Chapter 4 Tabulation and Analysis of Brand Architecture...
Transcript of Chapter 4 Tabulation and Analysis of Brand Architecture...
68
Chapter 4
Tabulation and Analysis of
Brand Architecture Types
The objective of this component of the study is to present comprehensive
information and analysis regarding the various types of brand architecture
prevalent among fast moving consumer goods (FMCG) companies in India.
As indicated in Chapter 3, 55 prominent FMCG companies were identified
for this purpose, and all FMCG brands offered by these companies were
included in the study.
Available information from company websites, advertisements, product
packages, news items, etc., was used to prepare well-structured tabulations
pertaining to the brands and brand architectures of the companies chosen for
study. The tabulations are presented at Annexures 1 to 55 at the end of this
report.
The procedure followed for tabulation, including the methodology for
identification and enumeration of brands, classification of brands based on
product type, application class and brand architecture type, and also the
recognition of sub-brands are explained in the next five sections (i.e.,
Sections 4.1 to 4.5 respectively).
The analysis in terms of numbers and percentages of different types of brands
and brand architectures used by the companies, and cross-tabulations and
categorizations thereof are covered in Sections 4.6 to 4.9.
69
4.1 Identification and Enumeration of Brands
Having decided to study all the FMCG brands offered by 55 identified
companies, the first step is to determine what should be considered and
enumerated as a brand.
For example, Agro Tech Foods Ltd markets several “brands” of edible oils –
Sundrop Heart, Sundrop GoldLite, Sundrop Olivea, etc. In the case of
Horlicks (from GlaxoSmithKline), we have various offerings such as
Horlicks Ninja, Junior Horlicks, Mother’s Horlicks, Lite Horlicks, Horlicks
Biscuits, Horlicks Oats and Foodles from Horlicks. In these (and similar)
cases, Sundrop and Horlicks are considered and enumerated as brands.
GoldLite, Olivea, Ninja, Foodles, etc., are considered as sub-brands of
product brands, and are not enumerated and considered in the analysis. This
is because the brand architecture template is decided at the corporate level, in
terms of the pattern of usage of corporate brand, individual product brands
and dual brands (i.e., combination of corporate brand and product brand).
Sub-brands come one level lower.
Let us now consider another set of examples. Amrutanjan Roll On,
Amrutanjan Faster Relaxation and Amrutanjan Xpert (all from Amrutanjan
Health Care Ltd) are considered as separate brands, and not as different
products marketed under a common brand name - Amrutanjan. Likewise, the
hair oils – Bajaj Almond Drops, Bajaj Brahmi Amla and Bajaj Jasmine (from
Bajaj Corp Ltd) are all considered as separate brands, and not as sub-brands
of Bajaj. This is because each of these is marketed as a distinct brand. Even
though the second part of some of the above dual names have grammatical
meaning (e.g., Roll On, Faster Relaxation and Jasmine), they are not mere
product descriptors, but product brand names. All these are cases of dual
brand names comprising a company name and a product name.
70
Likewise, in the case of L’Oréal, the various product brands offered by the
company such as White Perfect, Youth Code, Revitalift, Color Riche, Glam
Shine, Excellence Creme, Total Repair 5 and such others are all considered
as separate product brands, endorsed by L’Oréal, thus resulting in dual brand
names.
What to consider as a brand has also been to a significant extent influenced
by what the company itself considers as a brand, as evident from the section
on brands in the company’s website.
However, for the most part, what has been identified and enumerated as a
brand is the primary customer-facing brand, based on which the prospective
customer makes a buying decision. It is also what is marketed and
communicated as a brand by the company itself. In other words, what is
considered and enumerated as a brand is the primary brand. Sub-brands
(often the names of variants) and endorser brands (often the names of
companies or divisions) are not considered as primary brands.
Accordingly, 722 primary brands have been identified and enumerated
across the 55 companies selected for the study. If sub-brands (of product
brands) were also to be considered, the total number would run into
thousands. The sample is fairly exhaustive, and is estimated to cover around
80 per cent of the FMCG market (by value) catered to by manufacturer
brands that are marketed nationally. The sample however excludes
regional/local brands and retailer brands.
A note on primary brand, sub-brand and endorser brand is given below,
which would help to reinforce and further clarify the method followed for
identification and enumeration of brands.
According to Tybout & Calkins (2005) – “The primary brand is the
main brand name on a product or service. This is generally the largest
branding element on a product package or in a piece of
71
communication. This is what people refer to when they talk about the
brand. Every brand has a primary brand.”
It would also be useful at this stage to quote Tybout & Calkins’
(2005) definitions of sub-brands and endorsing brands, as they help to
amplify the meaning of the term – primary brand, which is of main
interest to us.
“Sub-brands are secondary branding elements that fall below the
primary brand in prominence but usually above the product
description. The primary brand continues to be the most prominent
branding element. Sub-brands are usually employed to set apart a
group of products or service offerings that are different in some
meaningful way from the primary brand.” “Sub-brands can vary
substantially in prominence.” “If the sub-brand is more prominent
than the primary brand; then the sub-brand is actually the primary
brand.”
