What comes to mind when you think
of Gucci? A Premium Brand? Hi-end fashion? Luxury? Italian? Exclusive? Stylish?
When you visualize a typical
Gucci /Armani user- would you think of a rich cool dude/girl in the city- sophisticated and fashionable? or would you think of Punjabi rap, small town
wanna be cool dudes, and the fields of Punjab as likely setting for the brand
imagery? These two pictures will not remain quite so far apart, if you look at
what these brands seem to be aiming for, in India. It’s nice to be a global brand on a pedestal ,
a brand somewhat alien and out of reach for all but a privileged few. But is it
nicer to be an aspirational brand which appeals to a larger number of people? Does
it make better business sense to move from being a brand at arms’ length, to a
brand which the consumers may want to stretch out for? The latter is the
philosophy which many of the luxury brands are now adopting to expand in an
emerging market like India.
Search for Gucci or Armani or
Audi or Tommy in You tube and you will
find a number of Punjabi rap music videos.
Among the first to become highly popular
was “Gucci Armani” -a new Punjabi song by Simranjeet Singh (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHmBgWHldO0
). The lyrics of this song are about a young guy singing about his stylish
girlfriend who has expensive shopping habits and is fond of brands like Gucci
and Armani. “Gucci Armani De, Kidda De Sonk Marjani De, Nakhre Us patrani De, Mekya Hun Ta Kudiye Bs
Karja”. (Its Gucci and Armani, look at
what she’s prefers, she shows attitude like a queen, I say –Girl! At least stop
now!)
Another popular video “Armani” by
Harman Chahal is also notching up the views on youtube and on music channels (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6HpUmPaLHAY)
. While Simranjeet Singh is shown as a well dressed city guy with an Audi in
the background, Harman plays a rural jat farmer (complete with a Sonalika
tractor and a tube well in the background) falling for a rich, stylish, modern
girl who wears expensive Armani clothes. These videos seem to have worked well
making both for the brands as well as the singers widely popular amongst the Punjabi youth.
Italian fashion powerhouses,
Giorgio Armani and Gucci are the world’s most coveted designer brands according
to a global online survey of 21,000 consumers in 42 countries conducted by
ACNielsen in November 2005. Frank Martell, President and CEO, ACNielsen Europe,
points out that regardless of where they live, when consumers purchase a Gucci
bag or a Giorgio Armani suit they are prepared to pay a premium because they
are buying the image the brand represents. (Breaking News, AC Nielsen, March
2006).
So are these brands compromising on their brand image which was their
strength and differentiator?
If we look closely that is not the case at
all- At the core, these brands represent exclusive designs, high quality and
luxury. None of these are being compromised in an effort to reach a consumer
who has the aspirations and the means but possibly lacks the exposure to the Hi
fashion brands. Though both the music videos, feature characters which Punjabi
youth can relate to, they do not detract from the exclusive and premium
association of the brand- since the brand user is shown to be glamourous, and
the aspirational aspect for the brand is highlighted. Its not about diluting
the brand value and bringing it down on the premium/ style quotient, but about communicating
the brand values to the consumer who may have been aware about the brand but
did not relate to it and so did not aspire for it. The Nielson report quoted
above also states that eleven percent of Indian’s online consumers already buy
Armani but 38 percent would buy Armani
in the future, if they could afford it. And while nine percent of online
Indians already bought Versace, 34 percent aspire to buying Versace in the
future (Breaking News, AC Nielsen, March 2006).
While it is relatively easy for
multinationals to tap into an aware metro consumer more in sync with global
consumers in terms of purchase behaviour, it is the second and third tier cities where
the need for localisation based on consumer insight is the highest. Several
studies have indicated the growing market potential in the smaller cities and
towns. Over the next 15 years, developed economies and emerging-market
megacities will account for only one-third of global GDP growth, according to a
McKinsey Global Institute report- Urban world: Mapping the economic power of
cities. Around 230 of second tier cities not presently among the top 600 urban
centers by GDP, will make that list in 2025 (Navigating Asia’s new urban
landscape, Mc Kinsey Quarterly, April 2011).
As income and exposure increases in the smaller towns and cities, these
consumers are becoming more open to embracing new types of food, fashion and
lifestyle products/ services and with a little effort marketers can build long
lasting relationships with these consumers.
How should the brand be made to
look appealing is more a question of fitting the brand in the socio-cultural
context of the target consumer. Should brand appeal be about transcending
diverse cultures or should it be about adapting to different cultures? Much has
been written about the debate on standardization vs customization of branding strategy.
Different brands depending on their brand recognisability and the nature of their
product category, adopt varying degrees of customisation. While some brands
like Apple are more standardized in all aspects of branding strategy, others
like Nestle, follow a more customised approach with local teams having a high
degree of functional autonomy on decisions ranging from product development to
communication.
