#mitbrandingsectionb

[vmaloneymitbranding-blog]

Making microprocessors mainstream

The success of the “Intel Inside” campaign is their ability to translate the value proposition of their semiconductors into laymans terms. As Lewnes stated, Intel intended to market the product based on “feelings and experiences” rather than technical specifications in order to “bridge the gap between the technical details and the emotional experience of using cutting-edge technology.” The brand repositioned itself as a key component of a high-quality computers in a way that made the product accessible in a market where the majority of consumers are tech illiterate. Rather than focusing on the actual function and value of their product, the “Intel Inside” campaign successfully positioned Intel as accessible to average consumers while maintaining the aura of being a leading, reliable technology. I’d guess that most consumers would not be aware of what role Intel plays in operating their computers, but still have positive associations with the technology. In the modern economy, as more and more complicated products are developed, innovative positioning of technical products can define who becomes an household name.  

[nvelutini-blog]

Brand Architecture

“We think there’s some advantage to making P&G as a company more like a brand. If you look at investors, they buy our company. You look at the various lists out there — Most Admired, Most Respected companies — they’re about the company, not about the brands.”     —Bob McDonald, CEO P&G

During college I had the opportunity to intern at Procter and Gamble (P&G) for a summer. I worked in the marketing department, and the company was deciding if they should continue with their current brand architecture, or if they should brand their portfolio under P&G.

We had a couple focus groups to understand what the current perception of P&G as a brand, as well of the perception of each of the main brands for the country and the results were very impressive.

About 85% of the people in the focus groups associated P&G with high quality house hold products, but when asked to name a brand only around 20% would actually name P&G brands.

This concept was recurrent almost all over the world, and after this the company decided to change the way they spoke and how they addressed their brands in order to give them the P&G quality seal, and began to also market the company.

I believe there are some pros and cons to this strategy:

Pros:

1.       The company can now enjoy the benefits of the perception of P&G and relate that to the full product line.

2.       In Venezuela in many cases scarcity was a problem, so people felt confident substituting goods from P&G if they did not find their preferred brand.

3.       It allows you to create a company image and goal that can align internal and external corporate communications

Cons:

1.       If at any point there is a problem with a specific product, it can affect the full portfolio.

2.       There are quality differences between brands at P&G, that are explained by pricing but promising the best in every product can be tough to deliver

3.       Product differentiation becomes more complicated (Luvs vs Pampers)

[luceminott-blog]

The Bush Family’s Branded House

The general consensus is that George W. Bush benefitted greatly from associations with his father, George H. W. Bush, who ended his presidency with a 50% approval rating. 

During George W.’s campaign, The Gallup Poll reported: 

“There is no doubt that George W.’s famous pedigree has been of enormous help to him throughout his political career. His success to date would have been a much more difficult task if his name had been George W. Smith rather than George W. Bush. But so go the fortunes of war… Having a famous name is as much a part of the game of politics as is any of the myriad other reasons why one candidate ends up beating another.”

George W.’s experience illustrates the positive impact of a, literal, branded house.  The “Bush” master brand was very strong and helped him gain credibility and visibility throughout his campaign. Moreover, George H. W.’s experience was highly relevant so there was no need to brand a “new offering” to Republican voters.

Jeb Bush’s experience was very different. He spent significant effort during his recent campaign disassociating himself from his brother, whose presidency ended with a 27% approval rating. In this case Jeb was actively trying to avoid this association and represent a new, different offering.

In his own words: “Jeb is different from George…Jeb is who he is. My life story is different.”

The story of the Bush family nicely illustrates both the pros and cons of a Branded House approach.