186). It is therefore important that there is clarity when it

comes to the kind of relationship that the organization wishes to have with its audience as

well as the appropriate tone of voice, something which the current guidelines do not ad-

dress in a clear matter and is visible in the communication materials.

The tone of voice in the posters used to promote the Global volunteering programme is,

as an example, to the point and attempts to encourage the reader to take action and be-

come a leader (appendix 3, slide 23). However, this may leave people confused as

phrases like develop your skills and become a leader have an educational ring to them

while the image on the poster and the additional text tell a story of a community with the

children placed around a young woman sparking associations of teaching.

31

4.1.7 User reflection and self-image

Reflecting on the kinds of customers of the AIESEC brand as well as members, one inter-

viewee expressed that new members are often enthusiastic, passionate and interested in

self-development. Many members of AIESEC are furthermore interested in sustainable liv-

ing, which is something that connects them. Finally, it was found that AIESEC provides

customers and members with an intercultural lifestyle while working on issues of the

world.

As mentioned, reflection is what consumers would identify as the perceived type of client

of the brand and describes how the customer wishes to be portrayed as a result of using

the product (Kapferer 2008,186). Therefore, not only does reflection describes how mem-

bers and customers wish to be portrayed, but it also hints to the perceived type of cus-

tomer and member of AIESEC. Thus, although AIESEC’s target is young people age 18 to

30, the members and customers would like to be seen as passionate young people who

live sustainably, are developing themselves by working on global issues in an international

environment.

Furthermore, working for AIESEC is something which the interviewees stated made them

and other members both proud and happy of their achievements and professional growth.

As previously established, the self-image refers to how the consumers feel when they in-

teract with the brand and is described as an internal mirror (Kapferer 2008,186). It could

be discussed whether part of the previously established reflection is more the self-image,

however, the important thing to understand is that members feel that they actually achieve

something, that they do contribute in working towards a better world and that they are re-

ally proud to be part of this.

4.1.8 The AIESEC brand identity

To illustrate the identity of AIESEC Kapferer’s (2008) prism was found to be best suitable

because of its simple and clear way of addressing some of the previously discussed chal-

lenges which AIESEC faces. Furthermore, concern was raised by one of the interviewees

regarding the need to be able to sell, both products and the idea of becoming a member,

something which the interviewee felt uncomfortable doing. Since members have very dif-

ferent educational backgrounds, this approach of communicating the identity of the brand

may also solve this problem since talking to the self-image - an image which members of

the organization already can relate to - will feel much more natural for those who do not

have a background in business or sales.

32

Based on the analysis above, the brand identity of AIESEC can be established as illus-

trated in figure 7. As previously established, AIESEC develops young leaders through vol-

unteering programmes and their membership offering with the Global Volunteer Pro-

gramme being their flagship product since this programme is closer aligned with values of

the organization. The main colour of AIESEC is blue and the personality is genuine, trust-

worthy and outgoing which should reflect in the relationship creating a friendly, relatable

and inspiring relationship with the recipient.

Figure 7. Brand identity of AIESEC

The strong culture is an advantage for AIESEC where a global network of young people

with a no-judgement attitude are dedicated to give back by enable others. This is also in

line with the passionate, living sustainably, and tackling global issues way that the mem-

bers would like to be seen, as they feel like they are making a difference in the world.

4.2 Brand image of AIESEC

To uncover the image of the AIESEC brand, questions were formulated based on the six

dimensions of Kapferer’s (2008), identity prism (appendix 2). In addition, visual examples

from secondary external material were presented and provided as topics of discussion

(appendix 3). The structure of this sub-chapter is based on the main areas of discussion

by the participants during the focus group session.

33

Before the actual discussion began, the participants were asked if they had read anything

about AIESEC or had been in contact with any of their members. One of the participants

remembered seeing a poster in the lounge of Haaga-Helia, while another student con-

fused AIESEC with the organization for International Student Identity Card (ISIC) due to

the similar pronunciation of the name. The other participants had never heard of the or-

ganization and were therefore completely unaware of what AIESEC does and provides.

4.2.1 Organizational attributes and physique

Due to the very limited knowledge of AIESEC, the participants were not able to discuss

much about the organization and unfortunately, presenting examples from presentations -

which are used by members of AIESEC - did not help much (appendix 3, slide 3-13). They

were generally positive about what was described as “ideals of AIESEC” as well as sup-

porting young people to work towards own goals, the UN Sustainable Development Goals

and thought that the intentions of the organization seemed good. It was mentioned that

being a member of the organization probably allows young people to expand their interna-

tional network and learning about different cultures. However, they all had difficulties in

fully grasping the concepts of the global volunteer programme, memberships and how

these relate to each other. The questions of AIESEC’s main activities and how the organi-

zation operates remained open.

It was furthermore not surprising that when the participants were asked to discuss who

AIESEC is, their colour, and what the AIESEC logo looks like, they did not have many

comments. The one participant who was able to recall an AIESEC poster mentioned that

the logo looked like people standing in line and was further able to recognise this logo

when all the AIESEC logos were showed to the participants during the session (appendix

3 slide 2). However, it was clear that none of the other participants recognised any of the

logos. Comments were made that the AIESEC human looked like a traffic sign, an associ-

ation which all the participants found to be true, and one participant further associated the

original AIESEC logo with an accounting company and not a global organisation providing

volunteering programmes. This further supports the previous discussed notion that

AIESEC has not given much thought to building recognition and communicating the

meaning behind symbols.

