Eneco Group, the second largest utility company in the Netherlands, launched a smart thermostat, Toon, that served as a platform for energy management services. Toon quickly became the gold standard for smart homes in the Netherlands. In January 2017, top management needed to discuss the strategic priorities to keep Toon's lead and hold off the competition.
Eneco Group, the second largest utility company in the Netherlands, launched a smart thermostat, Toon, that served as a platform for energy management services. Toon quickly became the gold standard for smart homes in the Netherlands. In January 2017, top management needed to discuss the strategic priorities to keep Toon’s lead and hold off the competition.
Over the next decade, as artificially intelligent assistants like Alexa and Siri become the main channel through which people get information, goods, and services, the way companies acquire, serve, and retain customers will radically change. Because the bots will have deep knowledge about individuals' habits and preferences, they'll be able to anticipate a consumer's needs even better than the consumer herself can. They'll ensure that routine purchases flow uninterrupted to homes and constantly scan and analyze complex offerings like insurance and data plans for the best deals. And the more AI assistants satisfy consumers, the more trust in them will replace trust in brands. Marketing will soon become a battle for AI assistants' attention, says Dawar. Brands will focus on influencing AI algorithms and will compete for placement on the assistants' platforms. In return, brands will be able to get data on consumers from the platforms. That's something companies will need in this new world, because AI assistants' never-ending reassessment of purchases will force them to keep producing new tailored offers and innovations to keep their customers on board.
DSM, a global life sciences, business-to-business company, is in the midst of a massive multi-year corporate rebranding exercise to incorporate the concept of creating sustainable shared value. With few precedents in this industry, the company must develop its own processes and implementation. Students are challenged to define the next steps in the rebranding, including the promotion of DSM's sustainability positioning as its key differentiator.
DSM, a global life sciences, business-to-business company, is in the midst of a massive multi-year corporate rebranding exercise to incorporate the concept of creating sustainable shared value. With few precedents in this industry, the company must develop its own processes and implementation. Students are challenged to define the next steps in the rebranding, including the promotion of DSM’s sustainability positioning as its key differentiator.
Companies may want to shift a brand's position--to exploit less crowded territory, for example, or grow sales. Companies have long used perceptual mapping to understand how consumers feel about their brands relative to competitors', to find gaps in the marketplace, and to develop brand positions. But the business value of these maps is limited because they fail to link a brand's market position to business performance metrics such as pricing and sales. Other marketing tools measure brands on yardsticks such as market share, growth rate, and profitability but fail to take consumer perceptions into consideration. In this article, Ivey Business School's Niraj Dawar and Charan K. Bagga present a new type of map that links a brand's position to competitors according to its perceived "centrality" (how representative it is of the company) and "distinctiveness" (how much it stands out from other brands) with its business performance along a given metric. Using the tool, marketers can determine a brand's current and desired position, predict its marketplace performance, and devise and track marketing strategy and execution. In-depth examples of the car and beer markets demonstrate the value of this tool to managers of brands in any category.
A health services company is planning for an initial public offering. Its new business model is the farming of body parts to feed into the organ supply chain in developed economies to help reduce the waiting lists for organ transplants.
A health services company is planning for an initial public offering. Its new business model is the farming of body parts to feed into the organ supply chain in developed economies to help reduce the waiting lists for organ transplants.
Five years earlier, a U.S.-based social enterprise, d.light design, launched its innovative brand of solar lamp in India. Although the company has gained market share, the category as a whole is not growing. The solar lamp market in India is complex, as a result of being both fragmented and disorganized. The company's new head of Indian operations faces three dilemmas: How can the company scale up? How can the company improve the productivity of its distribution channels? How can the company leverage its first-mover advantage to make its brand synonymous with the category?
In 2009, a U.S.-based social enterprise, d.light design, launched its innovative brand of solar lamp in India. Although the company has gained market share, the category as a whole is not growing. In 2014, The solar lamp market in India is complex, as a result of being both fragmented and disorganized. The company’s new head of Indian operations faces three dilemmas: How can the company scale up? How can the company improve the productivity of its distribution channels? How can the company leverage its first-mover advantage to make its brand synonymous with the category?
