I might be wrong.....
…but tell me, are marketers becoming increasingly arrogant? Or just ignorant? Or arrogant because of being ignorant? Almost every article/case study/ presentation on marketing that I go through these days seems to be the same jargon of standard marketing tools and techniques. Market segmentation, brand positioning, demographic/geographic/blah blah target group. Is this what marketing has finally come down to? The use of standard tools and techniques over and over again to dissimilar situations and scenarios? And when the strategy doesn’t work, blame it on the market dynamics or the changing consumer preferences et al? John Hegarty, co-founder of BBH (one of the world’s biggest advertising agencies) was quoted in today’s edition of Brand Equity saying “I work in advertising, I don’t live in advertising and the last thing I’d ever do is read a book no advertising.” While John might have said this in reference to a field such as advertising, where it’s imperative, in a very obvious sense, that the past is not a model for the future; I think it’s time the entire marketing field itself woke up to this concept.
Every year, approximately 30,000 new consumer products are released into the minds and lives of unsuspecting consumers the world over. And more than 90% of them bomb. Why? In some cases, it might be argued that the product did not have a USP, did not cater to a consumer need, was over priced, was below expected quality and so on. Fair enough. All these might be true in the same or different cases. But I also think that a majority of these products got their marketing strategy wrong. What is marketing? Marketing is a way of telling prospective consumers, “Look. I have this product here. I believe it can solve this problem/task of yours and make your life simpler/happier.” Isn’t that what all marketing is about? It’s about getting a product in between a consumer and the execution of a particular task. These tasks can be physical or emotional.
Now how can a flawed marketing strategy be developed? One clear possibility is in not understanding consumer needs. Or ever more, not even knowing who the consumer is. Almost all companies follow the standard practice. You ask them what is the TG for a particular product of theirs and they are going to tell you the TG is “Male in the age group of 20-35, SEC A1,A2 and B, minimum monthly HH income of Rs. 35,234 etc” Is this the right way to define them? No.
I am 22 years old. Belong to SEC A. Male. Now does that mean I am like everyone else in the same bracket? Definitely not. I probably don’t visit the barber’s shop as often as others in this bracket do. I probably don’t pee as often as others in the bracket do. What gives the marketer the right to classify me based on my sex, age and other demographic bollocks? The problem here is in identifying consumers based on such variables as mentioned above and not on the actual softer variables like need states, style (and not standard) of living and interest, to name a few.
I am not you. You are not me. I might be closer to a particular person/group of people in some areas like my love for all things on two wheels and have a gear box and move very fast. But you are not going to find these people in a particular bracket based on the variables in use today. Consumers should be identified based on their need states. And only on their need states.
Which creates the question, “Then why are marketers still following the standard techniques/tools/practices on every problem?” Simply because it’s easy. C’mon! Don’t tell me it’s easier to use a IMRB Pulse Plus or a AC Nielsen survey data than to sit down and figure out the essence of the brand and the ‘need-states’ of the prospective consumer whom it is aimed at and then try to position this product as the answer to that need state! I have don’t it myself before in marketing. And a lot of them are still doing it.
‘Disruptive Innovation’ as Clayton Christensen puts it is not only about product innovation. It is about every single task that goes on from consumer insight to the consumer actually using the product. This will involve market research, product development, communication development, point of sale interaction, product purchase and product use. And each one of these requires looking at the case afresh.
And not thinking because it worked on that liquid dishwash product we launched 4 years ago, it will work on this skin cream.
Every year, approximately 30,000 new consumer products are released into the minds and lives of unsuspecting consumers the world over. And more than 90% of them bomb. Why? In some cases, it might be argued that the product did not have a USP, did not cater to a consumer need, was over priced, was below expected quality and so on. Fair enough. All these might be true in the same or different cases. But I also think that a majority of these products got their marketing strategy wrong. What is marketing? Marketing is a way of telling prospective consumers, “Look. I have this product here. I believe it can solve this problem/task of yours and make your life simpler/happier.” Isn’t that what all marketing is about? It’s about getting a product in between a consumer and the execution of a particular task. These tasks can be physical or emotional.
Now how can a flawed marketing strategy be developed? One clear possibility is in not understanding consumer needs. Or ever more, not even knowing who the consumer is. Almost all companies follow the standard practice. You ask them what is the TG for a particular product of theirs and they are going to tell you the TG is “Male in the age group of 20-35, SEC A1,A2 and B, minimum monthly HH income of Rs. 35,234 etc” Is this the right way to define them? No.
I am 22 years old. Belong to SEC A. Male. Now does that mean I am like everyone else in the same bracket? Definitely not. I probably don’t visit the barber’s shop as often as others in this bracket do. I probably don’t pee as often as others in the bracket do. What gives the marketer the right to classify me based on my sex, age and other demographic bollocks? The problem here is in identifying consumers based on such variables as mentioned above and not on the actual softer variables like need states, style (and not standard) of living and interest, to name a few.
I am not you. You are not me. I might be closer to a particular person/group of people in some areas like my love for all things on two wheels and have a gear box and move very fast. But you are not going to find these people in a particular bracket based on the variables in use today. Consumers should be identified based on their need states. And only on their need states.
Which creates the question, “Then why are marketers still following the standard techniques/tools/practices on every problem?” Simply because it’s easy. C’mon! Don’t tell me it’s easier to use a IMRB Pulse Plus or a AC Nielsen survey data than to sit down and figure out the essence of the brand and the ‘need-states’ of the prospective consumer whom it is aimed at and then try to position this product as the answer to that need state! I have don’t it myself before in marketing. And a lot of them are still doing it.
‘Disruptive Innovation’ as Clayton Christensen puts it is not only about product innovation. It is about every single task that goes on from consumer insight to the consumer actually using the product. This will involve market research, product development, communication development, point of sale interaction, product purchase and product use. And each one of these requires looking at the case afresh.
And not thinking because it worked on that liquid dishwash product we launched 4 years ago, it will work on this skin cream.
posted by Sushant Sreeram | 1:45 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home