However, as previously discussed a clear definition of what the brand stands for must be

in place before choosing symbols, since the values of the brand should be reflected in

these (Kapferer 2008, 173). It is therefore also possible that the reason for the AIESEC

logos not being well in line is because a clear definition of what the brand stands for was

34

not in place before creating the various logos and symbols. While AIESEC, may have tried

to fix this problem by using the “powered by AIESEC” logo together with the product

logos, it became clear during the focus group session that this unfortunately is not a

proper long-term solution. Despite these attempts, the students seemed to pick up on the

lack of structure and direction.

4.2.2 Social media examples

When presented with screenshots from the AIESEC Finland Facebook page (appendix 3,

slide 14), the discussion turned to the problem of recognising AIESEC - hence the brand

recognition - due to the use of several logos. Participants found it difficult to see the con-

nection between the profile picture and the original AIESEC logo – which are of two differ-

ent fonts - and further discussed the difficulties of associating the page with the global vol-

unteer programme. At this point the participants clearly found it problematic that the logos

which represent the organization (the original logo, the AIESEC human, and the logo with

the capital letter a) are so different from each other and represent a different world if com-

pared to the product logos for the volunteer programmes, which were thought to be well in

line with each other.

As previously discussed, inconsistent messages will not only ruin the brand image but

also send conflicting signals in the brain lowering the chances of the brand being selected

by the algorithm of the brain (Walvis 2010, 103). Thus, by not sending a coherent mes-

sage throughout channels AIESEC is spoiling its own image leaving conflicting signals in

the reader’s brain which will likely result in the brand not being at the top of the readers

mind, even if this person’s needs could be satisfied by AIESEC.

It was further interesting that, when presented with two Facebook posts (appendix 3, slide

15-16), the participants initially thought that the posts had nothing to do with any of the

volunteer programmes since they did not spot any of those logos. This was despite the

word “volunteering” being written on one of the images and included in the copytext of

both posts. After further examination of the posts, the participants found the copytexts and

images to convey mixed messages. Furthermore, the group found it difficult to understand

the point of the posts and felt that maybe there was a hidden agenda.

As an example, one question that was brought up concerning the connection between de-

veloping sales skills and volunteering as it was promoted in one of the posts (appendix 3,

15). Do you go volunteer abroad to develop your selling skills? How will this happen? And

35

what will you be selling? Were some of the questions brought up. Due to the lack of an-

swers to these basic questions, the participants felt that it was essentially impossible to

grasp the core message of these promotional posts, which in turn made them sceptic to-

wards AIESEC. It was furthermore pointed out that with such little information - or maybe

in this case, the wrong - information it would be impossible for the reader to imagine if

such opportunity would be of interest as well as feasible. Moreover, if the reader would be

thinking of going abroad to volunteer, this person would likely give up on that idea if the

information is too hard to find.

Similarly, when participants were shown a screenshot from the Finnish AIESEC Instagram

account (appendix 3, slide 17), they found the copytext in the bio to come off as shady be-

cause of the star emojis, the quote: “sign up”, as well as the heavy use of hashtags. Some

of the participants even went as far as comparing this to spam emails. It was furthermore

discussed that this approach might be “American” (in a negative way), because of the use

of “nice” words like personal development, marketing and sales combined with “sign up

now” and a “random link”. This made the participants feel like there was some sort of

catch.

The same was true for the Instagram and twitter posts (appendix 3, slide 18-22), which

were lacking specific information on what the volunteer works consist of and who it will im-

pact. The “sign up today” call to action was furthermore seen as pushy, and they felt like

AIESEC was trying to rush the sign up. The participants expressed that they would

preferer the call to action to be an invitation to find out more.

As a final note, it was surprising to see that the use of logos was important to the partici-

pants when creating credibility. They felt that since they did not see the global volunteer

logo on the Instagram page, they could not trust it. Thus, it was not enough for them to

read about volunteer programmes with an AIESEC logo present, they wanted to see the

global volunteer programme logo as well. It was almost as if - in the little time the partici-

pants had to familiarise themselves with AIESEC - they came to see the organization and

the products (programmes) as two separate brands and thus one brand could not talk on

behalf of the other without creating distrust. This idea of two brands and how - based the

examples presented in appendix 3 – the participants could have perceived brand one to

speak on behalf of brand two is illustrated in figure 8.

36

Figure 8. Student perception of brand representation

This is a rather serious problem for AIESEC as it is the organization - and not the ‘product

brand’ - who communicates on behalf of the products. To sum up, not only does it create

confusion that the AIESEC logos and symbols are not in line but since the participants

were not able to fully grasp the connection between these it made them feel wary towards

the brand. Furthermore, as in the abovementioned Facebook scenario, the lack of a global

volunteer logo made the participants think that the page had nothing to do with this pro-

gramme, and in the discussion about Instagram, the absence of this logo - together with

previously described factors - further made them doubt if these pages could be trusted at

all.

4.2.3 Poster example

Once the participants were presented with the posters (appendix 3, slide 23), one partici-

pant pointed out that AIESEC constantly try to convince the reader that volunteer work is

a mean to build skills and become a leader. However, the participants found that there

were no examples of how you could become a better leader by working with AIESEC. The

messages were therefore thought to be unclear with the use of “big words” without context

to support them.

The colour scheme of the posters was briefly discussed. The red poster was found to give

a more earthy, cultural diversity kind of image while the blue one was thought to be more

in line with the leadership message and felt more corporate. Finally, also this example

made participants feel they were being pushed to sign up and that AIESEC does not trust

people to sign up on their own.

