They may not have heard of Al Ries & Jack Trout, but the Indian political scene is rife with case studies of resounding branding successes, as well as crippling branding failures!
On the eve of the last Bihar state elections, Lalu, the master raconteur was regaling his audience of supporters, media
persons, local leaders & rustic admirers with mirthful stories about contemporary politics on one hand & lampooning his political opponents on the other. “The leaders of the National Democratic Alliance,” he said, “are arguing among themselves as to who should be the next CM of Bihar. But they appear to have missed the board outside the house which says ‘No Vacancy.’” Lalu lost the election. And yet his brand equity remains undiminished. A core base of voters always remains loyal to a Jayalalitha or a Lalu. In marketing terms, that’s successful branding. By definition, commodities or undifferentiated brands now sell no more in Indian politics.
A politician is the quintessential brand. In politics as in the market, there is a seemingly endless beauty parade of new products periodically. These new arrivals rub shoulders with established ones. Political brands have their stages of political life cycle – introduction growth, maturity & decline – just like commercial products in brand life cycle.
Branding has become ubiquitous in the political arena nowadays. Amidst all the slogan shouting and rabble rousing is concealed an effective message: either introduce a new brand (read candidate) to customers (read voters) and brand him with desired traits, all things the public wants, or to glorify the attributes of an old hand reasserting the relevance and uniqueness of this brand. A brand has to be relevant & differentiated.
Political parties invest a lot of time, effort, and money on building brand equity. Comes judgement day and the customer faces the task of choosing from a crowded supermarket aisle. He hopes to encash his vote for a better future; he looks around for a brand he knows and trusts (brand recall & loyalty). There are strategic choices though: one can choose an individual brand (independent candidate) or a family brand (party candidate). Brand recognition through easily identifiable logos like lotus, hand, et al play a role too.
Evaluation, though, may indicate that brands are positioned uncomfortably close to each other. Functional benefits provided by any brand make up for only a small part of the brand experience. The real strength lies in the intangible benefits – the values that it represents, and which the targeted customer identifies with or aspires to own. This projection of customer aspirations onto the brand in question – and the resultant vicarious fulfillment – makes a buyer splurge on a brand more moolah than it is intrinsically worth. And remember, this value addition happens post production, through astute communication. The same logic can be applied to understand as to why a Mayawati or a Mamata have strong consumer franchise among the ‘disadvantaged,’ or why a Manmohan Singh is the middle class pin up model. They hold lot of promise for loyalists.
Brands typically address specific segments. That is how AIADMK or BSP entered the political boxing ring. At times if a brand seeks to adopt a diffused – as against a focused – positioning because it wishes to ensnare the customers of other brands, such a switch over from other brands users may fail to occur. Worse still, even the brand loyals may betray eroding allegiance. That perhaps explains why last national elections results were not so shining for BJP, notwithstanding a very eye catching ‘India Shining’ campaign. Unfortunately for NDA – the customer refused to play ball. So another lesson: credible, not clever, communication works. During World War II, RAF bombers were assigned to drop scores of propaganda leaflets over Germany claiming that German authorities were lying about war losses, & urging Germans to demand the ‘truth’. But the whole exercise made pilots comment sardonically, “The only thing achieved out of this exercise by the British Government was to supply the Continent’s requirement for toilet paper!”
To be sure, however, if one can extend one’s sphere of influence, without compromising core values of the brand, into different market segments, the gains will multiply. BSP, the dalit outfit managed to take UP by storm in the 2007 state elections because Mayawati successfully extended her brand influence into the new (‘other brand loyal’) markets inhabited by Brahmins and even Muslims.
Thus, one view says that truly powerful brands have a narrow focus. Brand extensions may yield easy gains in the short term but in long run, the exercise is likely to erode brand identity. But a contrarian view also prevails, advocating transcending original boundaries to convert potential gains into actual ones. The debate is inconclusive. The only consensus is: brand extension is a tricky proposition, more so if it involves extending a mass market brand into a premium category, and vice-versa. Handled well, however, it can win many new customers without diluting the brand equity or even alienating old loyalists.
The complexity involved in extending a brand without ending up with a failed product & a critically diluted brand image is something that political parties are very much seized of. None more so than the BJP, which tried to reposition itself during the last general elections from a party with Hindutva as the major election plank to a pan Indian organisation, while concurrently retaining old faithfuls. Congress, too, has seen steady erosion in brand value. From being the ‘mother brand’ once upon a time, (of course due to virtual monopoly brand power in post Independence phase, with the TINA factor – There Is No Alternative – in its favour), today the party finds many of its values usurped by interlopers in clearly defined niches. Generally, markets in transition, as contrasted with matured ones, witness unfreezing and freeing of entry conditions into a hitherto restricted or even a monopoly market. Consequently they become extremely fragmented with even the leading brand enjoying not very high market share. Consolidation of brand takes place much later. Should we perhaps then accept the rise of coalition politics as the transitional stage in the development of democracy in India?