“Endorser brands are secondary branding elements. When an
endorser brand is present, a primary brand and a product description
will also be present. Endorser brands are used to link the parent brand
to another brand. Endorser brands are often used to communicate the
parent company of the primary brand, but this is not always the case.”
“Generally, endorsers are used to bring credibility to the primary
brand while letting the primary brand establish its own identity.”
“Endorsers can vary substantially in prominence, varying from very
slight endorsement to very strong endorsement. Like sub-brands,
endorser brands can never exceed the prominence of the primary
brand; if the endorser brand is the largest brand element, then it is
actually the primary brand, not an endorser.”
72
4.2 Product Types and Product Categories Used in the
Study
In the tabulations (i.e., in Annexures 1 to 55), each brand is classified by
product type to indicate the type or class of product to which it is applied, and
this is indicated in one of the columns (i.e., Column 4). For this purpose,
eight FMCG product types are considered. These are the same as those used
in Nielsen’s reports on India’s Most Trusted Brands. The eight product
types and the letter codes used to designate them are as follows:
A. Soaps & Personal Wash
B. Other Personal Care
C. OTC Health Care
D. Fabric Care
E. Other Household Care
F. Chocolates & Confectionery
G. Beverages
H. Other Food Products
However, for ease of analysis, the eight product types listed above are
aggregated into four product categories, as explained below. These are
designated by the letter codes – S, T, U and V respectively.
S. Personal Care products – comprising (A) Soaps & Personal Wash and
(B) Other Personal Care products
T. OTC Health Care products – comprising (C) OTC Health Care
products
U. Home Care products – comprising (D) Fabric Care and (E) Other
Household Care products
V. Food products comprising (F) Chocolates & Confectionery, (G)
Beverages, and (H) Other Food Products
73
4.3 Application Classes Used in the Study for
Classifying Brands
As mentioned earlier above, customer-facing primary brands are identified
and enumerated as brands, regardless of whether they are names of
companies or business divisions, or those associated with a specific product
or group of products.
Based on the breadth of application, each of the identified brands is classified
as a mono brand (M), range brand (R) or a family brand (F), and this is
indicated in Column 5 in the Annexures. This classification provides a broad
indication of the extent to which the brands have been extended, both within
and across product categories.
4.3.1 Mono Brand
A brand is classified as a mono brand (designated by the letter M in Column
5 in the Annexures) if it is used for only one product – e.g., toilet soap or
deodorant. If a brand is applicable only to toilet soaps, it is considered as a
mono brand, even if there are several sub-brands, variants and fragrances in
which the product is available. For example, Brooke Bond Taj Mahal is
considered as a mono brand as it applies only to packet tea, though there are
ten sub-brands – Classic, Gold, Earl Grey, English Breakfast and so on.
Likewise, Fair & Lovely is considered as a mono brand (fairness cream),
though there are at least seven sub-brands – Winter Fairness Cream, Anti
Marks Cream, Max Fairness For Men, Forever Glow, etc. When a brand is
available in different forms of a product, it is still considered as a mono
brand. For example, a detergent brand available in different product forms –
bar, powder and liquid, is considered as a mono brand.
74
4.3.2 Range Brand
A brand is considered as a range brand (R), if it is applied to anywhere
between two to five different products, which are usually closely related, but
could also sometimes extend across a broader product category (e.g.,
personal care products, foods, etc.). For example, Aashirvaad, which is
applied to staples, spices, instant mixes and ready meals, all within the larger
category of foods, is considered a range brand.
4.3.3 Family Brand
A brand is designated as a family brand (F) if it is used for more than five
products, whether or not within a broader product category. In some cases,
brands which are designated as family brands are brands developed in-house
(e.g., Dove, Revlon ColorStay) which are applied across numerous products.
Some others which are considered as family brands are erstwhile corporate
brands, which have now become family brands, due to acquisition (e.g.,
Lakme and Ponds). Lakme and Ponds were earlier companies in their own
right, which were acquired by Unilever/Hindustan Unilever.
4.4 Brand Architecture Types and Brand Architecture
Categories Used in the Study
Each of the brands is also classified into a brand architecture type (indicated
in Column 6 in the Annexures) based on how it relates to the brand
architecture typologies.
Classical theory on brand architecture suggests that each company follows a
particular model of brand architecture, and accordingly, all brands of that
company are of a particular type. For example, if a company follows a
75
“house of brands” model or “product branding” model of brand architecture,
all the products marketed by it would have distinct brand names, without any
reference to the name of the company. If a company follows the “branded
house” model or “corporate branding” model of brand architecture, all the
products would carry the company name followed by a product descriptor. If
on the other hand, a company follows a “dual branding” model of brand
architecture, all the products marketed by it would carry dual names – one
part being the name of the company, and the other being a name that is
distinct to each product.