37

4.2.4 Relationship and personality

When asked how the participants felt about AIESEC’s way of interacting with them, the re-

sponse was that the earlier mentioned call to actions made them feel like AIESEC was

pushing them to buy their products. As previously noted, the participants also felt like they

could not trust the organization and one commented that s/he would do a lot of research

about the organization before interacting with AIESEC to make sure there are no hidden

agendas or any catches.

Furthermore, it was thought that the messages were not personal enough and that

AIESEC did not manage to relate to the reader. The participants felt a lack of clear, hon-

est, reliable and straight forward information. As noted, when addressing young adults,

brands should offer a sense of community, security and optimism and a way of escaping a

tedious reality while the tone of voice should be respectful, aspirational, pioneering and

cool (Gabay 2015, 121). Here a sense of optimism and community would be natural for

AIESEC to include as these are well in line with the identity established.

The students were asked to discuss their attitude towards the word “johtajuus” meaning

leadership (appendix 3, slide 24). They did not see this word to be problematic however

the word “liike” meaning movement which was used in the phrase “Nuorten johtajuusliike”

(meaning youth leadership movement), was thought to have a “horrible”, bad ring to it be-

cause of the political associations that came to their minds. One participant further de-

scribed that it gave the feeling of “once you are in this movement, you will be in for life”.

This is a completely different image of AIESEC compared to the inclusive, non-judgemen-

tal community working for a common purpose as it was described by the two members in

the interviews.

Adding to this, the participants noticed that the copy text mentioned AIESEC being a non-

political organization and found it very contradictory and humorous to combine that with

the above-mentioned headline which makes AIESEC sound like a “revolutionary move-

ment”. One of the participants suggested to use the phrase “Nuoret johtajat” meaning

young leaders, as this phrase has a softer ring to it and would match the image above

(appendix 3, slide 24).

The discussion was then turned to the general use of the word leadership since the partic-

ipants generally felt that it was odd to talk about leadership in the context of volunteer

work. It was questioned whether one’s main motivation for joining was to become leader

of a movement or helping people. It was further discussed if this experience with AIESEC

38

was something that could be added to a CV and therefore the participants felt that it would

be important to clarify how AIESEC develops leadership skills in young people and if

these skills would be valuable for any future use. In short, the participants felt that

AIESEC had positioned itself as the place where young people would get a good basis of

skills which would be recognised by others as well and therefore beneficial in future.

The students were asked to describe AIESEC as a person. What was said by each partici-

pant in order going from participant one to four is summarized in table 3. Here it is possi-

ble to see that the students clearly piggy-backed off each other, when it came to the idea

of AIESEC as a sales person.

Table 3. AIESEC as a person, as seen by the focus group participants

Participant 1 Male

Mid-twenties

Sales person

Wears a suit

Participant 2 Suit guy

Anxious to sell

Going from door to door selling vacuum cleaners

Participant 3 TV-shop vibe

Like the DNA/Elisa guys

Stopping people on the street to sell

Participant 4 Someone advertising in front of the railway station

Desperate to sell

Someone you try to avoid

Final comment Not a person you trust

4.2.5 Reflection and Self-image

Interestingly, the participants did not have the same image of members working for the or-

ganization as they imagined them to be “young people”, probably “students”, “optimistic”,

“lively”, “fun”, “kind-hearted”, “genuine” and “outgoing”. They also thought that the mem-

bers must be adventurous people who want to spread good in the world. A final note was

that members probably do not care about marketing or advertisement as this reflects in

the communication.

39

The students were also asked what kind of person they would be if they were a member

of AIESEC. Here “fun”, “energetic”, “high on life”, “spontaneous”, “kind-hearted”, and “gen-

uine” were what they would think of themselves. However only one of the participants ex-

pressed interest in becoming a member of AIESEC, and one student clearly expressed

not wanting to join the organization as a member since everything is so “messy” but would

be interested in traveling and developing skills. Another participant expressed difficulties

imagining to be part of AIESEC since this person did not think of him/herself as a sponta-

neous kind of person.

4.2.6 The AIESEC brand image

The image expressed by the Finnish students of AIESEC Finland can be summarised as

in figure 9. This image prism is therefore entirely from their point of view. Thus, physique

is centred around recognition, relationship describes the interaction, culture becomes the

image of the organization while personality is more focused on how the interaction reflects

on the organization. Reflection is the participants view of the AIESEC members while self-

image refer what the students would think of themselves if they would be members.

Figure 9. Brand Image of AIESEC

Based on the focus group discussion, we can conclude that there was little to no recogni-

tion of the AIESEC brand and the lack of coherent logos representing the brand and its

products further left the participants confused. There was generally a positive attitude to-

wards supporting young people in working towards their goals, as well as the UN Global

40

Goals for Sustainable Development, however, the lack of specific information in social me-

dia posts and on posters presented, made the participant sceptic about the motives of

AIESEC leaving an unorganised impression of the organization.

The participants found the frequent use of “sign up now” call to actions pushy and further

felt that messages were not personal enough and did not relate to the reader. This, com-

bined with the uncertainty of the intentions, lead to the personality being described as anx-

ious to sell and untrustworthy. However, the participants thought rather positively about

the people in the organization who were described as fun optimistic and spreading good in

the world. In addition, participants would see themselves as spontaneous, kind-hearted

and high on life if they were part of AIESEC.

