In the competitive world of business, many brands seek to stand out through innovative strategies. Co-branding emerges as one of these solutions, promoting partnerships between companies to offer a joint product or service. However, it is necessary to analyze and understand if this strategy always brings benefits or could represent a risk for the brands involved.
According to research conducted by Visual Objects, 71% of consumers are attracted to co-branding and approve of this type of partnership between companies. Furthermore, this strategy can contribute to increased brand engagement and also help them differentiate from competitors.
Co-branding is a powerful tool but needs to be used with caution. The idea of uniting two brands to add value to the consumer can be advantageous when there is synergy between partners. Partnerships like Carmed, a lip balm brand from Cimed, and Fini are an example that can be cited. This collaboration resulted in a significant increase in Carmed’s revenue. According to data released, in 2023, Cimed recorded a revenue of R$ 400 million from Carmed product sales, representing a 1,566% growth compared to the R$ 24 million earned in the previous year.
Another example that can be cited refers to the partnership between Burger King and influencer Mari Maria, resulting in the launch of an exclusive line of glosses inspired by flavors from the fast-food chain’s menu. The main idea behind this partnership aimed to offer a unique experience to consumers and explore new ways to connect with the audience, as well as potentially expand the presence of the Mari Maria Makeup brand in the international market, leveraging Burger King’s global reach.
However, not all collaborations lead to success, and this is where risks emerge. First and foremost, the identities of the brands involved must be aligned. When this does not happen, the partnership can seem forced and even detrimental. A clear example of poorly planned co-branding was the collaboration between Shell and LEGO, which faced strong public rejection due to environmental issues. This mismatch can lead to image crises and drive away loyal consumers.
Additionally, there is the risk of one brand benefiting more than the other. If a partnership is not well balanced, one company may emerge stronger, while the other gains little from the collaboration. This can lead to internal conflicts and dissatisfaction among those involved. Another point of attention is the excessive dependence on the partnership. Some brands may become so closely associated with a partner that if the relationship ends, the public perception of the company can be negatively impacted. This highlights the importance of maintaining a distinct identity and not relying solely on co-branding as a marketing strategy.
Furthermore, co-branding, often celebrated as a successful strategy among big brands, can easily become an exclusionary tool in the market. Partnerships between giants further solidify their dominance, leaving smaller companies on the sidelines of this practice. However, smaller brands can overcome this barrier by seeking strategic alliances with complementary businesses within their niche, exploring authentic values and innovative proposals. Instead of relying on validation from larger players, well-planned partnerships between small and medium-sized companies can make a real impact, as long as they are based on relevance to the public and the creation of a strong joint identity.
Finally, co-branding should be adopted with strategic planning and careful risk analysis. When well executed, it can be an excellent way to generate innovation, expand markets, and strengthen brands. However, without proper alignment, it can backfire. Before embarking on this strategy, it is essential to assess the compatibility between the brands and ensure that the benefits are mutual. After all, the strategy relies on building an authentic and relevant partnership for the consumer.
