Corporate brands are shrouded in a “fog of complexity” (Balmer, 2001). Whilecomplexity, as a defining characteristic of corporate brands, cannot belegitimately avoided this, we suggest, is not true of the fog. A focus onconstituent elements, indicative of reductionism, is evident in much corporatebrand theorising. Because corporate brands consist of connected elements, whoseinteractions shape outcomes, they are complex systems. It is characteristic ofcomplex systems that they not reducible to their constituent elements. So wesuggest that, with corporate brands, the totality of the system must be properlyunderstood to be effectively managed (Hatch, 1997). We argue that SystemDynamics, previously unexplored in corporate brand theory, provides the holisticapproach called for in the literature (King, 1991; Hatch and Schultz, 1997;Maklan and Knox, 1997). We take the view that corporate brands result from theactions, and interactions, of many actors and that the mental models of actors,in social systems, are determinants of their actions (Forrester, 1975). Byadopting a system dynamics perspective we can contribute to corporate brandtheory and practice. We can model the interactions of elements, organizationfunctions, and mental models involved in corporate branding. Such models canlead to the development of new knowledge (Simon, 1999) and can enable thetranslation of knowledge into action (Pfiffer and Sutton, 1999). We can navigatethrough the current corporate brand fog (Knox and Bickerton, 2003) and, bymaking cause and effect relationships explicit, change prevailing mental modelsand behavio
