Ask any consumer to name his favorite drink. If he is a fan of the sweet, caramel-colored carbonated beverage that has become ubiquitous, he is likely to say Coke or Pepsi, as opposed to the generic term cola. Brands like Coca-Cola and Pepsi-Cola are not just names for products; rather, in this age of wall-to-wall advertising, they signify all of the values and images conveyed, either intentionally or unintentionally, by a company's marketing efforts. Consumers can be swayed by a strong brand when faced with myriad choices, and as a result, companies now recognize that a large portfolio of strong brands can constitute a true competitive advantage.
   Such realization of the importance of strong brand names has resulted in more sophisticated approaches to maximizing their value to the company, This is where the idea of brand portfolio management comes into play, David Aaker and Erich Joachimsthaler, recognized as leaders in the study of brand management, identify two high-level approaches, The first, referred to as a “branded house,” signifies a company that uses the same master brand as the primary driver for branding across multiple products. In contrast, a “house of brands” means that the company is known for having distinctive brand names within a product category. An example of the former would be the U.K. conglomerate Virgin, best known for its cola, airline, and music label; the latter approach is illustrated by Procter & Gamble, which markets at least four different brands of laundry detergent in the U.S.
   Can one approach be objectively judged superior to the other? Not necessarily. The best approach for any given company depends not on]y on that company's unique combination of values, target customers, and history, but also on the particular traits of the product category in question. The two approaches are not mutually exclusive; most companies follow both approaches, depending on the product category.