However, in actual practice, companies rarely follow one pure form of brand
architecture throughout the organization, barring those which are quite small
and have a very limited product range. More often, they use different brand
architecture types for different products, product groups or business
divisions. Thus, their brand architectures may have to be classified as
corporate dominant, product dominant or dual dominant, or even as mixed,
depending on the percentage of brands that have different brand architecture
formats. Therefore, in order to be able to classify companies based on brand
architectures followed by them, it is necessary to designate each brand
marketed by the company with a brand architecture type.
Accordingly, eight brand architecture types are identified and these are
listed together with their designated letter codes in Table 4.1. When we say
that corporate name alone is used or product name alone is used, etc., the
brand name (whether corporate brand or product brand) would be followed
by a product descriptor. The eight brand types are in turn aggregated into
three brand architecture categories – corporate dominant brand, dual brand
and product brand. A brief explanation regarding the brand architecture
categories and brand architecture types assigned to the brands (in Column 6
in the Annexures) is given below.
76
4.4.1 Corporate Dominant Brand
In a corporate dominant brand, either the name of the company or an
umbrella brand name is used to identify the product, together with a product
descriptor. Accordingly, there are two brand architecture types under this
category designated by the letters C and Cu (i.e., corresponding to corporate
name and umbrella name respectively).
In the first type (i.e., C) the product is described by using the name of the
company, followed by a product descriptor, e.g., Amrutanjan herbal balm
massage (from the company - Amrutanjan Health Care Ltd.)
In some instances, an umbrella brand (which is other than the name of the
company), may also be used across a wide range of products. This type of
brand is designated by the letter code Cu. For example, Gowardhan Ghee is
considered as a Cu type brand. Here, the company is Parag Milk Foods Pvt
Ltd. Though Gowardhan is not the name of the company, it is used akin to a
company name, and most products marketed by Parag Milk Foods are named
Gowardhan. In this case, Gowardhan is considered as an umbrella brand.
4.4.2 Dual Brand
A brand is classified as a dual brand, if two brand names are used – one of
them being a corporate/umbrella brand name and the other being a product
name. Dual brands are classified into four types, depending on the relative
prominence and role of the corporate/umbrella brand and the product brand.
Accordingly, the four types of dual brands are - Dc (corporate brand is more
important), Du (umbrella brand is more important), D (both
corporate/umbrella brand and product brand are equally important) and Dp
(product brand is more important).
77
The comparative dominance between the parent brand (corporate/umbrella
brand) and the daughter brand (product brand) is decided based on the
relative importance given to the two brand names on the product package and
also in the marketing communications. However, in some instances, though
the relative prominence given to the brand names on the packaging may be
similar across products, they are categorized differently depending on the
prominence acquired by the product name in consumers’ minds due to the
company’s marketing and advertising efforts. For example, L’Oréal Total
Repair 5 is classified as Dp (product name is more important), L’Oréal White
Perfect is designated as D (both company name and product name are equal
drivers), while a less known brand such as L’Oréal Lucent Magique is
classified as Dc (corporate brand is the main driver), though the naming style
on the package is nearly the same in all the three cases.
An important point to note is that brand names such as Brooke Bond 3 Roses,
Ujala Supreme or Sunfeast Dark Fantasy are not considered as dual names.
They are considered as product brands, as no company/umbrella brand name
is used. Some authors are found to consider such names as dual or mixed
brand names, thus influencing their conclusions about the brand architectures
followed by the companies accordingly.
4.4.3 Product Brand
A brand is designated as a product brand if the product’s name is used to
identify and market it, without using the name of the company. The company
name or logo may however appear in small size as part of the
manufacturer’s/marketer’s details on the product or its packaging. For
example, the ITC logo is used in small size on the packaging of most of its
consumer goods, such as biscuits, soaps, etc. Same is true in the case of
Hindustan Unilever. In some cases, the company name or logo may be
flashed at the end of an audio-visual advertisement (as is often done by
Hindustan Unilever, Procter & Gamble, Nestle and Vini Cosmetics on Indian
television commercials). In all these cases, the brands are considered as
78
product brand names and not as dual names, as the companies in question are
marketing the individual product brands with aggressive and dedicated
marketing efforts. In some instances, the companies are even offering
multiple brands competing in the same category, thus shifting the focus to the
product brands rather than the name of the company. Many of these brands
have sub-brands and are often associated with their sub-brand names rather
than with the company names (e.g., Sunfeast Dark Fantasy and Pepsodent
Germi Check rather than ITC Sunfeast or Unilever Pepsodent). Most
consumers recognize these brands by their product name and not by their
company name. Hence, all these brands are classified as Product brands
(designated by the letter P).
Product brands with a token endorsement by the company name (often at the
bottom of the packaging) are designated by the letter code Pe. For example,
Clean & Clear, Nizoral, Band Aid and Savlon are well known by their
respective names, but are endorsed by the company name Johnson &
Johnson. Likewise, edible oil brands such as Pilaf, Mahurat and Alife are
endorsed by the company name Adani Wilmar.
