Craft Topics - Category Marketing
Marketing people spend so much time building brands it is worth considering how category building fits into all this. Do categories build themselves? Or can they be ignored because the health of a category derives from what their resident brands happen to be doing at the time? It's a key question because I suspect very few marketers DO think about the vitality about their category even if it is the category which largely determines the residual levels of spontaneous product awareness and a lot of the trust. Look at financial services!
Brands can't exist without categories. Remember the heady days of the internet boom where the phone was ringing daily with bushytailed internet entrepreneurs flush with VC capital needing to advertise by the weekend to assure the next round of funding. And the product briefing was almost always the same. What's your competition? To be met by the smiling "Oh we're unique, we're filing patents we think we have an 18 month lead on everyone". So off the agency would trot to develop advertising to establish a brand around a unique product. Where did they go?
What they needed to do was to work together, to find competitors and create a market. It was the multiplication of websites and web products with no way of organising them in one's head that proved fatal. First the category then the products with distinct benefits then a brand which provides reassurance and intangible reasons to buy and keep on buying. Super nova internet brands like Amazon and Yahoo proved to be quite simple. Amazon was a book seller without bookshops. Yahoo was the first place your browser went to when you logged on the web plus an online directory. Hardly mould breaking stuff was it?
The Japanese are the masters of category
marketing. The post war industrial strategy of Japan inc pointed several manufacturers
at each major product category supported by the banks and financial houses.
In fact Honda was told not to make cars since there were already enough manufacturers
and the addition of another might create instability. Johanssen and Nonaka's
great book Relentless now unfortunately out of print introduces the concept
of churn as competitors looked to each rather than the customer to provide a
constant stream of new product features. The result as Relentless documents
is standardisation, greatly reduced component costs, and an audience which doesn't
need masses of advertising because communications for any one brand communicate
the features you can find on all the others.There is a memorable but apocryphal story that in the 1980s a Japanese drinks company launched an orange juice brand on the proposition that the product only contained juice and was forced to withdraw the advertising after competitors complained that it was not fair to make unique claims!
It would be worth reviewing every piece
of communications and asking the question What contribution does this make to
the category and what contribution does it make to the brand? Ironically so
much brand activity is rationalised as being differentiated and unique when
most of it is generic. Which is a big issue when we're all so over communicated
to that we filter out everything. But category building communications is not
per se a bad thing. In fact it is possible for the savvy brand manager to beat
the system. I remember in 1999 when Going Places refrained from advertising
in the key January advertising period, relying instead on their long running
sponsorship of Blind Date. Holiday advertising on TV is so generic that they
secured highest branded recall without having spent a penny on television advertising.
The following year however they were back advertising with a vengeance. Despite
the proven success of letting their competitors advertise for them their nerve
couldn't stand being out of it for another year. I now regret not having tried
harder to win an IPA advertising effectiveness casestudy with a non-existent
campaign!