Hamsini Shivakumar is a co-founder of Leapfrog StrategyConsulting, a firm that focuses on informed imagination for breakthrough
solutions. She has more than 25 years experience in premier marketing and
advertising companies like Procter and Gamble and JWT.
Innovation without strong branding is incomplete
In this blog post, I wish to put forward three ideas for
intending innovators in India, to consider.
a) A supply gap is not a demand gap.
b) Innovation without strong branding is
incomplete.
c)
Even
a radical innovation, which by definition is highly differentiated, needs to be
well positioned and well branded to generate demand and grow consumption.
In my experience, many professionals and entrepreneurs in
India are good at spotting ‘gaps’ in the market. However, the problem is that these are often supply
gaps, spotted due to the entrepreneur extrapolating from his/her personal
passions or capabilities. As India is an
under-supplied country in many areas still, it seems perfectly reasonable to
believe that supply will generate demand automatically. Or that it is a matter of concept ‘selling’,
viz, pushing hard(er).
A couple of examples will illustrate this point.
E.g., I am interested in coffee being from a coffee growing
area or agriculturist family, I travel abroad and see some specific types of
coffees or coffee making products and I think to myself, these are not
available in India, why not be the ‘first mover’ / ‘innovator’ to bring these
in?
E.g., I travel in the interior villages of UP, see how people
struggle with power cuts and shortages and think, why not provide them with
solar lamps – as far as I can see, solar lamps are not easily available
here.
E.g., I see full families travelling on two wheelers and
think there must be a market for a Rs. One lakh car, if only someone were to
make it.
E.g., I see that there is no forum or portal for marketing
knowledge to be shared and discussed, so I propose to launch India’s first and
only marketing portal.
All of these ‘well-spotted’ supply gaps talk to the
entrepreneur and innovator’s need to blaze new trails, be a pioneer, do
something innovative which has not been done before and hence is exciting, with
the seeming potential to grow into a big business over time.
The million dollar, unanswered question at this stage is,
will there be demand for this innovation?
And assuming that the innovator team could identify a set of potential
target consumers for the innovation, would those consumers be able to give a
reliable answer to the question of whether they would want this innovation or
not – when they can’t see it, smell it, taste it or know it in a concrete way;
hence clearly appreciate the value that it can bring to their life, vis-à-vis
existing alternatives. Concept testing
may be valid for known categories and established markets, but does it really
work for the radical, the new, the somewhat unknown?
With these thoughts in mind, the innovator often has to make
a bet and get down to the hard work of translating the idea or concept into a
product or service which can be launched into the market. And that is what he/she does, with full
enthusiasm, often cheered on by an excited media audience.
However, the potential consumer for these innovations,
sitting at the other end, is oblivious to all this new supply that could enter
his/her life and is going about his-her life in their usual way. Which means that the innovator has to think
harder about who is exactly the intended consumer and why would he-she want it
compared to his-her existing alternatives.
The innovator must be prepared to be surprised because, experience shows
that demand for the innovation can come from unexpected places and the market
for the innovation could be built in unanticipated ways. And sometimes, in fact, very often, as the
track record shows, the innovation that has been created with so much passion,
effort and commitment meets with a cold reception and the consumer demand-market
potential turns out to be far less than was imagined it could be.
One of the key reasons that the supply gap sought to be
filled by the innovation does not translate into high demand is that the
innovator believes that his creation is new and different enough to sell
itself. Or rather, if ‘sold’ through
distribution channels, the demand is bound to grow. However, a critical step between the
innovation converting to demand is not marketing and sales, but positioning and
branding. Even a unique product or
service, has to attract potential customers through perception enhancement viz
branding. It not only needs an
attractive name and identity, it also needs to be well-positioned with an
attractive image, to draw its target consumer.
It has to reflect the aspirations of its consumer and align to the
cultural current of the place and time. It
needs a communication campaign and a conversion strategy that will translate
interest into purchase.