4.5 Recognition and Identification of Sub-Brands
Many of the brands in the product-dominant and dual-branding categories
would have sub-brands. For example, the “product” brand name Ponds is
used across a wide family of products, and several of these products are
designated or identified by distinct sub-brand names such as Age Miracle,
White Beauty, Gold Radiance, etc. In some instances, even the sub-brands in
turn have sub-brands. As mentioned earlier, the combination of a product
brand and its sub-brand is not considered as dual brand.
However, wherever a primary brand has a sub-brand or sub-brands, the
existence of the same is indicated by the letter s in Column 7 of the
Annexures. In most cases, a partial or complete listing of the sub-brands is
79
also included in Column 2. In cases where some of the sub-brands in turn
have sub-brands, this is indicated by the code s-s. However, the sub-brands
are not otherwise enumerated, recognized or used for analysis of the brand
architectures. They are captured for the sake of completeness of information
and as an indication of the extent to which the primary brands are extended to
related products, instead of launching new brands.
4.6 Brands across Application Classes and Product
Categories
4.6.1 Analysis by Application Classes
Out of the 722 brands, 172 (23.8%) are categorized as range brands and 19
(2.5%) as family brands. The rest (i.e., 73.7%) are mono brands. This
suggests that almost three out of four FMCG brands are used for only one
product. However, one should not use this information to conclude that there
are very few brand extensions in the FMCG sector. Mono brand does not
imply absence of brand extension. Amrutanjan Roll On, Amrutanjan Xpert
and such others are all considered mono brands, but they are extensions of
the Amrutanjan brand. Likewise, Brooke Bond Taj Mahal and Fair & Lovely
have several extensions/sub-brands/variants, but as explained earlier, they are
identified as mono brands.
4.6.2 Analysis by Product Categories
A classification summary of the 722 brands across the four major product
categories and the eight product types in terms of both numbers and
percentages is presented in Table 4.2.
80
The largest number of brands is in the Food Products category (V), followed
by Personal Care products (S). OTC Health Care (T) and Household Care
(U) brands are comparatively less in number.
Going into specifics, 46.3 per cent (334 numbers) are food product brands,
36.8 per cent (266 numbers) are personal care brands, 9.2 per cent (66
numbers) are household care brands, while 7.7 per cent (56 numbers) are
OTC healthcare brands.
Given that the sample of 55 companies includes most of the prominent
companies operating in the FMCG sector at the national level in India, the
percentage distribution of brands across different product categories and
product types can be considered as fairly representative of the universe itself
(i.e., the aggregate Indian market).
Even otherwise, the skew towards large number of brands in the personal
care and food products categories is as expected. Brand management as is
practiced today was developed by companies such as Procter & Gamble,
Unilever, Coca-Cola, PepsiCo and such others, which are majorly into
personal care and food products. These product categories are characterized
by more number of market segments and differentiated products, thus
translating into greater number of brands in the market.
Company-wise break-up of brands across the four principal product
categories (designated as S, T, U and V as explained earlier) in terms of
numbers and percentages is shown in Tables 4.3. The last column (Prod.
Cat.) is explained later in Section 4.9.1 below.
81
4.7 Brands across Brand Architecture Categories
The number and percentage of brands of each of the 55 companies across the
three principal brand architecture categories are indicated in Table 4.4. The
last column (Co. BA) is dealt with in Section 4.9.2 later below.
Out of the 722 brands included in the study, only 10.3 % (75 numbers) are
corporate dominant brands, while 46.6 % (336 numbers) are dual brands, and
43.1 % (311 numbers) are product brands. This seems to suggest that
corporate brands play a very minor role in the marketing of FMCG products.
But we will soon discover in the following paragraphs that this is not actually
so.
4.7.1 Importance of Corporate Brands in the Marketing of
FMCG Products
Foods command the highest level of risk perception, importance and
involvement from consumers amongst all FMCG products. Nearly 75 per
cent of the corporate dominant brands are found in the food products
category, i.e., V (Refer Table 4.5, item (iii)). This demonstrates that a
credible and reputed company or umbrella name (the main examples being
Amul, Britannia, Dabur and Gowardhan) helps in the marketing of food
products.
Most of the dual brands are in the personal care (46.7%) and food products
(44.1%) categories (Refer Table 4.5, item (iii)), both of them being of high
importance to consumers. Within personal care products, dual branding is
more common among cosmetics, towards which consumers are more
sensitive. Examples of companies with a large number of dual brands are –
L’Oréal, Parle, Nivea, Modi-Revlon, Colgate-Palmolive and Nestlé. In dual
branding, the corporate or umbrella brand is used together with the product
82
name so as to bring in the images associated with both, in positioning and
marketing communications. While the corporate brand lends source
credibility, the differentiation associated with the individual product is
communicated through the product brand. As such, this clearly shows the
importance of endorsement by a corporate brand in enhancing the acceptance
of the product brand in the FMCG category. And dual brands account for
nearly half the total number of FMCG brands.
