Product Mix Strategies Fmcg

SCMS Journal of Indian Management , Apri l - June, 2010. 39

A Quarterly Journal

Product Mix Strategies:FMCG in Indian Market

Mohankumar T.P. and Shivaraj B.

T h i s r e s e a r c h p a p e r e x p o s e s t h e a t t i t u d i n a l e f f e c t s o n t h e d e c i s i o n -

m a k i n g p r o c e s s o f c o n s u m e r s i n p u r c h a s i n g F M C G p r o d u c t s i n a m a s s

ma r ke t con f i ned to HUL and P&G Compan i e s soaps and de te r gen t s . T h i s

a r t i c l e i n t r o d u c es t h e e x i s t i n g a n d de s i r ed p roduc t m i x s t r a t eg i e s i n F M CG ca t ego r i e s b r i dg i ng

t h e g a p b e t w e e n c o m p a n i e s a n d t h e c u s t o m e r s . T h e a r t i c l e s t a r t s w i t h t h e p r o b l e m s t a t e m e n t

f o l l o w e d b y s i g n i f i c a n c e , o b j e c t i v e s , s c o p e , m e t h o d o l o g y , l i m i t a t i o n s o f t h e s t u d y , s u m m a r y o f

f i n d i n g s a n d s u g g e s t i o n s a n d r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s .

G

Abstract

Gap-Filling

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

1234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012

M r. M o h a n K u m a r T. P. , C o m m e r c e a n d M a n a g e m e n tF a c u l t y , M a h a r a n i s Wo m e n s A r t s a n d C o m m e r c eC o l l e g e , M y s o r e , E m a i l : m b a m o h a n @ r e d i f f m a i l . c o m

P r o f . S h i v a r a j B . , B a h a d u r I n s t i t u t e o f M a n a g e m e n tS c i e n c e s , U n i v e r s i t y o f M y s o r e , M a n a s a g a n g o t h r i ,M y s o r e - 0 6 , E m a i l : b s h i v a r a j @ h o t m a i l . c o m

ood research depends on a good problem. Awell-defined problem is pre-requisite for goodresearch. In this context, the research problem

considered is Product MixStrategies of Leading FMCG inIndian Market, with specialreference to Soaps andDetergents. FMCG market inIndia is one of the fastestgrowing markets in India. Theproduct categories which aremarketed under this, consistsof variety of product lines anditems. In India, there aregood number of companiesmanufacturing and marketingFMCG. Among all, HUL andP&G are in the forefront. Inspite of the wide range of

soaps and detergents marketed in India, there seems to bea gap in the existing product mix offered by the companiesand the customer requirements. The diverse segments in

Indian market are yet to becompletely taped by theexisting players. The currents tudy has a t tempted toknow the ex i s t i ng anddes i red p roduct m ixstrategy in FMCG categorieswith special emphasis onSoaps and Detergents inIndian Market. This researchis going to bridge the gapbetween companies and thecustomers in terms of thecustomer expectation andcompanies understandingof the customers expe-ctation.

SCMS Journal of Indian Management , April - June, 2010. 40

A Quarterly Journal

Significance of the Study

Though, the wide range of soaps and detergents is beingmarketed by the companies, consumers belonging to differentsegments are not effectively delivered with the right productsin right price. The studies, so far conducted on product mixstrategies, are not adequately focusing on bridging the gapbetween marketer and the prospects. Therefore, current studyis designed to address those issues, which are very essentialin designing customer oriented marketing mix strategy. Thisstudy is impor tant because of the type of information itgenerates to assist in developing effective product mix in soapsand detergents. Since, product mix decision is critical decision,it involves huge investment, efforts, and right information savescompanies from the disaster.

Objectives of the Study

The research aims at identifying sal ient features of theProduct Mix Strategies adopted by two FMCG companies inrespect of some of their offerings. The following are someof the specific objectives of the study.

