What Is Heritage Brand Marketing?
Heritage marketing is more than a campaign style. Research describes corporate heritage marketing as a brand philosophy and a strategic discipline: it uses the unique traits of brands with a history and manages the brand story over the long term. The past is not treated as a museum piece, but as a working part of the brand’s identity and market position (Balmer, 2013).
Corporate heritage marketing has eight components: character, communications, covenant (promise), conceptualisations, culture, audiences, guardianship and context. Together they form one system rather than a single message (Balmer, 2013).
Guardianship is especially important. Managers and employees should see themselves as custodians of the corporate heritage, responsible for maintaining it and showing it correctly (Urde et al., 2007; Balmer, 2013).
Corporate Heritage Communication Strategies
A study of iconic Italian brands describes three main heritage communication strategies. They focus either on the company’s legacy or on the product’s legacy, and use either emotional or functional storytelling (Sacco & Conz, 2023).
Heritage for Authenticity
The brand wants to be seen as real, genuine and historically rooted. Communication stresses its uniqueness through the link to the roots of the company or the product (Sacco & Conz, 2023).
Heritage for Market Leadership
The brand shows its achievements, expertise and excellence over time – technological leadership, design advances, innovation and sporting victories (Sacco & Conz, 2023).
Heritage for Continuity
The brand stresses stability, permanence and consistent values and product quality over time. Typical themes are family, tradition passed on through generations and loyalty to original principles (Sacco & Conz, 2023).
Total Corporate Heritage Communication
Heritage is communicated on four levels: primary (official messages and visual symbols), secondary (everyday behaviour of the company and its employees), tertiary (external perception and public feedback) and legacy (what is passed on from generation to generation) (Balmer, 2013).
This means heritage is not only what a company says. Symbols, rituals and consistent practices also shape how the brand is perceived and keep it culturally relevant (Balmer, 2013).
How to Activate Brand Heritage
Step 1. Find your heritage assets. Start with the company’s history and core values (Urde et al., 2007), then look at which forms your heritage takes – see The Four Dimensions of Heritage on the What Is a Heritage Brand? page.
Step 2. Decide how central heritage should be. Managers’ views on the value of heritage differ, so the team needs a shared view first (Rindell & Strandvik, 2021).
Step 3. Link heritage to the brand promise. Heritage only convinces if this link is believable (Brunninge, 2023).
Step 4. Explain your heritage openly. Consumers rarely check historical claims themselves – they rely on their own memory, general knowledge or freely available information. So brands should communicate their heritage openly and clearly (Pecot & De Barnier, 2017).
Step 5. Check how the audience sees it. The story the company tells and the story people perceive can differ (Rindell et al., 2015).
Heritage, Innovation and Modernisation
Strong brands are built not only on past reputation, but also on moving forward: consumers and stakeholders expect brands to keep improving (Brexendorf et al., 2015).
Innovation can mean new products and services, new technologies in production, or new structures and management systems. It can be developed inside the company, bought (through purchases, licences or partnerships) or copied from others (Huse et al., 2005).
Innovation is most valuable when it helps a company stand out with a unique offer; otherwise its effect on business results is limited (Semuel et al., 2017).
Brand and Innovation Synergy
Brand management and innovation should work together. A strong brand increases trust in new products and lowers perceived risk; innovation makes the brand look modern and progressive. If the two are not coordinated, consumers may feel a contradiction (cognitive dissonance) (Brexendorf et al., 2015).
Innovation can be radical (changing the core of the brand) or incremental (supporting the existing identity), and each type needs its own brand management approach (Brexendorf et al., 2015).
Companies with a long history have often gone through many changes, so a culture of innovation can be part of their “DNA” (Sammour et al., 2020b). Technology and know-how matter here: in an experiment with a fictional wine brand, heritage perception was positively linked to technology. Presenting a brand as traditional but adapted to modern times can lead to positive purchase decisions (Pfannes et al., 2021).
When Innovation Conflicts with Continuity
Innovation becomes risky when it breaks the feeling of continuity. If a brand stresses its long history and consistency (founding year, an original product that has existed for a long time), consumers rate improved versions lower than the original (Han et al., 2021).
This does not happen when heritage is built on values and origins (for example, being family-owned or having core values). In that case, improved products are not judged more harshly (Han et al., 2021).
