Advertisements that make my head hurt: Part 1

I have been wanting to put a message out there for companies who have sub-par brand managers, and even worse agencies executing the adverts. I wonder where the concepts of brand maps, concept boards went when I look at these adverts.

I also feel bad for the company that puts these ads out, because clearly it doesn't help create the connect they'd wished for, or does it? I leave it to you. To me, it simply makes my head hurt. And if anything makes me never want to invest in these products.

I will continue to enhance this post, with more adverts... But here are a few to get you started.

Contender number 1: The Vivo IPL 2016 advert.

Now this advert, I am sure the brand manager thought that the message he wanted to convey was good. The association that the team tried to create was that of positive thinking. But, unfortunately, the song that plays in the background makes ones blood pressure rise.

So here it is for your viewing pleasure.

Contender number 2: Rupa Vest Advert

I do not want to say anything about this. Zohan has been copied shamelessly. I am not even sure what the message is this guy is trying to convey

Contender number 3: Oppo Smartphones

All I can say about this is, OH MY DEAR GOD! WHY!

Hritik Roshan looks like a creep trying to fix eye bags on Ms. Sonam Kapoor. Who herself manages to use filters to change her look from that of a normal human being to a South-East Asian woman. Why, I ask, WHY!? And why do we have a guy playing the accordion in the background is beyond me, and honestly adds to the irritation quotient of the advert.

I know Chinese companies generally make terrible adverts, but this one takes the cake, simply because of the amount of money they must have spent on the slots, the actors, and the agency.

Contender number 4: Vimal Pan Masala

I don't know what Pan Masala has, as in terms of contents, but I am sure people do not start hallucinating the way they show in this advert. Ajay Devgan ought to revisit his career choices again.

Contender number 5: Lyra Leggings

Now I have been assaulted by this ad quite frequently at cinemas. I hope Prachi Desai goes back to making chapatis at home that she was doing anyway, after starring in Rock On, because quite clearly her career did not go any where.

Contender number 6: Manyawar
I have decided I will never let anyone I care about wear Manyawar clothing. Why? Well because of this advert.

Contender number 7: Sprite

I am not a huge Sprite fan, and after seeing this advert, I am thankful I stick to drinking Amul Masti, a spiced buttermilk, and after seeing this commercial, I recommend you don't drink Sprite  out of care for the intellect and intelligence of a normal human.

Contender number 8: Frooti

Now, I respect Shahrukh Khan as an individual, however I firmly believe he sucks at acting, dancing, and generally at films. Not to forget even at adverts. I only hope folks at Frooti wake up, hire a better agency, and re-look at brand ambassadors.

Here is the commercial that makes absolutely no sense to me. Again, the brand is so powerful, and Parle is loved by the masses so much, the product manages to tick, despite the horrendous adverts, and the terrible brand ambassador.

Contender number 9: Thumbs Up

Salman Khan shouldn't have been retained as brand ambassador for the company, after his frequent run-ins with the law, is what I feel. However, if he was retained, at least make him star in adverts that don't say: "Kuch toofani karte hain" (lets do something that's terrifying)

After all, maybe this toofani bit landed him in trouble in the first place. Unfortunately, the drink is loved by the masses, given its slightly "coarser" taste when compared to other dark colas in the market. The target segment that favors this drink also varies, it is not just the young, urbane, risk taking junta, but is also loved by the slightly mature populace. Given its' origins, a Thumbs Up becomes an instant hit when paired with a spicy biriyani, or a oily chhole kulche/ bhature.

Contender number 10: He Deodrants

So the point of this advert is, if you do not use this deodorant you shall never be interesting. Also, this kind of proves what we all have known for a while, that deodorants are like your bag of wafers, filled with air. In fact in this advert, it seems the gas is lighter than air.

I will rest my case for now, but I will come back with more on terrible adverts, that make your head hurt.

Binnj and Many new start ups that get it all wrong

The biggest challenge that Binnj faces is the absence of an elaborate market research to generate significantly deep insight about the restaurant business industry that can be the game winner in this case.

Without that insight, and I will elaborate on the kind of insights, creating a business model canvas is tough. What Binnj has is a concept board, where they think that they have an idea and are now in the process of field testing the conceptual product.

I agree, that lean-startups adopt this model, but now that they have invested so much time into the development of the product, I think it’s time they explored how they will come up with their value proposition, their positioning, identify and segment customers, identify the Minimum Viable Product and the Minimum Viable Segment and work towards an acquisition and retention strategy.

For example, if I were to ask them questions such as, how big your market is, and how much are you looking to capture in how much time, these questions would perhaps not earn me quantifiable responses.