1. To assess the product mix strategy used in consumermarket.

2. To evaluate the Product mix strategy of HUL and P&Gin Indian Market.

3. To determine the customer perception and opinionon product lines offered by the select companies.

4. To assess the existing and desired product mix inFMCG categories in India.

5. To evolve new possible oppor tunities for FMCG inIndian market.

Scope of the Study

The scope of the study deals with the area that has beenconsidered in the research. The area considered in theresearch is product mix strategies of Hindustan Uni-Leverand Proctor & Gamble, in Indian Market. Consumer opinionon the product mix strategy of the HUL and P&G is collectedwith the a id of des igned quest ionna i re . The sample

respondents are selected from the various segments inBangalore and Mysore. The collected data is analyzed tomeet the research objectives.

Methodology of the Study

Research Design

This research is descriptive as well as exploratory in design;it is used when the study is not conversant with the problemenvironment. Such type of investigation is concerned mainlyto determine the general nature of problems and variablesrelated to it. This mainly relies on secondary source ofinformat ion. Pr imary data has been col lected throughintensive fieldwork from the sample respondent with theaid of structured questionnaire.

Data Analysis Techniques

Statistical tools like tests, cluster analysis etc., and othermethods of presentation like diagrams, char ts, and graphshave been used to draw a precise conclusion.

Sources of Data

a) Primary Data

Sample survey through questionnaire has been administeredto the target respondents at various locations in Mysoreand Bangalore city for comparative study of consumerbehaviour and perception.

b) Secondary Data

Gathered in format ion f rom the assoc ia t ion of FMCGIndustries consumer protection organizations, FICCI, CII andindustry archives. Other required information has beencollected from published journals, books, and concernedresearch repor t s , annua l repor t s o f the company speriodicals, seminar papers, business magazines, dailies,and internet.

Limitation of the Research

The study is mainly based on survey method of research.Therefore, the limitations of survey method are expected toinfluence the out come of the research. Product mix is an


A Quarterly Journal

Table No.1: Showing the Soaps and Detergent Brands usage of the Sample Respondents

Sl.No. Brand Name No. of Respondents No. of Respondents

Presently using Used in the past

1. Lux 59 271. L i r i l 30 252. Breeze 15 053. Jai 07 034. O.K 00 175. L i febuoy 34 266. Fa i r & Lovely Soap 04 007. Hamam 19 108. Pears 33 159. Rexona 40 1010. Dove 08 0311. Camay 02 0012. Salvo 04 0513. Ivory Soap 06 0314. Joy 00 0015. Sur f 65 2016. T ide 58 2517. Wheel 62 2718. Henko 28 0519. Ar ie l 64 2020. Zes t 00 0021. Rin 48 26

area of competitive advantage; companies were hesitant toreveal the information on product mix strategy they followed.The information provided by the companies is assumed tobe factual and its validity is not questioned.

The above Tab le No.1 ind ica tes the cur ren t l y usedbrands and the brand used in the past . I t a lso showsthat the customers are not loyal to any brand for a longerper iod. In case of Lux 59 percent of the respondents

are current ly us ing and 27 percent used in the pastswitched over to other brands. From th is i t is inferredthat bui ld ing a brand loya l ty i s a cha l leng ing task insoaps and detergent market . The study indicates thatthe respondent present ly us ing a par t icular brand oftoi let soap and detergents and a lso was used in thepast . As the indiv idua l tas tes and preferences keepchanging, major i ty of the respondents are switch ingover f rom one brand to another.

Table 2: Monthly spending on Bathing Soaps

Spending Soaps Percentage

Below Rs.50 40 40

50-100 30 30100-200 15 15Above200 15 15


A Quarterly Journal

The below Table No.2 shows that spending on soaps by therespondents per month varies from one another. Majority ofthe respondents i.e. 40 percent who spends Below Rs.50per month followed by 30 percent Rs.50-100, 15 percentRs.100-200 and 15 percent spend above 200 Rs. per month.

The below Table No.3 shows that the surveyed respondentshow much money spends on detergent per month. The

study shows that even on detergent major i ty of the

respondents i.e. (45 percent) spend below Rs.50 followed

by Rs.50-100 of 30 percent, Rs.100-200 of 15 percent and

above Rs.200 of 10 percent. The study revealed that the

percentage of the money which the respondents are

spending on soaps and detergent is very minimal of their

income.