For Complete IIPM Article, Click on IIPM Article
Source : IIPM Editorial, 2008
On the eve of the last Bihar state elections, Lalu, the master raconteur was regaling his audience of supporters, media
persons, local leaders & rustic admirers with mirthful stories about contemporary politics on one hand & lampooning his political opponents on the other. “The leaders of the National Democratic Alliance,” he said, “are arguing among themselves as to who should be the next CM of Bihar. But they appear to have missed the board outside the house which says ‘No Vacancy.’” Lalu lost the election. And yet his brand equity remains undiminished. A core base of voters always remains loyal to a Jayalalitha or a Lalu. In marketing terms, that’s successful branding. By definition, commodities or undifferentiated brands now sell no more in Indian politics.A politician is the quintessential brand. In politics as in the market, there is a seemingly endless beauty parade of new products periodically. These new arrivals rub shoulders with established ones. Political brands have their stages of political life cycle – introduction growth, maturity & decline – just like commercial products in brand life cycle.
Branding has become ubiquitous in the political arena nowadays. Amidst all the slogan shouting and rabble rousing is concealed an effective message: either introduce a new brand (read candidate) to customers (read voters) and brand him with desired traits, all things the public wants, or to glorify the attributes of an old hand reasserting the relevance and uniqueness of this brand. A brand has to be relevant & differentiated.
Political parties invest a lot of time, effort, and money on building brand equity. Comes judgement day and the customer faces the task of choosing from a crowded supermarket aisle. He hopes to encash his vote for a better future; he looks around for a brand he knows and trusts (brand recall & loyalty). There are strategic choices though: one can choose an individual brand (independent candidate) or a family brand (party candidate). Brand recognition through easily identifiable logos like lotus, hand, et al play a role too.
Evaluation, though, may indicate that brands are positioned uncomfortably close to each other. Functional benefits provided by any brand make up for only a small part of the brand experience. The real strength lies in the intangible benefits – the values that it represents, and which the targeted customer identifies with or aspires to own. This projection of customer aspirations onto the brand in question – and the resultant vicarious fulfillment – makes a buyer splurge on a brand more moolah than it is intrinsically worth. And remember, this value addition happens post production, through astute communication. The same logic can be applied to understand as to why a Mayawati or a Mamata have strong consumer franchise among the ‘disadvantaged,’ or why a Manmohan Singh is the middle class pin up model. They hold lot of promise for loyalists.
Brands typically address specific segments. That is how AIADMK or BSP entered the political boxing ring. At times if a brand seeks to adopt a diffused – as against a focused – positioning because it wishes to ensnare the customers of other brands, such a switch over from other brands users may fail to occur. Worse still, even the brand loyals may betray eroding allegiance. That perhaps explains why last national elections results were not so shining for BJP, notwithstanding a very eye catching ‘India Shining’ campaign. Unfortunately for NDA – the customer refused to play ball. So another lesson: credible, not clever, communication works. During World War II, RAF bombers were assigned to drop scores of propaganda leaflets over Germany claiming that German authorities were lying about war losses, & urging Germans to demand the ‘truth’. But the whole exercise made pilots comment sardonically, “The only thing achieved out of this exercise by the British Government was to supply the Continent’s requirement for toilet paper!”
To be sure, however, if one can extend one’s sphere of influence, without compromising core values of the brand, into different market segments, the gains will multiply. BSP, the dalit outfit managed to take UP by storm in the 2007 state elections because Mayawati successfully extended her brand influence into the new (‘other brand loyal’) markets inhabited by Brahmins and even Muslims.
Thus, one view says that truly powerful brands have a narrow focus. Brand extensions may yield easy gains in the short term but in long run, the exercise is likely to erode brand identity. But a contrarian view also prevails, advocating transcending original boundaries to convert potential gains into actual ones. The debate is inconclusive. The only consensus is: brand extension is a tricky proposition, more so if it involves extending a mass market brand into a premium category, and vice-versa. Handled well, however, it can win many new customers without diluting the brand equity or even alienating old loyalists.
The complexity involved in extending a brand without ending up with a failed product & a critically diluted brand image is something that political parties are very much seized of. None more so than the BJP, which tried to reposition itself during the last general elections from a party with Hindutva as the major election plank to a pan Indian organisation, while concurrently retaining old faithfuls. Congress, too, has seen steady erosion in brand value. From being the ‘mother brand’ once upon a time, (of course due to virtual monopoly brand power in post Independence phase, with the TINA factor – There Is No Alternative – in its favour), today the party finds many of its values usurped by interlopers in clearly defined niches. Generally, markets in transition, as contrasted with matured ones, witness unfreezing and freeing of entry conditions into a hitherto restricted or even a monopoly market. Consequently they become extremely fragmented with even the leading brand enjoying not very high market share. Consolidation of brand takes place much later. Should we perhaps then accept the rise of coalition politics as the transitional stage in the development of democracy in India?
For Complete IIPM Article, Click on IIPM Article
Source : IIPM Editorial, 2008
An Initiative of IIPM, Malay Chaudhuri and Arindam Chaudhuri (Renowned Management Guru and Economist)
No comments:
Post a Comment