Procter-and-Gamble保洁公司多品牌战略(英文)

ProcterandGamble–Corporatebrandingvsmulti-brandingProcterandGamble(P&G)istheAmerican,fast-movingconsumergoodscompanybehindmanybrandsyouarelikelytohavelyingaroundyourhouse:Ariel,Bounty,PringlesandGillette–justtonameafew.Thesebrandsareprobablyfamiliartoyou.Hence,theirstrategytodateofpromotingmultiplebrandstotargetdifferentmarketsegmentshasbeenhighlyeffective.However,thishashithertobeenatthatexpenseofpromotingtheircorporatebrand.Thus,P&Ghavereviewedtheirpromotionalmix;now,thecompanyplanstopromotetheircorporation’senvironmentalcredentialsthroughT.V.advertisingintheU.K.TheirbeliefisthatifconsumersperceiveP&Gtobeagreencompany,thentheywillactivelyseekouttheirbrands.Thiscoincideswiththelauchoftheirnewenvironmentalsustainabilityvision.Simply,P&Garemovingawayfromamutli-brandstrategytoacorporatebrandingstrategy.Butsurelythereareadvantagesanddrawbacksofeachapproach?Firstly,whathasmadeP&Gsosuccessful?Asmentionedbefore,effectivemulti-brandingistheanswer.ThisallowsP&Gtotailordifferentfeaturesthatappealtodifferentconsumers–noteinthepictureabove:theymanufacturebothHead&ShouldersandPanteneshampoo.Asaresultofthis,thecompanycantakeadifferentiatedapproachtomarketing.Thus,long-termrelationshipsaredevelopedwithcustomersbycloselysatisfyingtheirwantsandneedswithproductsthathaveacompetitiveadvantageovertheircompetitors.AlthoughP&Ghaveovercomethemostcommondrawbackofusingamulti-brandstrategy–thateachbrandmayonlyobtainasmallmarketshare–theydosufferfromalackofcorporatepublicity.UnlikeP&G,UnileverandReckittBeckinser,theirmajorcompetitors,havealreadystartedtopromotetheircorporatebrand–asopposedtotheirproducts’.Unileverdistinctivelydisplaytheirlogoontheiradvertisements;whileReckittBeckinserhasstartedtoraisetheircorporatepublicityamongstudentstohighlightthegraduatejobopportunitiestheyoffer.SoalreadyP&Gareplayingcatch-upwiththeirmicro-environment.Thismeansthatabove-the-linepromotionisneeded,intheformofadvertisements,toquicklyraisetheircorporateprofile.Thiswouldaccountforthecreativeadvertising,below,whichhasalreadybeenairedintheU.S.Takenoteoftheending:althoughtheyhighlighttherelevantproductrangetoMothers–akeymarketsegment–themainemphasisisonthecompany,P&G.ThisisanindicationofhowtheyaimtoundertakecorporatebrandingintheU.K–sponsorshipofthe2012olympicsthatemphasisestheirenvironemtalsustainabilityandhealthylivingethos.Thus,likehowMothersintheU.S.mayseekoutproductsfromvariousP&Gproductlines,healthandenvironmentalconcernedconsumersintheU.K.willtheoreticallylookoutforP&Gproducts.Moreover,Ibelievethatthiscorporatebrandingstrategywillprovideevenmorelonger-termbenefitsforP&G,thatmaynotevenbeapartoftheirmarketingobjectives.Namely,asconsumerstrustandrecogniseP&G,themorewillingtheymaybecometotrynewbrandstheylaunch.Forinstance,Heinz’straditionallabelinghasbecomesynonymouswithhigh-qualityfoodproducts.Thisdevelopsdeeperconsumerrelationships.IfP&Gcanachieveasimilarbrandpositioning–inthemindsoftheirconsumers–thenproductdevelopmentbecomeslessriskyand,therefore,innovationbecomesmoreeffective.However,inorderforcorporatebrandingtobeasuccess,thecompanymusthaveagoodreputation–aslightlyobviousobservationIknow.Butstill,apoorreputationisamajorweakness.Assuch,KraftFoods–unlikeothersmentionedsofar–arestillemphasisingtheirproductbrandsothertheircorporateidentityfollowingtheconsumerbacklashovertheirunethicalbehaviourduringthetakeoverofCadburyChocolate.Ultimately,IbelieveacorporatebrandingstrategywillworkforP&G–albeititbeingimplementedalittlelate.However,Idonotfeelthatitwillbesufficienttopromotetheirapparentenvironmentalconsiderations;environmentalimpactvariessomuchonaproduct-to-productbasis.Hence,eachoneoftheirproductshasdifferentdegreesofsustainability–itisthebrandoftheproductthatwillprevailoverthebrandofthecompanyonethicalissues.But,moreimportantly,corporatebrandingislikelytobeahugesuccessfortheP&Gintermsofmakingconsumersmorereceptivetothehigh-qualityinnovationthatthefirmhasyettoreceivecreditfor.