Table 3: Monthly spending on Detergent Cake

Spending Detergents Percentage

Below 50 45 45

50-100 30 30100-200 15 15Above 200 10 10

The above Table No.4 shows that the surveyed respondentshow much money spends on detergent powder per month.The study shows that the h ighest percentage of therespondents i.e. 45 percent spends below Rs.50 followedby Rs.50-100 of 30 percent, Rs.100-200 of 15 percent andabove Rs.200 of 10 percent. The study revealed that the

percentage of the money which the respondents arespending on soaps and detergent is very minimal of theirincome. According to the respondents, the money spenton detergent cake and detergent powder are inter related.If they use more powder, they will use less cake and viceversa.


A Quarterly Journal

Table 4: Monthly spending on Detergent Powder

Spending Detergent Percentage

Powder

Below 50 45 4550-100 30 30100-200 15 15Above 200 10 10


A Quarterly Journal

Table: 5 Purchased Quantities of Detergent Cake per Month

Quantities Detergents Percentage

1 - 3 25 25

3 - 6 60 60

Above6 15 15

No. of Soaps used per month

The above Table No.5 g ives the picture of d i f ferentquant i t ies of soaps the respondents use per month.40 percent o f the respondents use 3-6 soaps permonth, fol lowed by 30 percent they use 1-3 soaps and

the rema in ing 30 percent use above s i x soaps perm o n t h . This g i v e s t h e i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t t h e t o t a lconsumption of the selected respondents and i t a lsogives the market potent ia l for the soap.

Table 6 : Consumer Awareness of Different Soaps of HLL Soaps

No. of Respondent

Premium Popular Economy

Awareness 25 60 55

Unaware 75 40 45


A Quarterly Journal

Premium Brand Soaps

Economy Brand Soaps

Popular Brands


A Quarterly Journal

The above table No.6 reveals about the awareness status ofdifferent soap segments i.e. Premium brand, Popular brandand Economy brand which are available in the market. HerePremium brands are comparatively of higher price, targetedto the higher end market. Popular brands prices are lesswhen compared to premium soap. Company spends moreon promotional activities like advertisement, brand celebrityand on other promotional schemes. It is targeted to midsegment in the market. Economy brands are lesser in price,targeted to lower end of the market.

Among the respondents 75 percent are not aware of thePremium brand soaps. It inferred that the availability of theproduct is not equally distributed. It is restricted only to

urban market and the price of the product is not affordableto all the segments.

In Popular brand, though the name itself is popular it is sorryto reveal that only 60 percent of the respondents are awareand exposed to this brand. In fact, company should putserious effort to reach all the segments in the market throughtheir aggressive marketing.

In Economy brand the study reveals that 55 percent of therespondents are aware of and exposed to this Economy brandand 45 percent of the respondents are not aware of this brand. Itmeans that all soaps which are marketed by different companiesin the market are not aware of 100 percent.

Table 7: Consumer Awareness of P&G Detergent Cake and Powder

No. of Respondent

Premium Popular Economy

Awareness 35 70 40

Unaware 65 30 60

Premium Brands


A Quarterly Journal

The above Table No.7 shows the awareness status of the

different detergent segments, as we studied above as in

soap segments. i.e. Premium brand, Popular brand and

Economy brand in detergent.

In premium detergent brands 35 percent of the respondents

are aware of and exposed to this detergent, the remaining

65 percent are not aware of the brands.

In popular detergent brands 70 percent of the respondents

are aware of and exposed to the brands. And 30 percent of

the respondents are not aware of the brands.

In economy detergent brands only 40 percent of therespondents are aware of and exposed to the detergentsand remaining 60 percent of the respondents are not awareof the brands. This study reveals that different segmentedbrands are targeting to different market segments. Marketingstrategies used by the companies are restricted to thatpar ticular segment only. For e.g. premium brands soaps anddetergents are targeting to higher end, so all the promotionalactivities used by the company will reach to that par ticularmarket only. Like that, to other economy brands also. Onlythe popular brands may use both mid segment andeconomy segment, some times by higher end people mayalso be exposed to have this product.

