Skip to main content

What's common between Superbrands in Politics and Business

Though Narendra Modi and V Achuthanandan have nothing in common, they share a particular characteristic that is similar. Both, at some point in time in their political careers, grew bigger than their parties. Narendra Modi is going through this 'high' at the moment; for Achuthananadan, it happened just before the Communist party gudgingly accepted him as the Chief Ministerial candidate. This was after facing flak from the common man over their attempts to hoist Pinarayi Vijayan into the Chief Ministerial chair. Narendra Modi on his part is riding a popularity wave that has the BJP worried.

Although both the politicians in question have benefitted from their respective 'waves', the downside has been the number of 'political enemies' that have sprung up for each of them. Their respective popularities have gotten them their respective enemies. As to whether both of them will ride out the 'rough time' their 'enemies' give them, only time will tell.

In the marketing world too, brands at times become 'bigger' or 'better visible' than their parent companies. Most companies may not mind this happening. And there may also be times where the parent company tries to establish its identity with the consumer. HUL is an example. Not that it made any difference to consumer, as seen in the HUL case. But the larger problem of being a 'superbrand' is that it becomes the one that competitors gun after. Sustaining the superbrand status thus becomes extremely difficult. The more 'in your face' and 'visible' the brand is, the more the 'envy'.

Marketers can at times by choice maintain a low profile, especially for 'follower' brands. In such cases, where brand evaluations by the consumer are done on rational parameters, communicating to the target customer must be through less visible tools such as direct marketing rather than through the use of advertising.


Popular posts from this blog

Situational Involvement of Consumers

There are two types of involvement that consumers have with products and services, Situational and Enduring. Situational involvement as the term suggests, occurs only in specificsituations whereas Enduring involvement is continuous and is more permanent in nature.

Decisions to buy umbrellas in India are driven by the onset of Indian monsoon. Monsoon rains arrived in India over the South Andaman Sea on May 10 and over the Kerala coast on May 28, three days ahead of schedule. But then, after a few days of rain, South India is witnessing a spate of dry weather. Temperatures are soaring in the north of India. The Umbrella companies in the state of Kerala are wishing for the skies to open up. So is the farming community and manufacturers of rural consumer products whose product sales depend totally on the farming community. The Met. department has deemed this dry spell as 'not unusual'.

India's monsoon rains have been static over the southern coast since last Tuesday because of a…

Prior Hypothesis Bias

Prior Hypothesis bias refers to the fact that decision makers who have strong prior beliefs about the relationship between two variables tend to make decisions on the basis of those beliefs, even when presented with the evidence that their beliefs are wrong. Moreover, they tend to use and seek information that is consistent with their prior beliefs, while ignoring information that contradicts these beliefs.

From a strategic perspective, a CEO who has a strong prior belief that a certain strategy makes sense might continue to pursue that strategy, despite evidence that it is inappropriate or failing.

Ref : Strategic Management : An Integrated Approach, 6e, Charles W L Hill, Gareth R Jones

Consumer Spending

Carpe Diem Blog: From Visual Economics, a graphical representation appears above (click to enlarge) of Consumer Expenditures in 2007, using data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Note that total spending on food ($6,133), clothing ($1,881) and housing ($16,920) represented 50% of consumer expenditures and 30% of income before taxes in 2007. In 1997 by comparison, 51.1% of consumer expenditures were spent on food, clothing and housing, and 44.6% of income before taxes was spent on food, clothing and housing (data here).