Pure product brands are also quite commonly used in the FMCG sector. The
largest numbers of product brands are offered by Hindustan Unilever, Reckitt
Benckiser, Pepsico, ITC, Procter & Gamble and Johnson & Johnson.
However, here too, tacit endorsement by the corporate brand to varying
degrees is seen in several cases such as Hindustan Unilever, ITC, Procter &
Gamble and Johnson & Johnson.
Among corporate dominant brands, corporate brands (59) are far more
common than umbrella brands (16). Among dual brands, corporate dominant
dual brands account for the largest numbers. Nearly 64 per cent of all dual
brands are corporate dominant dual brands (i.e., 214 out of 336). This again
reinforces the important role played by corporate brands in the successful
marketing of FMCG products. Among product brands, though 92 per cent are
pure product brands, as observed earlier above, even among these, there is
tacit endorsement by the corporate brand in many instances.
The overall conclusion therefore is as follows: Much of the literature on
brand architecture highlights the point that product branding is most common
in the consumer packaged goods (i.e., FMCG) sector. This is definitely true.
However, corporate brand does have a very significant and important role to
play even in the marketing of FMCG products, though of an indirect nature;
and this often goes unnoticed and unacknowledged. The message to
marketers therefore is not to overlook the indirect support that the corporate
brand can lend to product brands, when marketing consumer packaged goods.
83
4.8 Cross Tabulations - Brand Architecture Categories
versus Product Categories
59% of personal care products (S) have dual branding, followed by 38%
having product branding (Table 4.5, item (iv)). The important observation
that emerges is that dual branding (i.e., inclusion of the corporate name) is
quite prominent even among personal care products, which are otherwise
perceived to be largely driven by independent product brands.
Considering OTC health care products, only 14.3 per cent of them have
corporate dominant branding (Table 4.5, item (iv)). This is an interesting
finding because one would tend to think that corporate brands are extremely
important for healthcare products. The presence of corporate brands is
however seen to a significant extent in the form of dual branding (42.9%).
Yet another surprise is that 42.9 % of OTC healthcare brands are pure
product brands, without being associated with a corporate or umbrella brand
name. This means that quite a number of OTC healthcare products are being
marketed with distinct positioning and marketing budgets of their own, akin
to personal care products.
The household care products are sold almost overwhelmingly through
product names (84.8 %). This speaks of the importance that they are given –
by way of being marketed with distinct names and positioning of their own.
This also implies large marketing budgets to support individual brands.
In the foods category, most of the products are sold as dual brands (44.3 %)
or product brands (38.9%). Corporate brands too have a significant presence
(16.8%). This pattern is along expected lines, as corporate brands are present
in the case of majority of the products (44.3% + 16.8%), given the perceived
risk and involvement associated with this category. The presence of a reliable
and well-known corporate name provides the necessary assurance and
comfort to consumers.
84
4.9 Relationship between Company Brand
Architectures and the Products Offered by Them
So far, the analysis was focused on the individual brands included in the
study. For instance, the association between product categories and brand
architecture categories was discussed in Section 4.8 above with the 722
brands as the units of observation and measurement.
Now we shift our attention to analyzing the 55 companies. What we try to do
is to explore how the brand architectures followed by FMCG companies are
related to the product categories that they deal with.
In order to proceed with this objective, we first need to identify the product
categories dealt with by each of the companies and also the predominant
brand architecture type followed by them. The methodology adopted for
doing these is explained in Sections 4.9.1 and 4.9.2 respectively. The findings
about relationship between the companies’ product categories and brand
architectures are presented in Section 4.9.3.
4.9.1 Assigning Product Categories that the Companies are
doing Business In
We consider four product categories – personal care products, OTC health
care products, home care products and food products, designated by the
letters S, T, U and V respectively, as indicated earlier. Some companies are
operating in only one of these four categories. However, many are operating
in two, three or even in all four of these categories. Therefore, the following
methodology is used to assign the product category (or categories) that each
of the 55 companies deals with.
We consider the company-wise product category data (in terms of
percentage) available in Table 4.3. Data is available here pertaining to the
four product categories – personal care products (S), OTC health care
products (T), home care products (U) and food products (V).
85
The product category accounting for the highest percentage of brands dealt
with by the company is identified as the predominant product category that
the company is doing business in. In case a second (third or fourth) product
category accounts for at least 50 per cent of the percentage of brands in the
predominant product category, this too is considered as a product category
that the company is engaged in, thus assigning two (or more) product
categories to the company. The product categories thus assigned to each
company are indicated in the last column of Table 4.4 itself, which is shaded
in grey. This column is named “Prod. Cat.” and the relevant letter codes
(from among S, T, U and V) are assigned against each of the 55 companies.