The standardized approach does
have its benefits especially with a view to maintaining the global brand image
and equity, and ensuring transferability of strategies across geographies, to
say nothing of the economies of scale which can be better leveraged. Still, it
needs to be highlighted that increasingly marketers are finding that the key to
moving from acceptability to emotional bonding lies in customisation for the
local markets. It’s the local tadka which makes the consumer say “I’m lovin’
it”. It’s the identification and affinity with the brand which can make the
difference between a brand user and a brand advocate!
So would a global brand still be global, if we keep adapting and
localising our strategy?
That is an important question and
one which brand managers need to carefully evaluate while finalising their
strategy. While the brand core has to remain the same, the positioning may be
tweaked a little, if the stage of development of the market or socio-cultural
contexts are very different. Even so, the positioning cannot stray from the
core values of the brand. Product development and R&D can follow largely
global norms but there must be flexibility in the system to incorporate local
market views and sensibilities, and allow for adaptation. Even more important
is not to block new product ideas and innovations which stem from the local
market conditions, as it is these which very often help the brand to surpass
local competition and lead to faster and deeper brand penetration. The other elements
of the marketing mix are easier to localize, and these have been effectively
used by many brands. The underlying principle behind all such customisations is
simply that the brand as defined by its core identity needs to deliver value
and become relevant for the local consumer. MNCs are increasingly recognising the need to have
more flexible and entrepreneurial brand teams in emerging markets.
Product adaptations to suit local
tastes have proven successful in the fast food segment, with many global brands
like Mc Donald’s, Domino’s and Pizza Hut, adding spicy variants, Indian
ingredients and vegetarian options to
their Indian menu. But more than taste, brands also have to work at fitting
themselves into the consumer lifestyle and consumption habits. Ready to eat packaged
frozen foods have adopted the tack of highlighting the variety and fun quotient
rather than the convenience to the housewife because that would make her appear
to be a lazy caregiver for her family. Pepsi and all its brands have since the
very beginning worked hard at establishing a local connect. All said and done
even the urban, globally exposed Indian youth connects to a desi “yeh dil
maange more” and “thanda matlab coca cola” much more than the universal “Always
Coca-cola” or “It’s the real thing”. Sure “Always Coca cola” can be understood
across geographies and open happiness is celebrating a universal emotion so
these are good examples of communication which can work across diverse cultures.
But if it is acceptable and meaningful it does not necessarily make it lovable.
Think about it, which of these taglines connected more with you? Which got
adapted into everyday usage faster? Which had the greater potential to appeal
to the many different India’s within India.
When MTV launched in India in the mid nineties, it’s positioning and programme content were in tune with the
global brand and that seemed to be a sensible approach. After all, the target
group for MTV was the global urban Indian Youth who followed western music and
many of them were aware of MTV either through their friends and relatives or
through travels abroad. MTV was positioned as the cool brand which the
westernized Indian could relate to. But was this sufficient for the brand to
tap into the potential of the Indian Market? This audience was limited in size
and even this limited audience was not tuned to western music at all times.
Bollywood was still a big part of their music/ entertainment choices. After all
even the early adopters who know all about trance music will jump up to shake a
leg when they hears the first strains of a popular bollywood number or the
beats of a bhangra. For MTV it was not
only the choice of music, but the all English programming which further limited
the appeal of the channel. It was thought that the market size for an English
music channel was only so much and that it would take time to grow. But why did
MTV need to position itself as an English music channel was not a question
asked at that time. It was the success of small localisation attempts by MTVs
competitor Channel V which prompted MTV to switch gears and relook at their
brand relevance for the Indian market.
The channel decided to focus on the mantra ‘Indianize, Humanize and
Humorize” (Jocelyn Cullity
The Global Desi: Cultural Nationalism on MTV India, Journal of
Communication Inquiry, October 2002). Hindi
music videos and film clippings, were brought in to constitute the major part
of the programming content with English music being retained in largely non
prime slots. VJs dropped their foreign accents and interspersed their English
with liberal doses of hindi and local slang.
By drawing on, rather than
competing with, an existing popular
culture, MTV India made the global seem like a natural extension of the local
instead of a threat to it (Jocelyn Cullity, The Global Desi, October 2002). Did the brand depart from is global values?
No. It was still positioned as a music led, somewhat irreverent entertainment
channel for the youth but the shape it took was derived from local culture and entertainment
choices.
As Quelch has pointed out that standardisation vs customisation is not
an either /or choice. A tailored approach is required towards each
element of the business system and marketing program (customizing Global
Marketing, HBR, May-June 1986). And when global brands look at building their
equity in emerging markets like India, it becomes all the more important to Think globally,Compete locally and Sell
personally.