4.3 Comparison of brand identity and brand image

As previously noted, the brand position is the part of the brand identity and value proposi-

tion which should be communicated to the target audience. The main characteristics of

the brand position includes subsets of the brand identity and the value proposition, active

communication, target audience, as well as competitive advantage. (Aaker 2010, 176-

177.) With the brand identity uncovered (figure 10), the global value proposition estab-

lished by AIESEC (2017, 6), as “Develop leadership through practical team experiences in

a global environment, by improving your personal and professional competence”, active

communication can now be addressed.

Comparing the brand identity with the brand image on several ‘image dimensions´ will

have different outcomes for the communication tasks in the position statement as these

will focus on either augmenting, reinforcing and exploiting, or diffusing, softening or delet-

ing the brand image (Aaker 2010, 180). Similarly, when comparing image and identity on

the different aspects of the prism, gabs between these can clearly be defined. The as-

pects physique, personality, relationship and culture have the biggest perceived gaps as

the image expressed in these areas is mainly negative with coherency and trust being the

main drivers for the negative image.

One of the focus areas for AIESEC should therefore be to move the image from “messy”,

“unclear” (inconsistent), “unpersonal” and “untrustworthy” - an image resulted from

AIESEC being perceived as “pushy” with a “hidden agenda”, having an unclear visual

identity, and sending mixed messages - to genuine, clear (coherent), relatable and trust-

worthy (figure 10). As previously discussed, if the image is inconsistent with the identity,

41

the communication task in the position statement becomes to either defuse, soften or de-

lete the image and it may therefore be useful to specify what the brand is not (Aaker 2010,

181-182).

Figure 10. AIESEC image positioning map

Following this example, AIESEC could develop way to communicate that:

− There are no hidden agendas − It is not an organization that you cannot trust − There is no intention to push for fast action, such as signing up or buying products

However, since many young people in Finland are not familiar with AIESEC, it may not be

necessary to communicate what the brand is not. Instead, focusing on communicating the

identity of the brand and talking to the self-image may be enough as AIESEC is also fac-

ing the challenge of gaining recognition amongst young people in Finland. It is however

important that AIESEC does not continue in this same pattern as changing an image from

negative to positive will be a much more demanding task than building the right one from

the start.

42

4.4 Student development suggestions

At the end of the focus group session, the students were asked to give their opinions and

development ideas for AIESEC, with the goal of becoming more attractive to young Finn-

ish people. The logos were mentioned again as something which should be either

changed or modified so that visually AIESEC will represent one brand only. Another idea

was to avoid using the AIESEC logo all together, however, this is not recommended. It

was further suggested that AIESEC should change the approach when promoting the

products. The students found the current approach more suitable for low risk purchases

like hair products or similar, and advised AIESEC to soften their approach, to be “less

pushy” and create a more “earthy” image which they thought to be more in line with volun-

teer work.

Furthermore, the way of writing was thought not to be suitable for a Finnish audience as,

according to the participants, Finnish people prefer marketing that is “straight up” (no non-

sense), no “big or flashy words” just as clear information as possible. The tone of voice

should be more down to earth, honest and straight forward. AIESEC should furthermore

be more personal, try to “relate more to the reader” and copytexts should be more in-

formative. Finally, it was suggested to add the social media logos on printed materials as

well.

When asked about what could be done specifically to attract new members, it was further

added that maybe AIESEC could benefit from a more “laid-back attitude”, with less “sign-

up” call to actions. This is also in line with how Gabay (2015, 121), recommends brands to

communicate with this age group, explaining that the tone of voice should be cool, re-

spectful, pioneering, and aspirational.

It was furthermore suggested to create 30sec videos for social media where members de-

scribe what they are doing in the organization and what it is like to be a member. The call

to action here should be an invitation to learn more. Hosting forums or seminars was also

thought to be a good way to promote AIESEC. Finally, if AIESEC uses what the partici-

pants described as strong words (such as leadership), these should be explained and

have more context to avoid copytext without actual information, full of “big words”.

43

4.5 Development sugestions based on findings

There are several important areas where it is recommended that the commissioning com-

pany make changes. Some of the issues addressed in this study are not minor and re-

quire attention form the global team. These will shortly be addressed in this sub-chapter

together with the recommendations for the Finnish team.

4.5.1 Suggestions for global team

As it has been noted several times throughout this study, it is suggested that the commis-

sioning company works toward creating a more coherent identity on a global level. There-

fore, it is important to get to the bottom of what the AIESEC brand stands for, and if the

analysis provided in this study is not found to be sufficient, additional research can be

conducted and changes to the identity can be made. However, it is important to note that

it is not up to each country to create their own identity or modify it as they see fit.

When creating a visual identity, knowing the brand identity will give more freedom of ex-

pression because it emphasises the distinction, superiority and defines what stays and

what is free to change over time (Kapferer 2008, 173). Thus, only when there is a clear

understanding of what the brand stands for, it is recommended to work on creating a more

coherent visual identity. The gap between logos representing the organization and those

representing the products is too big, creating confusion, and inconsistent messages will

send conflicting signals in the brain, spoil the brand image, while lowering the chances for

the brand to be selected by the algorithm of the brain (Walvis 2010, 103).

In addition, consider that the values of the brand must be reflected in the external signs of

recognition (Kapferer 2008, 173). It is further recommended to consider if an endorsed

brand structure is truly the right model for the AIESEC organization. As an example, a

branded house would allow the focus to be on one single image which may be easier to

manage. Finally, communicate the identity within the organization. Create guidelines that

are simple and in line with the identity and underline what kind of relationship AIESEC

should have with its audience as well as the appropriate tone of voice.

