Branding is one of the most critical parts of a successful
business marketing strategy. A strong brand goes way beyond its visual logo or
business name – it’s a set of associations that a consumer has with a
particular product, and good brand identity can create an emotional
relationship of trust, credibility and quality that carries immense power.
The Secrets of Branding asks the question, “What’s behind the label?” This
fascinating and insightful series looks at how brands are first created and
shares the insights of the world’s leading business entrepreneurs as to why
some brands succeed and others don’t. The episodes examine some of the latest
brand strategies and marketing techniques adopted across Europe and America
which include the growing use of social media and the concept of augmented
reality.
Crisis discovers the secrets behind the brands recognised the
world over, as this insightful series looks at how brands are created and
explores why some succeed where others fail.
Looking at the latest techniques and marketing strategies in
Europe and America – including the use of social media and augmented reality –
Secrets of Branding shows how luxury brands are often ‘refreshed’ to attract
new generations of customers across the globe.
Crisis reveals the secret marketing tactics of some of the
world’s most successful brands, while leading business entrepreneurs,
advertising and marketing gurus share insights into the do's and don'ts of
brand development.
This episode looks at how an unexpected crisis can bring even
the most powerful brand to its knees, and what steps can be taken to protect
global brands from major reputational damage. Being prepared for a brand crisis
is a vital part of developing a brand and marketing strategy.
Incidents like the Pan American Airliner bombing of 1988 and
the recent disappearance of flight MH370 have shaken the airline industry and
specifically these two brands to the very core. It has also raised questions on
airline safety and making people think twice whenever they are opting to travel
by these two airliners.
The fact that people started cancelling Pan Am flights and
the compensation pan Am had to give affected their business heavily. The brand
had lost brand equity and the brand was on its way to a diminution.
Post that consumer confidence on the brand fell considerably and
from being ranked 23rd on Superbrand list (at that time) it failed
to make it into the top 500 list the next year.
Three things a brand need to keep in mind while sustaining a
brand and that is:
1. An unfortunate disaster is not the brand’s fault but to
aloof your business from the disaster and shying away from taking responsibility
and that to too quickly can have a negative impact on the brand.
2. Showing compassion for the mishap and dealing the situation
in a honest and candid way helps to regain consumer trust and pulls the brand
from declining.
3. Consumers don’t blame brand for this kind of mishaps but
if the brands lack an emergency damage control or crisis management
infrastructure then the onus comes back to the brand.
Fords Edsel development issue of 1955 is also another brand
failure’s classic example. Ford completely ignored the market research report,
went against it and did something on their own. their add campaigns promised more
than what the car was people’s expectation went high but when the car came out eventually
it was not what it promised.
The Edsel was saddled with quality and reliability issues
from the very beginning. Its price was another sticking point: It started at
$2,500 and topped out at $3,800, which was much more expensive than other Ford
models at the time. Adding to the Edsel’s woes was the fact that it debuted at
the beginning of a recession. An expensive Ford didn’t look like a good option
for most consumers.
In 1982, Johnson & Johnson's Tylenol medication commanded
35 per cent of the US over-the-counter analgesic market - representing
something like 15 per cent of the company's profits.
Unfortunately, at that point one individual succeeded in
lacing the drug with cyanide. Seven people died as a result, and a widespread
panic ensued about how widespread the contamination might be.
By the end of the episode, everyone knew that Tylenol was associated
with the scare. The company's market value fell by $1bn as a result.
When the same situation happened in 1986, the company had
learned its lessons well. It acted quickly - ordering that Tylenol should be
recalled from every outlet - not just those in the state where it had been
tampered with. Not only that, but the company decided the product would not be
re-established on the shelves until something had been done to provide better
product protection.
As a result, Johnson & Johnson developed the tamperproof
packaging that would make it much more difficult for a similar incident to
occur in future.
The cost was a high one. In addition to the impact on the
company's share price when the crisis first hit, the lost production and
destroyed goods as a result of the recall were considerable.
However, the company won praise for its quick and appropriate
action. Having sidestepped the position others have found themselves in - of
having been slow to act in the face of consumer concern - they achieved the
status of consumer champion.
Within five months of the disaster, the company had recovered
70% of its market share for the drug - and the fact this went on to improve
over time showed that the company had succeeded in preserving the long term
value of the brand. Companies such as Perrier, who had been criticised for less
adept handling of a crisis, found their reputation damaged for as long as five
years after an incident.
In fact, there is some evidence that it was rewarded by
consumers who were so reassured by the steps taken that they switched from
other painkillers to Tylenol.
Conclusion
The features that made Johnson & Johnson's handling of
the crisis a success included the following:
- They acted quickly, with
complete openness about what had happened, and immediately sought to
remove any source of danger based on the worst case scenario - not waiting
for evidence to see whether the contamination might be more widespread
- Having acted quickly, they then
sought to ensure that measures were taken which would prevent as far as
possible a recurrence of the problem
- They showed themselves to be
prepared to bear the short term cost in the name of consumer safety. That
more than anything else established a basis for trust with their customers.
No comments:
Post a Comment