Design and Material Heritage
Material heritage can inspire renewal. The Portuguese soap and fragrance maker Ach. Brito shows how: its packaging, decoration and symbols from the past carry heritage and help to show the company’s strategy to today’s stakeholders (Santos et al., 2016).
Cultural heritage branding can also renew traditional products, but it needs balance. Mixing English techniques into traditional Indonesian Palembang Songket textiles made the product look more modern and interesting to participants. Some, however, felt it damaged the visual code of the tradition or made the fabric less practical. Innovation works when it keeps the core of the cultural code (Saffira, 2021).
Digital Storytelling and Brand Co-Creation
From Brand Monologue to Dialogue
Heritage branding used to be a one-way story: the company chose parts of its past and told them to the audience. Unlike press releases and advertising, social media allow continuous two-way dialogue between companies and stakeholders (Yuen et al., 2024).
Interaction pays off. An analysis of Fortune 500 companies on Twitter found that “interactive” tweets, where the company replies to users, get more likes and retweets than one-way messages. Companies also try to answer negative comments quickly to calm down a crisis (North et al., 2017).
Active engagement on social media increases stakeholder satisfaction and loyalty and helps companies understand their audience better. It also supports reputation and social capital (Xu & Saxton, 2018; Yuen et al., 2024).
Stakeholder Pressure Online
Social media let anyone address a company publicly and gather support. Even small groups, such as single activists or NGOs, can now put pressure on a company (Barnett et al., 2018).
However, information overload limits this power. People focus on information that confirms what they already believe, interests are fragmented, and overall stakeholder influence has declined. To have an effect, stakeholders need to coordinate and build a strong shared message (Barnett et al., 2018).
At the same time, a study of 506 consumer crises in China showed that collective action on social media pushes companies to take more responsibility than traditional complaint channels. Public pressure online draws in more powerful stakeholders, such as regulators. So social media lets less influential voices join forces and push large organisations to change (Zhao et al., 2025).
User-Generated Content and Co-Creation
Brand stories are now co-created. Research speaks of a shift from a company-managed brand to brand co-creation with the community: brand identity is formed in a constant exchange of meanings between the company and its stakeholders (von Wallpach et al., 2016).
Consumers act as storytellers. Every post, mention or hashtag adds something to the brand story. Companies use this, for example with story contests whose best entries they publish on their own channels (Lund et al., 2017).
Shared storytelling makes a brand more authentic: when the value of a product is confirmed by real people, trust grows. But the company can no longer fully control the story – scandals and criticism also stay in the audience’s memory (von Wallpach et al., 2016; Lund et al., 2017).
Practical advice from research: involve users in co-creating the brand, keep the conversation lively, build alliances with influential users, and run storytelling campaigns that invite personal participation (Lund et al., 2017).
Who Owns Brand Heritage?
Traditional heritage research assumes that the company controls its own past. A critical, constructionist view asks different questions: who should take part in building heritage, who controls its meaning, and whose voices are left out. This view is still rare in corporate heritage research (Mérai & Kulikov, 2024).
Managing Heritage Risks
Keep checking whether heritage is still an asset. Researchers advise studying how the brand’s heritage has been perceived over time, adapting heritage elements so they stay relevant, and being ready to reposition the brand when signs of negative heritage brand equity appear (Sørensen et al., 2018). A real case is COOP in Heritage Brand Examples.
Avoid weak or artificial heritage claims, and watch the gap between the heritage the company wants to show and the heritage people actually see (Rindell et al., 2015; Brunninge, 2023).
FAQ
How can heritage brands stay innovative? By presenting innovation as part of the brand’s history, not as a break with it (Brexendorf et al., 2015; Pfannes et al., 2021). See Brand and Innovation Synergy above.
How does social media change heritage branding? It turns it from a monologue into a dialogue with stakeholders (von Wallpach et al., 2016; Yuen et al., 2024).
Which company does the best heritage brand marketing? There is no single winner, but research often uses Patek Philippe as a textbook example of a heritage brand (Urde et al., 2007). More examples in Heritage Brand Examples.
