Corporate heritage identity management and the multi-modal implementation of a corporate heritage identity

Abstract

AcknowledgementsThe authors wish to thank the anonymous reviewers for their very helpful comments and acknowledge the insightful observations made by past and current faculty members of the Center for Research in Marketing at Brunel Business School (Brunel University London, UK) which helped in shaping earlier drafts of the paper. In particular, we are indebted to Philippa Mulberry for proofreading the final draft. In, addition we wish to thank the editors of the journal and the guest editors for their encouragement and support. Thanks are also due to the management and staff of Shepherd Neame for their time and insights and Brunel Business School for funding the doctoral studies of one of the authors. Summary statement of contributionThis study advances the nascent area of corporate heritage identity management by providing empirical and theoretical insight into the salience and strategic relevance of corporate heritage identity as a resource for corporate marketing. The article provides a normative framework of 3 actionable categories of activities related to the management and implementation of substantive corporate heritage identity dimensions.

Explicating corporate heritage, corporate heritage brands and organisational heritage

“…As such, this interesting study of the architecture of French financial institutions contributes to the emerging theme within corporate marketing scholarship that is exploring the multi-modal nature of corporate heritage implementation and the symbolic relevance of corporate heritage manifestations per se (Burghausen and Balmer 2014a; also see Hudson 2011). In particular, the article introduces the notion of the architectural corporate heritage conduit as the material-aesthetic manifestation of corporate heritage and this dimension is added to the generic corporate heritage marketing mix suggested by Balmer (2013).…”

“…The above being noted, the importance of the past and of the temporal dimension (Balmer 2011a(Balmer , 2013) and more recent empirical and conceptual work on the same of Burghausen and Balmer (2014a, 2014b, 2015 and Balmer and Chen (2015) being noteworthy too.…”

Introducing organisational heritage: Linking corporate heritage, organisational identity and organisational memory

“…Thus, it was as if Albert and Whetten and Larçon and Reitter were articulating the core traits of heritage organisations. In addition, the perceived/claimed stability and enduring notions conform to the explication of corporate heritage identity by Balmer (2011bBalmer ( , 2013 and Burghausen and Balmer (2014a; and in particular, to Balmer's (2013) corporate identity criteria -especially that of the institutional trait consistency/constancy criterion (see: Balmer and Chen, 2015).…”

“…(Balmer 2011b;Balmer 2011c;Balmer, 2013a;Burghausen and Balmer 2014a;. Initially, corporate heritage scholarship very much focused on instrumental concerns Urde et al 2007;Blombäck and Brunninge 2009;Balmer 2011aBalmer , 2011bBalmer , 2013) and a good deal of this literature focussed on the corporate heritage brand construct.…”

“…Initially, corporate heritage scholarship very much focused on instrumental concerns Urde et al 2007;Blombäck and Brunninge 2009;Balmer 2011aBalmer , 2011bBalmer , 2013) and a good deal of this literature focussed on the corporate heritage brand construct. It is the nascent literature on corporate heritage identity (Balmer 2011;Burghausen and Balmer, 2014a; and the broader conceptual discussions of possible links between various past-related concepts (Balmer 2011c;Burghausen and Balmer 2014b) which are of pertinence to our discussion of organisational heritage. Why is this so?…”