For decades, businesses have sought competitive advantage in "upstream" activities related to making new products--building bigger factories, finding cheaper raw materials, improving efficiency, and so on. But those easily copied sources of advantage are being irreversibly eroded, and advantage increasingly lies "downstream"--in the marketplace. Today the strategic question that drives business is not "What else can we make?" but "What else can we do for our customers?" This new center of gravity demands a rethink of long-standing strategy principles: First, the sources and locus of competitive advantage now lie outside the firm, and advantage is accumulative--rather than eroding over time as competitors catch up, it grows with experience and knowledge. Second, it's no longer about having the better product but about how you position yourself in the market and which companies you choose to compete against. Third, the pace of change in markets is now driven by shifts in customers' purchase criteria rather than by improvements in products or technology.
Brand battles occur in every industry and in practically every product category. They consume significant managerial attention and consist of far more than marketing tactics — they are ultimately about winning customers’ cognitive resources. Brands make it easier for consumers to find the products they want and need. They also make markets more efficient by bringing buyers and sellers together at a lower cost than would otherwise be possible. In fact, the loss of a brand would often be more harmful to a company’s ability to continue business operations than the loss of its upstream assets. Consumers’ attention is finite, but available information is increasingly abundant, which gives rise to a principle of scarcity that makes brands particularly valuable. Moreover, cognitive economy states that because information-processing capacity is finite, customers often trade off accuracy of results and optimal outcomes for what is most accessible. This partly explains the high failure rate of new, novel products — and why Lexar, when it introduced memory cards for digital cameras, wisely packaged them in gold packages similar to those used for Kodak film. As this article shows, the battle between brands takes place inside the minds of consumers.
This is an MIT Sloan Management Review article. In the perennial tug of war between manufacturers and retailers, retailers seem to be winning. Today's retail industry is more concentrated than ever -in many industries and markets, a handful of retailers account for a majority of the sales. Their ability to control market access and influence consumer buying behavior means that manufacturers need retailers more than ever. And just imperatively, the authors argue, they need to understand what makes retailers tick. As retailer influence has grown, they note, power has moved downstream. For example, Wal-Mart's sale are approximately 4.5 times greater than those of its largest supplier, Procter & Gamble. Consolidation and the global scale of retailers have reduced the number of "buying points"that manufacturers can develop. Yet neither side is satisfied with the current system. Many retailers have difficulty converting trade promotion into profits. Rather than building longer-term partnerships with suppliers and nurturing store and shopper loyalty, retailers tend to compete on price and fritter away the trade support they extract from manufacturers. What can be done to improve the situation? While manufacturers are locked into large fixed investments and wedded to products and brands with long payback cycles, retailers have a variety of ways of making money. The particular approach, or the mixture of approaches, that a retailer selects defines the retailer's business model and how it differs from competitors. The article highlights four different retail business models, as exemplified by Tesco, which connects with consumers through its loyalty program; Loblaw, which relies heavily on private labels; Costco, which gets its suppliers to finance its inventory; and Wal-Mart, which focuses closely on margins.
In September 2011, the CEO of First Energy Private Ltd, a startup enterprise in the alternative energy industry in India, is facing a flashpoint. The company has commercialized the technology of biomass cooking stoves and has been providing, since 2007, clean and affordable cooking solutions to customers in rural India. A marginal hike in price of biomass fuel in early 2011 has, however, led to a steep fall in demand making the continuance in the rural household market unsustainable. The company does not have a level playing field in the household segment because the competitor product, liquid petroleum gas (LPG), enjoys price subsidy provided by the federal government. First Energy has been quick to find its bearings by targeting a niche market in the urban commercial market consisting of restaurants, eateries and hostels. While the margins are high in this segment, the volumes are low. The company must therefore build scale to be able to service the investments in plant capacity, which is being under-utilized. The case enables students to come up with strategies for market expansion for the CEO. They will also take a call on whether to exit from or hold on to the household segment where the margins are low but the volumes, in the light of the imminent de-subsidization of LPG, would be high.