These are big tasks for the global team. However, it is important that these issues are ad-

dressed as they need to be in place for the local entities to act in line with the brand iden-

tity and communicating one coherent message throughout channels, to create a strong

brand that people recognise.

44

4.5.2 Suggestions for Finnish teams

While the core of many issues identified in this study is for the global unit to address, there

are still things that the Finnish teams can work on. Some of these are simple things such

as changing the call to actions from “sign up now”, “sign up today” etc. to “read more”,

“discover more”, “learn more” and so on. It is important that the reader does not feel

pushed as it was revealed that the Finnish students would never click such links because

it made them wary of the intentions of the organization. It is also recommended not to use

emojis in connection with links or call to actions as this combination draws associations to

spam emails. Finally, copytexts in social media posts and other promotional materials,

should be more directed at a Finnish audience. In practical, according to the students, this

means honest, clear and straight forward information with a proper amount of context. It is

thus not enough to write statements such as “go volunteer abroad and develop your lead-

ership skills” instead questions like what, where, when and how should be addressed.

Think also about the kind of visuals that is used in association with the communication

materials, as these should reflect the identity of AIESEC. Furthermore, if an image is used

to promote a certain volunteer activity, it will help the reader if the image is related to the

actual volunteer work. As for promoting the membership offering, it is suggested to show

how the organization works and what members do and how they benefit from being a

member. This may be done with short videos. These changes are an important step to-

wards creating to more trust while inspiring people to take action and participate instead of

pushing them.

As previously discussed, an interviewee raised concern about feeling uncomfortable with

selling, both products and the idea of becoming a member. Since members in the organi-

zation come from many different backgrounds it would not be surprising if others feel the

same way. Therefore, use the brand identity established and shift the focus from pushing

sales to communicating the identity of the brand, while talking to the self-image, an image

which members of the organization can relate to.

It is further recommended for members of AIESEC to consider the positioning of the

brand. As noted, the identity expresses tangible and intangible characteristics based on

the heritage of the brand, while positioning the brand is competitive. (Kapferer 2008, 178.)

The lasts two points of the positioning statement, target audience and competitive ad-

vantage, should therefore be addressed. Whereas the target segment can be a large

group, the target audience should be specific, however, it may be feasible to have a pri-

mary and secondary target audience (Aaker 2010, 179). As noted, the only restriction of

45

becoming a member of AIESEC is the age limit (18 to 30 years), and young people in this

age group can therefore be considered the target segment. It is then necessary to further

specify the target audience. Examples of such could be Finnish students, international

students, and young graduates, while making Finnish students the primary audience to at-

tract to become members of the organization. It could also be considered to split the tar-

get group into two target audiences: young people interested in travelling and young peo-

ple interested in developing skills, or simply just differentiate between students and other

young people.

The competitive advantage should be a part of the value proposition which resonates with

customers, is of superiority and differentiates from competitors. As discussed, a brand can

amongst other position itself based on self-expressive or emotional benefits, a customer

relationship, a brand personality as well as organizational attributes. (Aaker 2010, 182-

183.) The strong culture in AIESEC is, as previously mentioned, an organizational attrib-

ute which is difficult to compete with and would therefore be a suitable way to position the

brand. It was also discussed that the Global volunteer programme would be a good to

start with the objective is to have the brand associated with a product group. The goal

would thus be to have young people think of AIESEC when they think of going abroad to

volunteer. However self-expressive or emotional benefits may also be suitable ways of po-

sitioning.

As previously discussed, the students in the focus group study did not find it logical to talk

about leadership in the context of volunteer work and were a bit sceptic about leadership

in the context of the membership offering although they thought it might work. Therefore, it

may be best to include the part, from the value proposition, about improving personal and

professional competence in a global environment, since the focus group participants were

more positive towards personal development than leadership. Furthermore, consider if

AIESEC gains a real perceived advantage by communicating about leadership to the tar-

get audience. This objective can still be the mission of the organization and part of its

identity. However, it is questionable if that is the reason why young people become mem-

bers of the organization, as it became clear during the interviews that the motivation lies in

giving back and enabling others. It could therefore be argued that these are the goals

which AIESEC should tap into - by positioning the brand in a way that will satisfy the mix

of these goals, connecting the neurons representing the brand with those representing the

customer goals - for the brand to be chosen (Walvis 2010, 50).

46

With the above in mind and based on the Aaker’s (2010), four questions described in

chapter 2.3., the positioning statement for AIESEC, which is to be communicated to the

target audience, could be formulated as:

− AIESEC is genuine, friendly and something people can relate to. It inspires to tackle global issues and develop personal and professional competencies in a global envi-ronment. (Target - eighteen- to thirty-year-old with a passion for travel and/or self-de-velopment).

By implementing these changes and working towards communicating the identity/ posi-

tioning statement while obtaining coherency, both brand image and recognition of AIESEC

should improve. These are important elements in the process of attracting both members

and customers. As a final note, the identity traps were discussed in this study as AIESEC

may find itself in several of these. It is therefore advised to follow the recommendations

given in table 2, to break out of these traps and be aware of these in future. Ending up in

one or several identity traps may lead to ineffective brand strategies (Aaker 2010, 69).

47

5 Discussion and conclusions

The objective of this thesis was to uncover how AIESEC could communicate its brand

identity and thereby attract Finnish students to become members of the organization. Dur-

ing the analysis of the brand identity, in chapter 4.1, it became clear that AIESEC had not

given enough thought to the importance of their visual identity and building recognition,

and it was questioned whether nor not a token endorsed brand architecture was the best

fit for the organization. It was further questioned in chapter 4.2 if lack of a clear definition

on what the brand stands for, while creating the various logos and symbols, was the rea-

son for the logos not being well in line. Management was therefore encouraged to con-

sider creating a more coherent visual identity based in the brand identity while considering

if changing the brand architecture would create a stronger brand.