Popular Brands

Economy Brands


A Quarterly Journal

Ta b l e 8 : Th e Fa c t o r s c o n s i d e r e d t h e m o s t b y t h e

Co n s u m e r w h i l e p u r c h a s i n g So a p s

Factors No of Respondents P e r c e n t a g e

Pr ice 55 55

S ize o f t he soap 12 12Qua l i t y 80 80La the r 42 42Fragrance 28 28Sk i nca re 64 64Durab i l i t y 05 05P romot iona l scheme 06 06

The above Table No.8 directs that what percentage ofthe respondents preferred the most whi le purchasingsoaps. Because human wants and tastes are dif ferentfrom person to person, place to place and t ime to t ime.According to the survey 80 percent of the respondents

preferred the most because of the qual i ty of the soapswhile purchasing, fol lowed by 64 percent because ofskin care, 55 percent are because of price, 28 percentare because of lather in the soap, then size, promotionalscheme and durabi l i ty.


A Quarterly Journal

Table 9 : The Consumer consider the

Factors the most while purchasing Detergents

Factors No of Respondents Percentage

Price 43 43

Size of the soap 14 14Quality 72 72Lather 37 37Fragrance 23 23Skincare 72 72Durabil i ty 47 47Promotional scheme 35 35

The above Table No.9 shows that what percentage ofthe respondents prefer red the most whi le purchas ingthe detergent . According to the survey 72 percent ofthe respondents pre fer red the par t icu la r detergentbecause of the qua l i ty and sk in care , fo l lowed by 47

percent durabi l i ty, 43 percent pr ice, 37 percent lather,35 percent promot iona l scheme, f ragrance and s izeo f t h e s o a p . T h e s t u d y a l s o r e v e a l e d t h a t s a m ecustomer used di f ferent detergent brand for d i f ferentfabr ics .

Table 10 : The Customer ranking of Var ious Brands of HUL and P&G

Ranks/ Palmolive Salvo Pears Lux Lifebuoy Dove Camay Ivory

I s t Rank 10 0 35 15 10 21 0 9

II 9 2 20 19 20 15 0 15I I I 20 16 14 20 15 5 4 6IV 15 30 5 6 9 0 30 5V 10 22 0 10 15 7 31 5


A Quarterly Journal


A Quarterly Journal

The above Table No.10 shows the ranking status of differentsoap brands of Hindustan Unilever Limited and Proctor andGamble in the minds of surveyed respondents. 35 percentof the respondents have given I rank to Pears, followed by21 percent have given I rank to Dove.

II rank has been given to Pears and Lifebuoy by 20 percent ofthe respondents each, followed by Lux by19 percent, Doveand Life buoy by 15 percent each.

Palmolive and Lux have been given III rank by 20 percent ofthe respondents each followed by Lifebuoy by 15 percent,pears 14 percent.

Salvo and Camay have been given the IV rank by 30 percent

of the respondents each, followed by Palmolive by 15

percent, Lifebuoy by nine percent.

Camay was given V rank by 31 percent of the respondents,

followed by Salvo by 22 percent, Lifebuoy by 15 percent.

Summary of Findings

The analysis made in the foregone chapter is presented in

this section as summary of findings. The impor tant findings

are as follows:


A Quarterly Journal

1. Hindustan Unilever soaps and detergent line are muchwider than Proctor and Gamble brands in Indian market.

2. Hindustan Unilever soaps and detergents brand areavailable in all levels of the market i.e. upper end, midsegment and lower end of the market, where as Proctorand Gamble brands are mainly focusing on higher endof the market.

3. There is a wide gap in the perception about differentbrands of soaps and detergents among urban and ruralconsumers.

4. Quality is the major purchase determinant of soapsand detergent among the h igher income grouprespondents, where as price is the most impor tantfactor in the lower end of the market.

5. Among the Premium, Popular and Economy brands ofbathing soap segments, Popular brands are exposedto 70 percent of the e respondents followed byeconomy 40 percent and premium brands 35 percent.

