Community is arguably the fundamental social relationship, having its roots in the familial relationship often used to define relationship marketing. Thus, it provides a good template to overlay the relationship between the company/brand and those who consume. Moreover, a community framework is consistent with a number of traditional perspectives in marketing, particularly given its inclusion of other consumers in the relationship, such as the social interaction view of marketing, in which marketing is exchange between social actors (Bagozzi 1974), and the macro network approach, in which the relationship among the entire network of users and the brand is important (Iacobucci 1994). Deprived of their social connections, the value of these brands to consumers would certainly be diminished.
Relationship marketing stresses attracting, maintaining, and enhancing long‐term customer relationships instead of focusing on individual transactions (Berry 1995). Such long‐term relationships provide a competitive advantage and strategic resource for the firm (Webster 1992). However, it is not always efficient to maintain one‐on‐one relationships with customers as time spent developing the relationship can take away from time spent actually serving the customer (Gruen and Ferguson 1994; Iacobucci 1994). Yet brand communities carry out important functions on behalf of the brand, such as sharing information, perpetuating the history and culture of the brand, and providing assistance. They provide social structure to the relationship between marketer and consumer. Communities exert pressure on members to remain loyal to the collective and to the brand.
In our view, a brand with a powerful sense of community would generally have greater value to a marketer than a brand with a weak sense of community. However, it should also be recognized that a strong brand community can be a threat to a marketer should a community collectively reject marketing efforts or product change, and then use communal communications channels to disseminate the rejection. For example, many Saab owners did not approve of some Saab changes, such as the introduction of the 9000 model or modifications to the 900. Saab, recognizing the potential power of this community, attempts to appease and perpetuate the brand community by maintaining links with the brand's past. The Saab corporate Web page contains an extensive section on the Saab community, including history of the brand. Saab even supports user‐created community sites by providing information and images for user pages.
For the more insular marketer, a more connected and empowered community can be a real problem. Brand communities, particularly those operating within computer‐mediated environments, could pose enormous rumor control problems. Competitors could easily snoop on other brand communities and their internal communication. Brands could be sabotaged by competitors or brand terrorists misappropriating or subverting community values and interest. Also, a strong brand community may in some instances signal brand marginality. Consider Apple, with its underdog and marginal status (and low share), a source of pride among community members. Most likely, those marketing Apple see it another way. Brand communities may thus serve an important signaling function. Just as brand quality perceptions can be affected by alliances with other brands (Rao, Qu, and Ruekert 1999; Simonin and Ruth 1998), brand quality might be inferred from the character of the brand community.