Nirma: Warrior at Crossroads
The
case makes it clear that staying in the detergent space has become devoid of
leadership and hence is not a good space to continue in. The brand enjoys
recall and recognition, even though the latest iteration of the ad is also only
a stern rendition of the previous jingle – so much so that it does not have
background music anymore.
Horizontal
line extensions have already been tried and capitalized on in the past by
Nirma, and the absence of leadership mentioned in the case (and above) leaves a
sizable gap to be filled if the consumer base is to be expanded within the detergent category. Vertical
expansion has also been done in toilet soaps category.
Nirma,
as a company Nirma Limited, has extended its production capacities to products
like chemicals and pharmaceuticals. An example of an indigenous pharma company
is Orchid Pharma – Nirma could look to capitalize on these high-growth, assured-return product categories. The company’s
long history and rags-to-riches story will lend credibility during meetings with
decision-makers at every level.
Another
reason against staying (or pumping more money in efforts for staying) in the
detergent category is lack of any significant breakthrough in detergent
technology; even when such an innovation becomes commercially viable, it will
still be in the low-involvement category for most people and hence liable to
the vagrancies of mass-consumer products (FMCG), which are bound to be
high-volume-low-return-per-unit revenue inflows.
 |
The relevant parts [“Brand value drivers for stretch”, viz. linkages between extensions and core product] of David Taylor in Brand Stretch are suggested, non-exhaustively, here:
 |
Brand promise [overlap between human
side of brand, job of brand and insight foundation]: cost-effective manufacture of chemicals.
Benefits [part of job of brand]: value for money.
Core insight [part of insight foundation]:
making essential chemical formulations of all qualities available to the “economy
class”.
No comments:
Post a Comment