Concern was raised in chapter 4.1 as to whether AIESEC finds itself in one or several

identity traps as findings indicated that the organization had underestimated the im-

portance of using brand identity to help members within the organization in understanding

basic values, purpose and vision resulting in the external perspective trap. It was further

discussed if lack of communicating the identity within the organization, had left members

looking for an identity externally leading to the brand image trap, where customers dictate

who the brand is. Finally, it was questioned if the large number of value propositions were

created for communications objectives, in which case the search for an identity had be-

come a search for a position leading to the brand positioning trap. Thus, it was advised to

communicate the brand identity within the organization, to keep in mind that the image re-

flects on the past while the identity looks to the future, and use the positioning to guide the

communication, in order to break out of these traps. (table 2.)

It was found that the culture is what drives the organization forward, as members are com-

mitted young people who want to enable others, give back and do something for the envi-

ronment. Thus, these organizational attributes became an important part to include in the

identity as they also provide a competitive advantage for the organization. It was surpris-

ing to find that trust was not discussed in the internal guidelines provided by the commis-

sioning company, as this was thought to be an important element to include in the identity,

for this type of business. The importance of trust was further supported by the representa-

tive sample of young people when uncovering the image, as they found the company to

be untrustworthy. Based on findings, the relationship which AIESEC should build with its

customers was found to be inspiring, relatable, and friendly. Furthermore, passionate, liv-

48

ing sustainably, and tackling global issues were found to be ways in which costum-

ers/members would like to be portrayed as a result of interacting with AIESEC, while they

feel they are making a difference in the world. (figure 7.)

In the process of uncovering the brand image of AIESEC in chapter 4.2, it was found that

there was little recognition of the brand however there was generally a positive attitude to-

wards the organization regarding the collaboration with UN for the Sustainable Develop-

ment Goals, as well and helping young people work towards their own goals. It was found

that grasping the concepts of the global volunteer programme, memberships and how

these relate to each other was a general problem which did not become clearer as the

students got to learn more about the organization. The visual inconstancies further con-

tributed to the confusion and while AIESEC may have tried to fix this problem by introduc-

ing “powered by” logos it became clear that this is not a proper long-term solution as the

students anyway picked up on the lack of direction and structure of the brand. It was

found to be especially problematic that visuals representing the organization are so differ-

ent from each and from the product logos.

A general lack of specific information, mixed messages and pushy call to actions, resulted

in a negative image (figure 9), and further added to the confusion. This was found to be

problematic as coherency is a necessity in order not to spoil the brand image and for the

brand to be selected by the algorithm of the brain. It was further found that messages did

not relate to the reader which combined with the uncertainty of the intentions, lead to the

brand personality being described as anxious to sell and untrustworthy. However, the im-

age of the people in the organization was found to be rather positive as they were de-

scribed as “optimistic” and “spreading good in the world”.

The comparison between brand identity and brand image in chapter 4.3 revealed the big-

gest gaps to be on aspects of physique, personality, relationship and culture as these ar-

eas mainly expressed a negative image with coherency and trust as the main drivers for

this image. The focus area was thus identified to be moving the image from inconsistent

(messy) and untrustworthy to coherent (clear) and trustworthy. As the image was found to

be is inconsistent with the identity, the communication task in the position statement (the

part of the value proposition and brand image to be communicated), was found to be sof-

tening or deleting the image. However, it was questioned whether it would be necessary

to delete the image since many young people in Finland are not familiar with the organiza-

tion. A focus on communicating the identity of the brand by talking to the self-image - an

image which members of the organization can relate to - was therefore proposed, as the

challenge is also to gain recognition amongst young people in Finland.

49

Suggestions for improvements provided by the Finnish students were discussed in chap-

ter 4.4. It was found that the communication approach was not suitable for a Finnish audi-

ence therefore needs to be changed. communication materials should be as clear and

straight forward as possible, the tone of voice should be more down to earth and honest,

as well as be more informative and answer to questions like what, where, when and how.

It was also suggested, and further discussed in chapter 4.5, to change the call to actions

from ‘sign up now’ to ‘learn more’ or similar as well as stop using emoji’s in association

with call to actions to avoid that the reader feels pushed and questions the intentions of

the organization. It was further suggested in chapter 4.5 to consider the use of visuals as

these should reflect the identity of AIESEC. It would further help the reader if there would

be a link between images and the actual volunteer work in question in promotional posts.

Developing leadership was not found logical in the context of volunteer programmes as

well as a bit odd in the context of the membership offerings. It was further questioned in

chapter 4.5 whether leadership is the reason for young people joining organization and

consequently if it provides a real perceived advantage, as there were some indications

that giving back and enabling others are the motivators. It was evaluated that leadership

could still be part of the identity however not always the main focus.

Thus, it was suggested not to use this part of the value proposition in the process of posi-

tioning the brand and instead include the part about improving personal and professional

competence in a global environment. The target group was also discussed as the com-

missioning company could choose to operate with a primary and secondary target audi-

ences, if this would prove beneficial. Several examples were given including dividing the

target group into two audiences: young people interested in travelling and young people

interested in developing skills.