4.9.2 Assigning Brand Architecture(s) Followed by the
Companies
For this purpose, we consider the three principal brand architecture categories
– corporate dominant, dual branding and product branding. However, many
companies do not follow one pure form of brand architecture and use
different forms for different product categories or business divisions.
Therefore, a method similar to the one followed above, was used to designate
the brand architecture category (or categories) used by each of the 55
companies.
We consider the company-wise brand architecture category data (in terms of
percentage) available in Table 4.4. Data is available here pertaining to the
three brand architecture categories – corporate dominant (C), dual branding
(D) and product branding (P). The brand architecture category accounting for
the highest percentage of brands dealt with by the company is identified as
the predominant brand architecture type that the company is following. In
case a second (or third) band architecture category accounts for at least 50
per cent of the percentage of brands in the predominant brand architecture
category, this too is considered as a brand architecture format that the
company is following, thus assigning two (or three) brand architecture
86
categories to the company. The brand architecture categories thus assigned to
each company are indicated in the last column of Table 4.4 itself, which is
shaded in grey. This column is named “Co. BA” and the relevant letter codes
(from among C, D and P; and M, i.e., Mixed, if all three are categories are
used significantly) are assigned against each of the 55 companies.
4.9.3 Analysis - Company Brand Architectures and Company
Product Categories
A cross-tabulation of brand architecture category applicable to each company
and the product categories that each of them is engaged in is presented in
Table 4.6. The companies fall into five brand architecture categories –
product brand (P) – 24 nos., dual brand (D) – 15 nos., Dual & Product Brand
(DP) – 8 nos., Corporate & Dual Brand (CD) – 4 nos., and Mixed Brand
Architecture (M), i.e., Corporate, Dual & Product – 4 nos. An important point
to note is that not even one of the 55 companies has corporate dominant (C)
brand architecture.
Considering the number of product categories, there are totally 11 – S, T, U,
V, ST, TU, UV, SV, TV, SU and SUV, with the letters S, T, U and V having
meanings as explained earlier. Thus, there are 66 cells in the cross-tabulation
(6 brand architecture categories x 11 product categories). 45 of these cells are
empty and 10 cells have only one company each in them, thus making it
difficult to draw meaningful conclusions.
Therefore, the product categories are reduced to four in the lower part of this
table, by giving pro-rata weightage to each of the product categories,
wherever a company has been found to be engaged in more than one product
category. The resultant data, both in terms of numbers and percentages is
given in the lower part of this table.
87
Based on this revised table, one arrives at the following conclusions:
1. Personal care companies are strongly associated with product
branding (42 %) and dual branding (40 %).
2. OTC health care companies follow one of three types of branding –
mix of dual and product branding (45 %), product branding (33 %)
and dual branding (22 %).
3. Home care product companies predominantly follow product
branding (72 %).
4. Food product companies tend to use product branding (44 %) and
dual branding (27 %).
Thus, analysis based on product as the unit of observation and company as
the unit of observation both point in the same direction, though there are
minor differences.
88
Table 4.1
List of Brand Architecture Categories and Brand Architecture Types
Used to Designate the Brands Included in the Study
Letter
Code
Brand Architecture
Category
Letter
Code Brand Architecture Type
C Corporate Dominant
Brand
C Corporate name alone is used
Cu Umbrella name alone is used
D Dual Brand
Dc
Corporate & product names
are used, and corporate name
is more important
Du
Umbrella & product names
are used, and umbrella brand
is more important
D
Product name is used
together with corporate or
umbrella brand, and both are
equally important
Dp
Product name is used
together with corporate or
umbrella brand, and product
brand is more important
P Product Brand
Pe
Product name is used, with
token endorsement by a
company or umbrella brand
P Product name alone is used
89
Table 4.2
Classification Summary of Brands across Product Categories and
Product Types
# Product Category
Nos. % # Product Type Nos. %
S Personal Care Products
266 37
A Soaps & Personal Wash Products
30 4
B Other Personal Care Products
236 33
T OTC Health Care Products
56 8 C OTC Health Care Products
56 8
U Household Care Products
66 9
D Fabric Care Products
21 3
E Other Household Care Products
45 6
V Food Products 334 46
F Chocolates & Confectionery
46 6
G Beverages 86 12
H Other Food Products
202 28
Total 722 100 Total 722 100
90
Table 4.3
Company-wise Tabulation of Brands by Product Categories
# Company n %
TOT Prod. Cat. S T U V
1 Adani Wilmar Ltd 11
100 100 V
2 Agro Tech Foods Ltd 3
100 100 V
3 Amrutanjan Health Care Ltd 12 17 67
17 100 T
4 Anchor H & B Care P Ltd 5 100
100 S
5 Bajaj Corp Ltd 8 100
100 S
6 Bisleri International Pvt Ltd 3
100 100 V
7 Britannia Industries Ltd 26
100 100 V
8 Bunge India Pvt Ltd 5
100 100 V
9 CavinKare Pvt Ltd 14 57
43 100 SV
10 Cholayil Pvt Ltd 3 100
100 S
11 Coca-Cola India Pvt Ltd 11
100 100 V
12 Colgate Palmolive (India) Ltd 25 96
4
100 S
13 Dabur India Ltd 38 34 42 11 13 100 ST
14 Dey’s Med Stores (Mfg) Ltd 1 100
100 S
15 Emami Ltd 13 46 54
100 ST
16 Fena Pvt Ltd 5 20
80
100 U
17 Ferrero India Pvt Ltd 4
100 100 V
18 G. D. Pharma Pvt Ltd 3 67 33
100 ST
19 General Mills India Pvt Ltd 13
100 100 V
20 GSK Consr Healthcare Ltd 7
43
57 100 TV
21 Godrej Consumer Prods Ltd 11 64
36
100 SU
22 GCMMF Ltd 40
100 100 V
23 Haldiram Group 8
100 100 V
24 Heinz India Pvt Ltd 5 20
80 100 V
25 Hindustan Unilever Ltd 47 53
21 26 100 SV
26 Indo Nissin Foods Ltd 3
100 100 V
27 ITC Limited 17 29
35 35 100 SUV
28 Johnson & Johnson Ltd 15 53 47
100 ST
29 Jyothy Laboratories Ltd 13 23
77
100 U
30 Kellogg India Pvt Ltd 8
100 100 V
Contd..
