Brand Management June 2026
Q.1: A once-popular national snack brand, CrunchTime, faded into obscurity after decades of declining sales, product stagnation, and changing consumer habits. Under new ownership, the CEO is launching an initiative to reintroduce CrunchTime by modernizing the packaging, updating recipes for healthier ingredients, and employing digital marketing with influencer partnerships. While long-time fans recall the brand fondly, younger generations are unaware of its history. Management’s goal is to revitalize CrunchTime so that it appeals to both nostalgic former customers and health-conscious millennials. Given the scenario, how should the revived snack company leverage both nostalgia and modern consumer trends to reposition its brand in today’s market? What practical steps should be taken to apply revitalization tactics that blend legacy with contemporary relevance?
Answer:
Introduction:
The decline of Crunch Time is a challenge faced by many legacy brands; they cannot continue to stay relevant with changing consumer preferences. A brand that used to be recognized, Crunch Time's forgetting came from lack of innovation, outdated positioning relative to their past success, as well as changes in how consumers view health, convenience, and digital engagement. With its revival comes a good opportunity for a strategic plan. Crunch Time has more brand equity than others that are newer in terms of nostalgia, recall, and trust by older consumers (and possibly younger). Consumers today, especially millennials & Gen Z, want healthier food options, a real story behind the brand, as well as interactive engagement through digital means.
The biggest challenge is not only to relaunch Crunch Time but to also reposition it relative to both past and present. In order for this repositioning strategy to work, the emotional heritage upon which Crunch Time products were built has to be preserved while also adapting what they sell and communicate to meet the needs of today’s consumer. If this dual strategy is executed well, Crunch Time could become a “heritage-modern” brand that recons both new & old.
This is partially solved sample answer
Buy complete NMIMS solved assignments for the June 2026 session.
General/Generic Assignment at just ₹200 per assignment.
Customized/ Unique Assignment at just ₹500 per assignment.
Contact No: +91 9741410271 (WhatsApp)
OR
Mail to: smu.assignment@gmail.com
Q.2 (A): An innovative technology conglomerate is preparing for international expansion by launching entirely new product categories (hardware, software, digital services) in emerging markets. Past brand extension efforts within a single category succeeded, but prior unrelated extensions caused confusion, leading to negative customer feedback. Leaders are debating between a branded house and a house of brands strategy for these launches, weighing concerns around customer trust, speed to market, complexity, and long-term brand equity. Evaluate the merits and drawbacks of pursuing a branded house strategy versus a house of brands approach in this expansion scenario. Given past extension failures and the diversity of new offerings, which strategy would best balance customer clarity, strategic risk, and long-term equity? Justify your position with reference to relevant principles from the provided context.
Answer:
Introduction:
Having a brand strategy is extremely important when a business begins to extend itself across multiple products and/or enter new markets. A company's choice of whether to use a branded house (one master brand for all products) or a house of brands (multiple brands for each category) will impact how customers view the brand, the risks the company is taking on, and the company's long-term equity. In this situation, the company has already seen confusion through unrelated brand extensions and therefore is sensitive to the concept of brand stretch. While the business is going into the hardware, software, and digital services industries simultaneously, the decision needs to adequately balance trust, clarity, and flexibility. The best approach would allow the company to avoid repeating past mistakes while allowing for sustainable global growth and still being scalable.
Q.2 (B): A leading global sportswear company, recognized for its innovative products and athlete endorsements, is experiencing a sharp decline in brand equity due to a recent controversy regarding sustainability practices. Senior management is divided: one group believes doubling down on high-profile sponsorships and advertising campaigns can restore trust, while another insists on radical operational transparency and community engagement initiatives. The organization must decide which approach is most likely to rebuild strong emotional connections with consumers and restore premium brand equity, given shifting consumer expectations. Evaluate the merits and potential drawbacks of each recovery strategy in the context of brand equity and consumer-based brand equity (CBBE) model. Which approach would you recommend to revitalize brand equity and why? Critically justify your recommendation by considering multi-stakeholder perspectives and long-term brand outcomes.
Answer:
Introduction:
A global sportswear company has lost consumer confidence due to questions about its sustainability, and therefore is suffering from an erosion of consumer perception and emotional engagement. The brand equity related to this brand is built from what consumers think, feel and how they relate to the brand through the Consumer-Based Brand Equity (CBBE) model. When a brand loses credibility, the recovery process must go beyond merely improving visibility (or surface-level) recovery efforts. The brand's management faces a dilemma on whether to rely on high-visibility marketing or to build credibility through transparency and community engagement. The two strategies being proposed have fundamentally different approaches: perceptions vs. reality. The success of any of these strategies will depend on the efforts made toward rebuilding trust, authenticity and long-term consumer loyalty within a marketplace where ethical standards are becoming an increasing factor in consumer buying decisions.