In September 2011, the CEO of First Energy Private Ltd, a start-up enterprise in the alternative energy industry in India, is at a critical juncture. The company has commercialized the technology of biomass cook stoves and has been providing, since 2007, clean and affordable cooking solutions to customers in rural India. A marginal rise in the price of biomass fuel in early 2011 has, however, led to a steep fall in demand, making the continuance in the rural household market unsustainable. The company is at a disadvantage in the household segment because the competing product, liquid petroleum gas (LPG), enjoys a price subsidy provided by the federal government. First Energy has been quick to target a niche in the urban commercial market consisting of restaurants, eateries, and hostels. While the margins are high in this segment, the volumes are low. The company must therefore build scale to be able to service the investments in plant capacity, which is under-utilized. The case enables students to come up with strategies for the CEO for market expansion. They will also decide whether to exit from or hold on to the household segment, where the margins are low but the volumes, considering the imminent de-subsidization of LPG, will be high.
This article, based on work with dozens of Business-to-Business firms, extracts general principles of brand architecture design based on specific examples, and then tests these principles by applying them more broadly to a wide sample of brand architectures. B2B brand architecture is a function of two key dimensions: the organizational structure, in particular, the extent to which a firm is centralized or decentralized (in terms of its product range, sales, and marketing); and the extent to which the firm's market offerings are standardized versus customized. This framework and the axiom of risk alleviation through the sales process together capture the principal elements of B2B brand architecture design.
India’s largest domestic retail group, the Future Group, is pursuing a novel private-label strategy. In a country dominated by small-scale retailers, it is using its scale to launch private-label brands in several product categories. It is planning to delink these new offerings from the store brand and make them available through other retailers. Future Group hopes to derive most of its growth over the next few years from this initiative.<br><br><br><br>The case enables students to take on the role of the group’s brand advisor, and deal with some important questions: Will private-label brands erode customer loyalty or build it? Will they increase traffic to stores or cannibalize it? Will they add to the complexity of retailing or simplify it? More fundamentally, is the private-label brand strategy sustainable in the long run in the highly competitive Indian retail market?
A month after Best Buy Inc. (Best Buy), the largest retailer of consumer electronics in the United States, acquired Five Star, the third largest retailer of appliances and consumer electronics in China in May 2006, the management of Best Buy is weighing in on a branding option. Should Five Star lose its identity and be marketed as Best Buy? Or should Best Buy retain the Five Star brand and let the two brands compete with each other in the Chinese market? The option has a sense of déjà vu because, when it first stepped out of its home turf in January of 2002 by acquiring Future Shop, the largest consumer electronics retailer in Canada, Best Buy was facing a similar dilemma. The company had decided, at the time, in favour of dual brand strategy. It had worked. There was no evidence of cannibalization, the single largest risk in dual branding. Best Buy and Future Shop had both grown together as independent brands in Canada. But, does dual brand strategy work in the vastly different retail environment of China?
Dabur, an Indian consumer package goods company, had established a strong brand equity in India by offering, for decades, a vast portfolio of over-the-counter products. In seeking international expansion in 1987, it first took the export route. It also followed the customer, targeting the Indian diaspora in the Middle East, Africa and the United States, already familiar with the brand. By 2006, Dabur had set up five manufacturing facilities outside India. In June 2007, Dabur had to make, in countries such as Nigeria for example, some critical choices. It had to choose between sticking to the diaspora, a market it understood best, and targeting the mainstream population. It had to choose its growth options between categories like personal care, in which it had built up competencies, and categories such as oral care and home care, which were the new engines of growth in its international markets but in which the company had no track record, either on the home front or overseas. The case study helps students deal with issues of growth and consolidation in a global market from the perspective of the company's chief executive officer and the head of its international operations.