Dynamics of the world's most valuable global brands in geographic context
Keywords:
global brands, most valuable brand, trends, countries, dynamics, ratingAbstract
Currently, global brands have a significant impact not only on the economy, but also on other social processes. Huge financial, production and human resources are concentrated in global brands. Academic interest in global brands has been growing rapidly since 2005. The phenomenon of global brands attracts the attention of researchers from various fields – economists, financiers, marketers and systems analysts. The purpose of this article is to identify trends for the world's most valuable global brands with geographic ties. The initial data for the study are the ratings of the most valuable and strongest global brands published annually by Brand Finance. The time period of the study was the last 10 years - from 2015 to 2024. It was found that the drastical share of the value of global brands falls on 7 countries: USA, China, Germany, Japan, France, United Kingdom, and South Korea. The first position in the ranking is occupied by the United States, and the second, with a significant gap, is China. This pair of countries has steadily increased its share from 54.2% to 68% in the TOP–500 for 7 years, and from 63.5% to 79.8% in the TOP-100. Since 2021, the situation has stabilized. The dynamics of China and USA are in an opposite phase – while one country is increasing its share, the other is decreasing. Since 2021, the USA shows a positive dynamics. Japan shows a stable negative trend in both the TOP–100 and the TOP–500. USA, China, Germany, and South Korea have stronger positions in the TOP–100 than in the TOP–500 throughout the period. These countries focus on hyper-valuable brands. France and United Kingdom are on the other side, preferring valuable rather than hyper-valuable brands. Japan occupies an intermediate position between these two clusters. Further research should be directed to the analysis of global brands as a complex system with the identification of the peculiarities of statistical laws of distribution of the value of its elements and their variability over time.
References
Steenkamp, J. B. E. M., Batra, R., & Alden, D. L. (2003). How perceived brand globalness creates brand value. Journal of International Business Studies, 34(1), 53–65. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400002
Holt, D. B., Quelch, J. A., & Taylor, E. L. (2004). How global brands compete. Harvard business review, 82(9), 68-75.
Gürhan-Canli, Z., Sarial-Abi, G., & Hayran, C. (2018). Consumers and brands across the globe: Research synthesis and new directions. Journal of Marketing, 26(1), 96–117. https://doi.org/10.1509/jim.17.0063
Kolbl, Ž., Arslanagic-Kalajdzic, M., & Diamantopoulos, A. (2019). Stereotyping global brands: Is warmth more important than competence? Journal of Business Research, 104, 614–621. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.12.060
Steenkamp, J. B. E. M. (2020). Global brand building and management in the digital age. Journal of International Marketing, 28(1), 13–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069031X19894946
Tsougkou, E., Sykora, M., Elayan, S., Ifie, K., & Oliveira, J. S. (2024). Peace brand activism: global brand responses to the war in Ukraine. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing. 44(1), 100–121. https://doi.org/10.1177/07439156241289079
Shtovba, S. & Shtovba, O. (2020). An informetric view on relations between global brands and research activity. In CEUR Workshop Proceedings (Vol. 2608 «Proc. of the Third International Workshop on Computer Modeling and Intelligent Systems», pp. 990–1000). CEUR-WS. https://doi.org/10.32782/cmis/2608-74
Lhotáková, M. (2013). The growing brand equity and brand value – the learnings from most valuable brands. Studia Commercialia Bratislavensia, 5(19), 434–448. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10151-012-0009-4
Siddiqui, K. A., & Ahmad, S. (2022). Brand equity trend analysis for top auto brands on Interbrand’s 20-year longitudinal data. Journal of Brand Strategy, 10(4), 311–329. https://doi.org/10.69554/dtlp2542
