In times of rapid technological change and increasing global competition, the brand constitutes one of the few resources to ensure sustainable competitive advantage (Lindemann, 2003). An important brand attribute companies need to build and communicate to consumers is brand authenticity. The technological and economic dynamics of our modern times can have destabilizing social consequences, particularly during the uncertainty caused by economic or political crises – which robs individuals of their need for stability and continuity. In these times, the human desire for authenticity may be especially strong (Turner & Manning, 1988). But what drives the authenticity of a brand? Recent research has identified brand heritage, that is, a company’s active use of its past and legacy, as beneficial for achieving competitive advantage (Urde, Greyser, & Balmer, 2007; Balmer, 2009). Previous conceptualizations of brand heritage highlight longevity, core values, use of symbols and an emphasis on history (Urde et al., 2007). Balmer (2013) builds on these conceptualizations, identifying six traits an institution should possess to be regarded as having a corporate heritage, including institution trait constancy (e.g. in terms of organizational culture; product, process and quality focus; location; group and class associations; design, style and sensory utilization; and corporate communications). To the best of the authors’ knowledge, no research so far has examined brand heritage as part of a corporate brand’s identity and authenticity for the specific case of post-Soviet brands whose embeddedness in a turbulent political and social environment over the last 200 years makes brand heritage management challenging. Using Balmer’s (2013) institutional trait constancy framework (Figure 1), the purpose of this study is to understand the identity of post-socialist corporate brands as corporate heritage brands and the challenges faced by managers in ensuring trait constancy of their corporate brands in the context of building and leveraging an authentic corporate heritage. A specific focus will be on analyzing how the heritage of corporate brands in post-socialist countries is connected to, and affected by, long-term societal developments including fundamental political and social regime shifts (i.e. presocialism, socialism and post-socialism). Our empirical application is the fast-moving consumer goods (FMCG) sector, and here in particular the confectionary industry because confectionary brands form an integral part of the traditions and culture of a society (Tellström, Gustafsson, &Mossberg, 2006). The paper draws on case studies of three Russian iconic corporate brands in the confectionary category (Babaevsky, Krasny Octyabr and Rot Front), and one Latvian iconic confectionary brand Laima. Through these case studies, the following research questions are answered: RQ1: How does institutional trait constancy manifest itself in corporate heritage brands in post-socialist countries? RQ2: How do long-term societal developments in these countries challenge institutional trait constancy in a brand heritage management context? Our findings suggest that successful brand heritage management in a post-Soviet context requires consistency regarding organizational culture, and here in particular adaptability and resilience, along with a focus on history and traditions. It also needs consistency in terms of product, process and quality foci, as well as regarding design, style and sensory utilization. Consistency as to location, group associations and corporate communications also matters. We argue that it is critical for academics and practitioners to better understand how brands become embedded in long-term social developments and consumer life-style and how the society feeds back into maintaining their brand heritage. On that basis, our findings can be used for development of effective branding heritage strategies to assist companies in their brand heritage management, and in sustaining their long-term competitive advantage in uncertain times.

Luxury consumption is intrinsically related to unusual expectations from the consumers, among which some are equally shared around the globe. For instance, Europeans, Americans and Asians claim that luxury products should be flawless and their producers (i.e. the luxury brands) should have some history and heritage (Wiedmann et al., 2007). What they put behind these two last notions can fluctuate, but they are systematically stressed out in studies, be they academic or applied, qualitative or quantitative. Therefore, it sounds fundamental for the luxury Maisons to communicate on their heritage and history (Wiedmann et al., 2012). While until the end of the XXth century brands could rely upon different message content and copy to do so, due to localized options of communication, the Internet has implied to complete revision of their approach. The Maisons’ websites, even if available in different languages, are unique platforms to showcase the brand’s history, ambience and offering to a worldwide audience. They should be able to reach consumers, both cognitively and emotionally, recreate the store atmosphere, while simultaneously stimulating some desire to discover new collections. They stand for an open-window on a boundary-free world, be it from the geographical or from the time point of view. However, as pointed out by academics and professionals from the very beginning, the road is paved with risks, especially in terms of brand image management (Geerts & Veg-Sala, 2012). This comes from the apparent non-compatibility between luxury and the online environment. However, such discrepancies have led to a complete redefinition of the luxury concept, with its new semiotics economy (Maman & Kourdoughli, 2014). Part of it is ‘heritage and history’, with little surprise. We can therefore raise the issue of a lack of academic research regarding how such Maisons communicate about their history (even if short) and heritage on their website, be it an institutional or a transactional one. The only studies we have found deal with the automotive sector (Wiedmann et al., 2011) or watch one (Baum, 2011), the second one being a Master’s thesis. It is the objective of the present study to fill in this gap, and to uncover the various ‘signs’ used by luxury brands to communicate their heritage and heritage to their worldwide audience. Besides, we wanted to understand whether different semiotic systems were used by French vs. Italian luxury brands, and whether other variables such as the place of origin or the ‘age’ of the Maison would lead to different signs. To reach this goal, we used a two-pronged approach. First we gathered data from 56 websites of fashion luxury brands, using an inductive approach of content analysis (Kim & Kuljis, 2007). A coding grid was thus built while data was collected, with a back and forth coding process. We also built upon the Gestalt principles to ‘judge’ whether the websites were more focused on 1) current fashion trends, 2) the brand itself or its designer(s), 3) the products offered, or 4) the past of the brand. A first researcher built the grid and filled it in, while a second one directly used the grid for coding. The two coding outcomes were confronted and discrepancies discussed until agreement was reached. Then, major trends and clusters were identified from the data, leading us to understand the various sign-systems used by the Maisons, using Peircian semiotics. We end-up our study with theoretical conclusions regarding the online communication of luxury fashion brands, and with practical recommendations for luxury brand managers.