Two types of errors lead to misguided positioning of the
innovation. The first is the innovators
passion and conviction that he ‘knows’ the customer and what the customer needs,
better than the customers themselves.
Linked to this, is the unwillingness to be classified and compared,
looking through the eyes of the potential customer. The pioneer is resistant to accepting that in
the buyer’s eyes, his innovation may not be so radical or unique after
all. Or if its uniqueness is perceived
and accepted, the buyer is unsure about what to do about it, given that it is
so new and unfamiliar.
One of the common views of branding as image is that it is
akin to stylists who dress the stars and give them the most attractive ‘look’
for the context of their appearance.
However, in reality, positioning a brand is all about classification and
framing. It is about understanding the
mental classification and categorization that the prospective buyer makes and
the conclusions and emotional meaning that he assigns to the innovation based
upon that categorization. If this is not
properly understood by the innovator and his campaign team, not enough time,
attention and effort is given to this stage.
The launch team follows the direction of the innovator in defining the
positioning, sometimes this can be right and sometimes it can be spectacularly
wrong.
These errors of judgment by innovator teams, of
mis-positioning their innovation, are not just what individual entrepreneurs can
make, they can be made by large corporations too. The Tata Nano is a spectacular case study
that illustrates the above. The Nano is
a radical innovation in cars, the first of its kind in the world and so
on. However, the consumer who it was
intended for, the first time car buyer in India, rapid upgrader from
two-wheelers, was left under-whelmed by the launch positioning of the
brand. It had to be re-positioned with a
young and trendy image; sales are still less than anticipated. This happened despite two years of media
coverage from all around the world. In
the case of the Nano, mis-positioning issues were compounded by product safety
issues as well. Godrej Chotu-kool, a
small, battery-operated refrigerator intended for small town and rural markets
is another case in point.
Thus, in my view, the company that intends to move from
opportunistic growth strategy or the ‘jugaadu’ approach to sustainable
innovation as a source of competitive advantage must be willing to invest its
efforts in two directions:
- Develop processes for innovating more consistently
- Give importance to completing the offering to the consumer, through adequate focus on positioning and branding. To get this right, setting aside innovator ego and having adequate humility to respect the consumer and potential buyer’s perception and value frames is a must.
A few years ago I had the opportunity to meet one of the designers at Honda R&D Pvt. Ltd. i.e. Hiroyuki Miyo and he had a wonderful insight on innovation. Miyo's role was instrumental in making Hero Honda Passion and Splendor successful. Honda conducts surveys across the nation before coming out with a new bike and the sample size of the survey runs sometimes to about a million respondents trying to find the pulse of the Indian Customer. So innovations should necessarily and as you mentioned rightly, come as an understanding of the consumers rather than personal likes or dislikes. On the other hand if you look at the story of Bill Gates it was his hunch based on his personal experience that drove the innovations at Microsoft. They assumed that there would be a need for personal computers 5-10 years down the line.
ReplyDeleteAs far as Jugaad to Systematic innovations are concerned, its a mindset. It will require quite an extraordinary effort on the part of the entrepreneurs to think beyond Jugaad and convert it to a systematic innovations. Contention is simple, if you look at any industry, very few or ignorable innovations have come out of India. The primary reason is that there is simply too much population out there to even think of concepts like customer satisfaction, forget about what the customers want. So basically it is short term gain that you are looking at as you are simply not interested in retaining the customer as the entrepreneur knows that if he loses one customer, there are always more that will come to him. Case in point are all the Mobile Service companies. What was expected out of Mobile number portability and what is the scenario now. The total shift in consumer base of these companies has been more or less the same.
So all in all innovation is a long term strategy and also a personal habit, philosophy and belief.
Thanks for the insightful article.The three errors and the concept o "supply gap" vs "demand gap" are key aspects every organization needs to consider! Couldn't agree with you more on the example! Very apt!
ReplyDelete