Parmentier & Fischer (2015): Things Fall Apart: The Dynamics of Brand Audience Dissipation
22 important questions on Parmentier & Fischer (2015): Things Fall Apart: The Dynamics of Brand Audience Dissipation
What is examined in the paper by Parmentier & Fischer (2015)? And why?
the destabilization of a brand’s identity and fuel the dissipation (verlies) of audiences of which they have been members.
Much prior work illuminates how fans of a brand can contribute to the value enjoyed by other members of its audience, but little is known about any processes by which fans contribute to the dissipation of that audience.
The phenomenon of a once-powerful brand losing popularity is particularly visible among which kind of brands? And what do those kind of brands entail?
- They are episodic
- They are highly epistemic consumption objects (invites consumers to pay renewed attention)
The phenomenon of a once-powerful brand losing popularity is particularly visible among which kind of brands? And what do those kind of brands entail?
- They are episodic
- They are highly epistemic consumption objects (invites consumers to pay renewed attention)
- Higher grades + faster learning
- Never study anything twice
- 100% sure, 100% understanding
What is meant by brand audience dissipation?
Which two RQ's are adressed in the paper by Parmentier & Fischer (2015)?
- What are the dynamics of audience dissipation?
- How do consumers contribute to these dynamics?
Which perspective is adopted in this study? And for which 3 reasons is this one chosen?
Suitable for studying brand audience dissipation, because:
- They are systems of diverse components that interact with one another which can either stabilize or destabilize the identity
- They draw attention to the material and expressive “capacities” of components
- The components of assemblages are not fixed
Which two types of capacities are mentioned in the article? And what do they entail (in terms of interaction)?
- Material capacities: Can interact with capacities of non-sentiment and sentiment elements
- Mechanical causation
- Catalytic causation
- Expressive capacities: Can interact with capacities of sentiment elements, normally involve catalysis
Which perspective is adopted in this study? And for which 3 reasons is this one chosen?
Suitable for studying brand audience dissipation, because:
- They are systems of diverse components that interact with one another which can either stabilize or destabilize the identity
- They draw attention to the material and expressive “capacities” of components
- The components of assemblages are not fixed
Which three ongoing elements of a process through which fans within a brand assemblage contribute to audience dissipation are identified (3 dynamics of audience dissipation)?
- Reframing
- Focusing attention on new components entering the assemblage and framing them as contradictions
- Remixing
- Creating material artifacts that increase the heterogeneity and diminish the coherence of the assemblage
- Rejecting
- Interpreting the new components that replace old ones as having inadequate capacities to support the brand identity
To what perspective resembles (lijken op) the assemblage theory?
to branding initiatives that diminish the cognitive "fit" between salient brand characteristics
Which three ongoing elements of a process through which fans within a brand assemblage contribute to audience dissipation are identified (3 dynamics of audience dissipation)?
- Reframing
- Focusing attention on new components entering the assemblage and framing them as contradictions
- Remixing
- Creating material artifacts that increase the heterogeneity and diminish the coherence of the assemblage
- Rejecting
- Interpreting the new components that replace old ones as having inadequate capacities to support the brand identity
Result: When brands add narratives to create greater cultural resonance, they are more likely to be successful if....?
Are there any differences with the theory the article describes and the aforementioned perspective?
On which brand is this research focussing on?
As can be seen in the figure
What is the link between this article and the doppëlganger effect from Thompson et al. 2006?
- Consumers can contribute to co-creation, but also to co-destruction
- Engagement of attentive consumers
Which methods were used in the paper by Parmentier & Fischer (2015)?
- Participant observations
- Formal interviews
- Monitoring ANTM social networking data
- Collecting all ANTM cycles and promotional material, evidence of prizes and website materials
- Purchasing national average TV ratings
- Used press coverage from the New York Times
There are components of the brand assemblage that contributes to stabilizing or destabilizing the brand identity by complementing the founding narratives. Which 4?
- Contestants (deelnemers)
- Recurring (terugkerende) contestant character types (ugly duckling/ underdog/ mean girl)
- Industry insider judges
- Audience members
Will this destabilize the assemblage or not and why?
- Introducing wildcards
- Changing the jury
- Introducing wildcards: It is contradicting to the winner narrative that suggests that only the best can win. It could be identified as Reframing.
- Changing the jury: It will depend on whether the newly introduced judges will be seen as worthy replacements and whether they support and reinforce the key narrative. Rejecting might take place based on this decision
The assemblage perspective is a complementary element as opposed to (in tegenstelling tot).....? (3 aspects)
- Satiation (= satisfaction):
- Consumers become ‘bored’ with invariance” versus consumers experiencing diminished coherence of the assemblage
- Psychology: lack of ‘fit’.
- Brand elements that conflict with those that were previously enjoyed by the consumer. However, consumer has a very active role in adjusting perception in the assemblage view.
- Semiotic (narratives, images, myths and stories)
- Distinction between expressive and material capacities. Assemblage view argues that they should be looked at when they are combined
What is the main key finding of the article by Parmentier & Fischer (2015)?
- If new components are added, components are replaced or increase the heterogeneity
- Loyal fans can contribute to the dissipation of the audience by reframing, remixing or rejecting these new components as being contradicting/ inadequate to the brand assemblage.
- They spread their 'new opinion' through these intersecting brand assemblages such as discussion boards.
What are the three key insights?
- Viewing brands as assemblages allows consideration of dynamics within the brand itself that are not initiated by the brand manager
- By reframing, remixing, and rejecting, consumers contribute to generating perceived inconsistency in the brand assemblage
- Managing brands entails more than managing elements with largely expressive capacities
- It entails managing elements with material capacities that can either support or undermine the expressive capacities of narratives
What is examined in the paper by Parmentier & Fischer (2015)? And why?
the destabilization of a brand’s identity and fuel the dissipation (verlies) of audiences of which they have been members.
Much prior work illuminates how fans of a brand can contribute to the value enjoyed by other members of its audience, but little is known about any processes by which fans contribute to the dissipation of that audience.
The question on the page originate from the summary of the following study material:
- A unique study and practice tool
- Never study anything twice again
- Get the grades you hope for
- 100% sure, 100% understanding
![Trustpilot Logo](/images/design_2020/lp/clp-trustpilot-en.png)