91
Table 4.3 (Contd..)
# Company n %
TOT Prod. Cat. S T U V
31 L’Oréal India Pvt Ltd 39 100 100 S
32 Marico Ltd 10 70 10 10 10 100 S
33 McNroe Cons Prods P Ltd 3 100 100 S
34 Modi-Revlon Pvt Ltd 30 100 100 S
35 Mondelez India Foods Ltd 13 100 100 V
36 Mother Dairy 10 100 100 V
37 Nestlé India Ltd 23 100 100 V
38 Nirma Ltd 6 33 50 17 100 SU
39 Nivea India Pvt Ltd 25 100 100 S
40 Parag Milk Foods Pvt Ltd 13 100 100 V
41 Parle Agro Pvt Ltd 7 100 100 V
42 Parle Products Pvt Ltd 35 100 100 V
43 Pepsico 17 100 100 V
44 Perfetti Van Melle I P Ltd 9 100 100 V
45 Procter & Gamble India 14 64 7 29 100 S
46 Rasna Pvt Ltd 3 100 100 V
47 Reckitt Benckiser 20 10 35 55 100 TU
48 Ruchi Soya Industries Ltd 6 100 100 V
49 S C Johnson Prods P Ltd 6 100 100 U
50 Tata Chemicals Ltd 3 33 67 100 UV
51 Tata Global Beverages 18 100 100 V
52 The Himalaya Drug Co 13 69 23 8 100 S
53 Vicco Laboratories Pvt Ltd 3 67 33 100 ST
54 Vini Cosmetics Pvt Ltd 9 100 100 S
55 Wipro Enterprises Ltd 10 70 10 10 10 100 S
Aggregate 722 37 8 9 46 100
Product Categories:
S = Personal Care Products
T = OTC Health Care Products
U = Household Care Products
V = Food Products
92
Table 4.4
Company-wise Tabulation of Brands by Brand Architecture Categories
# Company n %
TOT Co. BA. C D P
1 Adani Wilmar Ltd 11
100 100 P
2 Agro Tech Foods Ltd 3
100 100 P
3 Amrutanjan Health Care Ltd 12 8 50 42 100 DP
4 Anchor H & B Care P Ltd 5 40 40 20 100 M
5 Bajaj Corp Ltd 8 25 75
100 D
6 Bisleri International Pvt Ltd 3 33 33 33 100 M
7 Britannia Industries Ltd 26 35 65
100 CD
8 Bunge India Pvt Ltd 5
100 100 P
9 CavinKare Pvt Ltd 14 7
93 100 P
10 Cholayil Pvt Ltd 3
100 100 P
11 Coca-Cola India Pvt Ltd 11 9
91 100 P
12 Colgate Palmolive (India) Ltd 25 8 84 8 100 D
13 Dabur India Ltd 38 21 50 29 100 DP
14 Dey’s Med Stores (Mfg) Ltd 1
100 100 P
15 Emami Ltd 13 8 69 23 100 D
16 Fena Pvt Ltd 5 20
80 100 P
17 Ferrero India Pvt Ltd 4
25 75 100 P
18 G. D. Pharma Pvt Ltd 3
67 33 100 DP
19 General Mills India Pvt Ltd 13 38 31 31 100 M
20 GSK Consr Healthcare Ltd 7
100 100 P
21 Godrej Consumer Prods Ltd 11
73 27 100 D
22 GCMMF Ltd 40 49 43 8 100 CD
23 Haldiram Group 8 25 75
100 D
24 Heinz India Pvt Ltd 5 20 20 60 100 P
25 Hindustan Unilever Ltd 47
13 87 100 P
26 Indo Nissin Foods Ltd 3
33 67 100 DP
27 ITC Limited 17
12 88 100 P
28 Johnson & Johnson Ltd 15
7 93 100 P
29 Jyothy Laboratories Ltd 13 8
92 100 P
30 Kellogg India Pvt Ltd 8 13 88
100 D
Contd..