Also, one crucial piece that is missing is the financial viability of the product. Without knowing how much the service would cost to design, build, implement, sell, maintain, enhance and earn revenue from, investing too much time in product development does not make sense.

The case only mentions two broad segments, the ERG, and the SMERG clusters. I do not think they have broken down and identified these restaurant chains by location, and come up with a specific plan to acquire those customers. For example, if I were to ask Mr. Hutcherson, who is your customer and why is he your customer, the response I am anticipating, based on the case is an abstract one. Not a specific answer, such as “I intend to target A, B and C restaurants in this location, because they will pay, they do not need to spend a lot to try the product, they can easily adopt this kind of a solution to their existing practices, and that they will perhaps help me leverage their acquisition into future acquisitions.”

I agree prototyping is important, but the hundred day sprint could have been an ill-conceived plan given that the work really requires the business development team members to generate key insights.

I believe that they should sit and work out finances first, to explore the possibility of working out how much the business is worth and how much it will cost to develop. This to me is a significant step. More so because everyone on the current team has other day jobs, therefore, prioritizing and executing tasks becomes a key strategic issue.

The second step would be to generate insight into the restaurant business. Currently they have identified inventory management systems, a standard restaurant menu and lack of opportunity to selectively price items, as some of the pain points. But what if, for example, the clients of the restaurant want the waiter to service them personally and not want to order via an app? Then in that case their solution would fail to take off on a scale that they might have imagined it to take off on. In this case, coming up with a low cost, intuitive and smart application for inventory management might be a more viable solution than a digitized menu.

Third, they ought to clearly map the pain point of the restaurant industry and then come up with a list of features on the app that would solve each key pain point. The next action item would be to list down, on the basis of priority, the features that cut through the segments and those that are specific to one given segment.

Fourth, they should then look at the potential competitors. At this moment, they have identified a few, but that is again based on limited insight. What would be crucial in defining the competitor landscape is the kind of details their research can generate. This would help in coming up with a more focused MVP.

The next step would be to then focus on prioritizing key features of the prototype that can be taken to the field to test and demo to clients. To me, they have failed to identify those particular pain points clearly and subsequently translate them to priority items to their developers.

The next step would be to identify the go-to-market strategy. Currently no one in the team is talking about it. They seem to be building on a direct sales approach, but that limits visibility and adoption, more so because the product might not be “buzz-able” in its current state. Questions such as, how does Binnj look to educate potential customers about the features and benefits of the app, and how does Binnj plan to generate sales-leads through connecting with the elements in the restaurant business, haven’t been explored.

A direct sale is a costly proposition. More so in a B2B product because the typical acquisition costs go up owing to highly diffused landscapes.

Identifying one’s client’s customers and positioning oneself strategically with the client’s value chain is an important element that is missing in this case.

For example, if I am just a fancy, flashy restaurant menu app that runs on the iPad, and my client restaurant adopts it, but the restaurant’s patrons ditch the idea because one of the regulars likes the waiters, they will perhaps not adopt the idea in the long run. What then about the restaurants that doesn’t have such waiting services? Will they know that such a solution exists? Will the sales team be able to reach them?

The agile methodology of developing a product makes sense if they have all these things identified at either the start, or has a strategy in place to iteratively identify such insights in quick time and get product prototypes.

I feel adopting and proceeding with the guidelines mentioned above, would help the team chart a more definite path to take the product towards execution.

CUMI India's China Strategy - My Take

CUMI aims to convert its strategic objective of capturing the Chinese market, both on the material sourcing and market share capture front. It looks to create a unique, defensible and valuable position in China.

Its time tested strategy that worked in Russia and South Africa doesn’t seem to be working in China for CUMI.

To aid in the analysis, data pertaining to competition (local players, international players in the same arena as CUMI is looking to expand in), and data pertaining to successful strategies of international companies that set up in China can be looked at. However, this information is missing in the case.

I think CUMI failed to identify, analyze, and pursue a tailored strategy for China. Using the three Key Performance Indicators of Quality, Time and Cost involved in the process of setting up in China, I can see that a move into China, based on the information presented in the case gives the company a strategic edge in the Time to manufacture same Quality at significantly low Costs, is the logical step forward.

To analyze the political, economic, socio-cultural, technological, environmental and legal situation (PESTEL), I will attempt to break the value chain from the point of CUMI. Further, I will try to evaluate the strategic fit of each element of the value chain into the PESTEL components.