Finally, a suggestion for the positioning statement, to be communicated to the target audi-

ence, was given and worded as:

− AIESEC is genuine, friendly and something people can relate to. It inspires to tackle global issues and develop personal and professional competencies in a global envi-ronment. (Target - eighteen- to thirty-year-old with a passion for travel and/or self-de-velopment).

Thus, the goals for AIESEC Finland becomes to communicate the brand identity position-

ing statement in a way that creates the desired relationship which was suggested to be in-

spiring, relatable and friendly, with a tone of voice based on a genuine, trustworthy and

outgoing personality, while speaking to the self-image which was identified to be I am

50

making a difference in the world. The strong organizational culture was found to supports

this while providing a competitive advantage. The reflection was identified as passionate,

tackling global issues, and sustainable living which becomes important insight to the com-

munication as this explains how people wishes to be seen as a result from interacting with

the brand. The target may thus be very different from the reflection.

When promoting the membership offering, it was suggested to show what members do,

how they benefit from being members as well as how the organization works, which may

be done with short 30sec. videos. Finally, the development suggestions and the small

changes provided in this study are important for the commissioning company to consider

as there is a need to build recognition while making sure that the negative brand image

does not remain by working towards a relationship with customers which is built on trust

by inspiring people to take action and participate instead of pushing them.

It was briefly addressed, that it may be easier for the commissioning company to recruit

members amongst young people who have already been abroad with one of the volunteer

programmes. It may therefore be beneficial for AIESEC to consider if efforts in Finland

should be on inspiring people to go volunteer and then encourage them to continue work-

ing for the organization, enabling others to go through the same experience that they had.

This would also result in dedicated people who believe in the organization because they

had a positive experience with it.

This thesis process was challenging in terms of keeping focus, as several issues came up

throughout this study. Some of these issues are on a higher more strategic level and re-

quire attention form the global team as these also affect local teams. There was therefore

a constant need to create a balance between the focus and attention given on a global

and local level, and maybe more could have been done to help the Finnish team (by giv-

ing more concrete and specific directions). However, it is important that the deeper issues

are addressed so they can be fixed as these have implications for the whole organization,

including the Finnish team. Overall the thesis process thought the author to work more in-

dependently and make choices without always consulting other people, and hopefully the

commissioning company will consider some of the suggestions proposed in this study.

Finally, through this study, the global identity of AIESEC has been established as well as

what young Finnish people think of the organization (brand image) based on various com-

munication materials created by AIESEC Finland. As previously discussed, the commis-

sioning company may benefit from a second focus group session to dig deeper into the

mind of young people in Finland. On a global level the commissioning company could also

51

benefit from digging deeper into the mix of goals of young people, to uncover which ones

AIESEC could strengthen its connection to, and become a brand associated with the abil-

ity to fulfil these goals and thereby be chosen by the brain’s algorithm (Walvis 2010, 50).

In other words, we know what people think of the organization, the next step is to figure

out what happens in the mid before choosing a brand like AIESEC.

52

References

Aaker, D. A. 2010. Building Strong Brands. Pocket Books. London.

AIESEC 2017. Get: Value Proposition. Everything you need to know, to evolve TM

processes and drive Operations. Global TM Summit ’17. Presentation.

AIESEC 2018a. Global Annual Report 2017-2018. URL:

https://issuu.com/aiesecinternational/docs/aiesec_global_annual_report_17.18.c.

Accessed: 13 March 2019.

AIESEC 2018b. Intranet. AIESEC Blue Book. Accessed: 13 March 2019.

AIESEC 2018c. Info evenings 2018. Get to know AIESEC in Helsinki. Presentation.

Helsinki.

AIESEC 2018d. Go volunteer aboard!. Presentation. Helsinki.

AIESEC 2018e. Build your skills and become a leader. Poster. Helsinki.

AIESEC 22.10.2018. In the Naturatica project you work with local communities in Costa

Rica to help them to understand about climate change and their effects through activities

in the land. Tweet @aiesec_fi. URL:

https://twitter.com/aiesec_fi/status/1054341768655896577. Accessed: 3 April 2019.

AIESEC 23.10.2018. What is the life of a Naturatica volunteer like? In the Naturatica

project in Costa Rica every day is a new and different challenge. Tweet @aiesec_fi. URL:

https://twitter.com/aiesec_fi/status/1054628708328312832. Accessed: 3 April 2019.

AIESEC 2019a. About. URL: https://aiesec.org/about-us. Accessed: 13 March 2019.

AIESEC 2019b Home. URL: https://aiesec.org/. Accessed: 13 March 2019.

AIESEC 2019c. Membership. URL: https://aiesec.org/membership. Accessed: 13 March

2019.

AIESEC 2019d. AIESEC in Finland Facebook. URL: https://www.facebook.com/aiesecin-

finland/. Accessed: 3 April 2019.

53

AIESEC 2019e. AIESEC in Finland Instagram. URL: https://www.insta-

gram.com/aiesec_fi/. Accessed: 3 April 2019.

AIESEC 2019f. AIESEC in Finland Twitter. URL: https://twitter.com/aiesec_fi?lang=da. Ac-

cessed: 3 April 2019.

AIESEC 21 February 2019. Sales skills are key in any field! By volunteering abroad you

can develop your sales skills and help local NGOs grow and make an impact. Facebook

post. URL: https://www.facebook.com/aiesecinfinland/pho-

tos/a.10150092585248567/10156852443813567/?type=3&theatre. Accessed: 3 April

2019.

AIESEC 7 March 2019. Around 1% of Costa Ricans are of indigenous ancestry and they

speak more than 5 languages, none of them recognized officially by the Costa Rican gov-

ernment. Instagram post. URL: https://www.instagram.com/p/Bus2QP2lJGG/. Accessed: 3

April 2019.