Sources
Balmer, J. M. T. (2013). Corporate heritage, corporate heritage marketing, and total corporate heritage communications. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 18(3), 290-326. https://doi.org/10.1108/ccij-05-2013-0031
Barnett, M. L., Henriques, I., & Husted, B. W. (2018). The rise and stall of stakeholder influence: How the digital age limits social control. Academy of Management Perspectives, 34(1), 48-64. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2017.0080
Brexendorf, T. O., Bayus, B., & Keller, K. L. (2015). Understanding the interplay between brand and innovation management: Findings and future research directions. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(5), 548-557. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-015-0445-6
Brunninge, O. (2023). Invented corporate heritage brands. Journal of Brand Management, 30(2), 157-169. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41262-022-00304-7
Han, M., Newman, G. E., Smith, R. K., & Dhar, R. (2021). The curse of the original: How and when heritage branding reduces consumer evaluations of enhanced products. Journal of Consumer Research, 48(4), 709-730. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucab028
Huse, M., Neubaum, D. O., & Gabrielsson, J. (2005). Corporate innovation and competitive environment. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 1(3), 313-333. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-005-2596-2
Lund, N. F., Cohen, S. A., & Scarles, C. (2017). The power of social media storytelling in destination branding. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 8, 271-280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2017.05.003
Mérai, D., & Kulikov, V. (2024). The uses of corporate heritage: A critical approach. Heritage & Society, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/2159032x.2024.2361389
North, M., Li, C., & Liu, J. (2017). An analysis of how Fortune 500 companies respond to users replying to company tweets. Innovative Marketing, 13(4), 17-24. https://doi.org/10.21511/im.13(4).2017.02
Pecot, F., & De Barnier, V. (2017). Brands using historical references: A consumers’ perspective. Journal of Brand Management, 25(2), 171-184. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41262-017-0076-y
Pfannes, C., Meyer, C., Orth, U. R., & Rose, G. M. (2021). Brand narratives: Content and consequences among heritage brands. Psychology & Marketing, 38(11), 1867-1880. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21543
Rindell, A., & Strandvik, T. (2021). To be or not to be corporate heritage oriented? A study of managers’ corporate heritage mindsets. European Management Journal, 41(2), 282-291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2021.11.004
Rindell, A., Santos, F. P., & De Lima, A. P. (2015). Two sides of a coin: Connecting corporate brand heritage to consumers’ corporate image heritage. Journal of Brand Management, 22(5), 467-484. https://doi.org/10.1057/bm.2015.20
Sacco, F., & Conz, E. (2023). Corporate heritage communication strategies of iconic Italian brands: A multiple case study. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 28(7), 19-43. https://doi.org/10.1108/ccij-12-2021-0136
Saffira, M. (2021). Effect of narrative with cross-cultural innovation as cultural heritage branding strategy. In Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research. Atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.211228.027
Sammour, A., Chen, W., Balmer, J. M. T., Botchie, D., & Faraday, J. (2020b). Crafting the forever now: Corporate heritage brand innovation at John Lewis Partnership. Strategic Change, 29(1), 115-126. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsc.2315
Santos, F. P., Burghausen, M., & Balmer, J. M. T. (2016). Heritage branding orientation: The case of Ach. Brito and the dynamics between corporate and product heritage brands. Journal of Brand Management, 23(1), 67-88. https://doi.org/10.1057/bm.2015.48
Semuel, H., Siagian, H., & Octavia, S. (2017). The effect of leadership and innovation on differentiation strategy and company performance. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 237, 1152-1159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2017.02.171
Sørensen, A. R., Korsager, E. M., & Heller, M. (2018). A bittersweet past: The negative equity of corporate heritage brands. Journal of Consumer Culture, 21(2), 200-218. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469540518773803
Urde, M., Greyser, S. A., & Balmer, J. M. T. (2007). Corporate brands with a heritage. Journal of Brand Management, 15(1), 4-19. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.bm.2550106
von Wallpach, S., Voyer, B., Kastanakis, M., & Mühlbacher, H. (2016). Co-creating stakeholder and brand identities: Introduction to the special section. Journal of Business Research, 70, 395-398. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.08.028
Xu, W., & Saxton, G. D. (2018). Does stakeholder engagement pay off on social media? A social capital perspective. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 48(1), 28-49. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764018791267
Yuen, K. F., Da Lee, J., Nguyen, C. T., & Wang, X. (2024). Leveraging social media for stakeholder engagement: A case on the ship management industry. Information, 15(11), 693. https://doi.org/10.3390/info15110693
Zhao, M., Park, S. H., & Luo, L. (2025). How social media empowers stakeholders: A stakeholder multiplicity perspective. Management and Organization Review, 21(1), 21-49. https://doi.org/10.1017/mor.2024.64