The value chain could have the following components: Product Design, Manufacturing (Raw Materials, Parts Production, Assembly), Marketing, Distribution and Service. Product Design is an element that creates a unique, defensible and valuable position for CUMI at the moment. The objective behind getting into China is gaining a competitive edge in the Manufacturing front. But what I believe CUMI failed to look at could be Marketing, Distribution and service. I will expound more on the marketing and distribution strategies later in the paper.

Russia and China provides a similar political environment, but when the other factors in a PESTEL analysis are considered, China and Russia differ substantially, especially, when it comes to the Economic, Socio-Cultural and Legal factors. Therefore, what may work in Russia or any other country might not necessarily work in China.

The manufacturing component interacts with the political, environmental, economic and technological feasibility of China favorably, making the manufacturing process a good entry point. The various clauses that dictate partnership agreements with the investing companies create a barrier to entering the markets influencing the Legal aspect of a PESTEL analysis.

The other aspects of the value chain require further research in the PESTEL analysis to determine the interactions within.

The country strategy of CUMI seems to have been partner with a local business, enter into a joint venture and then either buy out the partner or stabilize the business.

A successful manufacturing venture in China’s political, economic and legal system in China entails a tough choice between giving up the competitive product development and manufacturing processes for achieving success basis the key performance factors.

The socio-cultural make-up of the Chinese manufacturing industry focuses on collectivist growth. The risk appetite of the Chinese market is far beyond what CUMI is willing to take. Sure the risks are big, but rewards are big as well assuming the company can capture its targeted geographic resources and competitive labor.

I feel one aspect to succeed in a business environment is by attaining resonance with the value chain that you are trying to enter. For example, if CUMI is trying to enter the Chinese market, it should identify what location in the value chain of the Chinese manufacturing industry it will capitalize upon. The opportunities that CUMI can explore is by giving up its edge with regards to the design and process, however create another unique, defensible and valuable position with regards to the value chain. It can explore areas such as distribution and marketing. This would solve the twin objectives of gaining market share and creating a sustainable source of profit that it can leverage.

One very important, yet neglected aspect of the value chain, that I feel CUMI failed to look at is how businesses would use their products. I talk about this from a business-to-business perspective. To elaborate, to create a valuable and defensible position, if the distribution channels for adhesives can be identified, modified and manipulated there is a distinct possibility of coming up with a feasible Mc. Kinseys Game Board (copyright McKenzie).

The other alternative that CUMI can explore is creating a joint venture, this time, however focused on acquiring an adhesive manufacturing company, similar to its strategies in India, Russia and South Africa. This of course would mean giving up its technological expertise (IP), but establishing an R&D facility to enable it to come up with newer products in other geographies would mean that it keeps its position in the value chain outside of China.

Another expensive, yet viable option could be to set up a manufacturing facility that contributes to the production of specific product components and then look at importing to India to deliver the finished product.

The key decision that CUMI needs to make at this juncture is whether it can really risk losing its production intellectual property. This is at the core of the adhesive industry. By production IP, I mean all aspects of its production process, from sourcing supplies, to the workflow, to the finishing of the product.

The implications of such a decision would require CUMI to look into the future to see where the company is headed, re-look at their mission and vision statement to see if the consequences of such a move would require it to invest in certain strategic areas such as R&D and securing the sales and distribution channels of its business-to-business model of operations.

I think CUMI should also revisit the position it aspires to target with regards to the current international value chain. If it currently leverages on just the production processes, CUMI should explore what more can it offer at the other geographic locations that would enable the company to grow sustainably.

If I were asked to suggest a course of action in this case, I would suggest setting up a joint venture to achieve its key objectives of producing cheap, and timely. This would, however, mean that CUMI needs to go back to the drawing board to figure out where in the value chain it would want to be to make it a market leader in terms of strategic positioning. One possible alternative could be that it places itself in the marketing and distribution segment as an innovator due to its product offerings and key strategic partnerships with other national and international steel manufacturers.

The company can then re-look at charting out a definitive plan in terms of where the R&D should be in order to come up with suitable innovations in its product lines so that it can remain an attractive choice for its overseas markets.

To really capture and gain a strategic advantage in China over other players is a challenge. Some ventures have managed to capture the unique opportunities that China has to offer (such as Boeing), however many have failed. For example, Mahindra and Mahindra’s strategic partnership in manufacturing engines and parts has failed in China.

Given the evidence of failures, I feel CUMI should be open to the possibility of establishing and growing alternate lines on business in China, as opposed to the manufacturing edge it is looking at. This, perhaps, is a conservative outlook, but something that the board should be open to adopting if the situation presents itself.