AIESEC 13 March 2019. Passionate about Sustainable Development? In the Dream Be-

yond Language -project you will raise awareness about the Sustainable Development

Goals in schools and push young people to action. Instagram post. URL: https://www.in-

stagram.com/p/Bu81q_ilU3e/. Accessed: 3 April 2019.

AIESEC 15 March 2019. Blending in with the locals is the most unique way of discovering

a new culture. The best way to do this is through volunteering. Facebook post. URL:

https://www.facebook.com/aiesecinfinland/pho-

tos/a.10150092585248567/10156899809668567/?type=3&theatre. Accessed: 3 April

2019.

Chikezie, K. 9 March 2019. Head of marketing Finland. AIESEC. Interview. Helsinki.

Gabay, J. 2015. Brand Psychology. Consumer perceptions. Corporate reputations. Kogan

Page Limited. London.

Kapferer, J. N. 2008. The New Strategic Brand Management. Creating and sustaining

brand equity long term. 4th ed. Kogan Page. London.

54

Miller, J. 2015. 5 reasons brand identity is important for your business. URL:

https://blog.tbhcreative.com/2015/05/5-reasons-brand-identity-is-important_14.html. Ac-

cessed: 28 April 2019.

Srbova, L. 11 March 2019. Vice president of outgoing global volunteer Helsinki. AIESEC.

Interview. Helsinki.

Walvis, T. 2010. Branding with Brains. Financial Times Prentice Hall. Edinburgh Gate.

Zikmund, W. G., Babin, B. J., Carr, J. C., Griffin, M. 2010. Business Research Methods.

8th ed. South-Western. Mason Ohio.

55

Appendices

Appendix 1. Management interview questions

The following questions are Based on Kapferer’s (2008) Identity prism and Aaker’s (2010) Brand identity system to uncover the brand identity of AIESEC.

Basic information:

1. What is your work title at AIESEC?

2. What are your work responsibilities?

3. Do you use any of the guidelines provided by AIESEC in your work?

Physique:

4. What does the AIESEC logo stand for?

5. How is the AIESEC logo related to what you do?

6. What is the colour of AIESEC?

7. What does the colour mean to you?

Vision and Values:

8. What is the vision of AIESEC?

9. What are the fundamental values that drive the AIESEC brand? (Aaker 2010, 87).

10. What does the AIESEC brand stand for? (Aaker 2010, 72).

11. What is your customer promise?

12. What is the soul of the AIESEC brand? (Aaker 2010, 87).

Organization:

13. What does the organization behind the brand stand for? (Aaker 2010, 87).

14. What are the competencies of the organization behind the brand? (Aaker 2010,

87).

15. How does the organizational values impact you as a member?

16. As a member, what drives you in your work for AIESEC?

17. What do you think drives your colleagues?

18. How would you describe the relationship between members locally and globally?

19. Is AIESEC a community?

Core product and attributes:

20. With what product is the AIESEC brand associated?

21. What is the flagship product of AIESEC representing the qualities of the brand?

22. Do you have any product attributes which brings you a competitive advantage?

- What are these?

23. Is there anything extra that you offer to customers or members of AIESEC?

24. Is there a specific country that you associate AIESEC with?

25. For what reason would a student decide to work for AIESEC, as a member?

26. For what reason would a student decide to purchase an AIESEC product?

Brand personality:

27. If AIESEC was a person, how would you describe this person?

56

28. What adjectives would you use to describe AIESEC?

User reflection:

29. What kind of lifestyle does AIESEC provide?

30. How would you characterize a typical AIESEC member?

Relationship:

31. What kind of relationship does AIESEC have with members and customers?

32. What is the tone of voice?

Self-image:

33. How does working for AIESEC make you feel?

34. How do you think working for AIESEC makes other members feel?

57

Appendix 2. Focus group questions

Questions are based on the dimensions of Kapferer’s (2008) Identity prism to uncover the students’ image of the AIESEC brand: Background:

1. Did anyone read about AIESEC or search for any information before coming today?

If no:

2. Have you had any interaction with AIESEC or its members? (via presentations,

online, social media etc.)

If yes:

3. What did you know/ hear about AIESEC before you searched for any information?

4. What information did you find?

Physique:

5. Who is AIESEC?

6. What does the AIESEC logo look like?

7. What is the colour of AIESEC?

8. What comes to your mind when thinking of AIESEC?

9. What does AIESEC provide?

Culture:

10. What do you think AIESEC as an organization is like?

11. What do you think it is like to be a member and work for AIESEC?

Relationship:

12. How do you feel that AIESEC is interacting with you?

13. What kind of language does AIESEC use?

14. What kind of relationship do you have with the organization?

15. What vibe does AIESEC project?

Personality:

16. If AIESEC was a person, what would he/she be like?

17. What personality traits (adjectives) would you use to describe AIESEC?

Reflection:

18. What kind of people do you think are members and work for AIESEC?

19. What adjective would you use to describe them?

Self-image:

20. How would it make you feel, if you were to become a member and work for the organi-

sation?

21. What would you think of yourself?

Improvement and suggestions:

22. Would you want to become a member of AIESEC?

23. What could AIESEC improve?

24. What could AIESEC do to catch your attention and interest?

58

Appendix 3 Focus group visual materials

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

Appendix 4. Examples of AIESEC communication materials

Examples from presentation: Get to know AIESEC in Helsinki (AIESEC 2018c).