93
Table 4.4 (Contd..)
# Company n %
TOT Co. BA. C D P
31 L’Oréal India Pvt Ltd 39
100
100 D
32 Marico Ltd 10
10 90 100 P
33 McNroe Cons Prods P Ltd 3
100 100 P
34 Modi-Revlon Pvt Ltd 30 3 77 20 100 D
35 Mondelez India Foods Ltd 13
62 38 100 DP
36 Mother Dairy 10 10 70 20 100 D
37 Nestlé India Ltd 23 4 87 9 100 D
38 Nirma Ltd 6 33 67
100 CD
39 Nivea India Pvt Ltd 25
100
100 D
40 Parag Milk Foods Pvt Ltd 13 46 54
100 CD
41 Parle Agro Pvt Ltd 7
100 100 P
42 Parle Products Pvt Ltd 35 3 86 11 100 D
43 Pepsico 17
100 100 P
44 Perfetti Van Melle I P Ltd 9
100 100 P
45 Procter & Gamble India 14
100 100 P
46 Rasna Pvt Ltd 3
100
100 D
47 Reckitt Benckiser 20
100 100 P
48 Ruchi Soya Industries Ltd 6
33 67 100 DP
49 S C Johnson Prods P Ltd 6
100 100 P
50 Tata Chemicals Ltd 3 33 33 33 100 M
51 Tata Global Beverages 18 17 44 39 100 DP
52 The Himalaya Drug Co 13
100
100 D
53 Vicco Laboratories Pvt Ltd 3
100
100 D
54 Vini Cosmetics Pvt Ltd 9
100 100 P
55 Wipro Enterprises Ltd 10
50 50 100 DP
Aggregate 722 10 47 43 100
Brand Architecture Categories:
C = Corporate Dominant Brand
D = Dual Brand
P = Product Brand
94
Table 4.5
Cross Tabulation – Product Brand Architecture Categories
and Product Categories
(i) By Numbers
S T U V TOT
C 8 8 3 56 75
D 157 24 7 148 336
P 101 24 56 130 311
TOT 266 56 66 334 722
(ii) By Aggregate Percentage
S T U V TOT
C 1.1 1.1 0.4 7.7 10.3
D 21.7 3.3 1.0 20.6 46.6
P 14.0 3.3 7.8 18.0 43.1
TOT 36.8 7.7 9.2 46.3 100.0
(iii) By Percentage on Brand Architecture Categories
S T U V TOT
C 10.7 10.7 4.0 74.6 100
D 46.7 7.1 2.1 44.1 100
P 32.5 7.7 18.0 41.8 100
TOT 36.9 7.6 9.2 46.3 100
(iv) By Percentage on Product Categories
S T U V TOT
C 3.0 14.3 4.5 16.8 10.4
D 59.0 42.9 10.6 44.3 46.5
P 38.0 42.9 84.8 38.9 43.1
TOT 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
C = Corporate Dominant Brand
D = Dual Brand
P = Product Brand
S = Personal Care Products
T = OTC Healthcare Products
U = Home Care Products
V = Food Products
95
Table 4.6
Cross-Tabulation – Company Brand Architectures
and the Products Categories Dealt With by Them
Product
Category
Brand Architecture Category
P D C CD DP M Total
S 6 6
1 1 14
T
1
1
U 3
3
V 9 6
3 4 2 24
ST 1 2
2
5
TU 1
1
UV
1 1
SV 2
2
TV 1
1
SU
1
1
2
SUV 1
1
Total 24 15 0 4 8 4 55
Summarization of the Above:
Product
Category
Brand Architecture Category
P D C CD DP M Total
Personal
Care 7.83
(41.6%) 7.5
(39.8%) --
0.5 (2.7%)
2.0 (10.6%)
1 (5.3%)
18.83 (100.0%)
OTC
Healthcare 1.50
(33.3%) 1.0
(22.2%) -- --
2.0 (44.5%)
-- 4.50
(100.0%)
Household
Care 3.83
(71.8%) 0.5
(9.4%) --
0.5 (9.4%)
-- 0.5
(9.4%) 5.33
(100.0%)
Foods 10.83
(41.1%) 6.0
(22.8%) --
3.0 (11.4%)
4.0 (15.2%)
2.5 (9.5%)
26.33 (100.0%)
Total 24.00
(43.6%) 15.0
(27.3%) --
4.0 (7.3%)
8.0 (14.5%)
4.0 (7.3%)
55.00 (100.0%)
(percentages in brackets and italics)
Methodology:
When a company is engaged in two or three product categories, half or one-
third of it is accordingly considered to be operating in each of the product
categories.