6. Pears of Hindustan Unilever Limited is ranked as numberone brand by about 35 percent of the respondent.Dove of Proctor and Gamble by 21 percent of therespondents, followed by Lux by 15 percent of therespondents.

7. The factors influence in purchasing detergent includesprice, size of the soap, quality, lather, fragrance, skincare, durability, promotional scheme. Among themskin care as more impor tant factor for more than 72percent of the respondents followed by quality 72percent, durability 47 percent, price 43 percent, lather37 percent, promotional scheme 35 percent, fragrance23 percent and size of the soap 14 percent of therespondents.

8. The factors influencing in purchasing bathing soap areprice, size of the soap, quality, lather, fragrance, skincare, durability and promotional scheme. Quality isthe most impor tant factor for 80 percent of therespondent, skin care 64 percent, price 55 percent,la ther 42 percent fo l lowed by f ragrance, s ize ,promotional scheme and durabil ity. Therefore the

factors influences on bathing soaps are different fromthe factors influencing the detergents purchase.

9. Monthly spending on soaps and detergents varies fromincome to income. In the research it is found that 40percent of the respondent spends less than Rs.50 permonth on bath ing soap and 30 percent of therespondents spend Rs.50Rs.100 per month andremaining 30 percent of the respondents spend morethan Rs.100 per month. It shows that higher incomegroup purchase premium brands of bathing soap.Therefore spending on bathing soap is more thanRs.100 per month.

11. Quantity of soaps and detergents purchase and familysize is highly correlated. In the study it is found thatthe families with more members are using more thanone bathing brands. Therefore this gives an input indesigning a family pack consisting of multi brands of acompany.

12. Among the HUL top of the mind awareness companyin soaps and detergent category followed by Godrej,Proctor & Gamble, Wipro etc.

13. Among the studied brands Lux is currently being usedby as many as 59 percent of the respondent, followedby 34 percent Lifebuoy, 30 percent Liril and otherbrands. In detergent Surf is being used by 65 percentfollowed by 62 percent Wheel, 58 percent Tide andother brands.

14. Product mix strategy adopted by HUL, as per the studyis full market coverage with multi brands and strongdistribution net work in both rural and urban markets,whereas Proctor and Gamble follows quality leaderstrategy with select brands in soaps and detergents.

Conclusion

Soaps and detergents market are the fastest growing in thewor ld among the consumer product . The growth i spropor tionate to the growth of population. Among theconsumer goods manufacturer and marketer, Unilever andProctor and Gamble are in the fore front. In India tooHindustan Unilever and Proctor and Gamble created a new


A Quarterly Journal

dimension in consumer goods marketing. The soaps anddetergents offered by these two giants are available in flexiblemarket offer to accommodate diverse segments in consumermarket.

Hindustan Unilever, being a subsidiary of Unilever U.S. islocalized in its presence in Indian market. The company hasmany land mark products which are popular and having topof the mind awareness among Indian consumers. Proctorand Gamble, though entered Indian market off late hasregistered in the mind of the customer as a quality leader.

Soaps and Detergents offered by these companies areclosely competed one another. According to this study,HUL stand out as a most admired company in terms of therange of products and services. The wide range and widthof the product mix is the strength of the company. Soapsand Detergents among the other product lines offered byHUL are the drivers of the sales revenue. The driving brandsamong the soaps and detergents are Lux, Dove, Palmolive,Rexona, Liril, Surf excel, Wheel etc.

Proctor and Gamble is known for its quality products inconsumer market, focusing largely on the upper end of themarket. Some of the popular brands in soaps and detergentsare Pears, Camay, Ariel, Tide etc.

In conclusion, it is obvious that both HUL and P&G are placedin a very advantageous position in Indian market. Indianmarket i s d ive rse in te rms of income, geograph ica ldispersion, regional differences and tradition. In the study itis found that there are still some untapped market segmentsin both upper and lower end of the market. This is evidencedby the brand switching in soaps and detergent market, fore.g. percentage of the respondents currently using Lux isabout 59 percent about 27 percent of the respondents haveswitched to other brand from Lux. During the interactionwith the respondent it was known that customers are notcompletely satisfied with the brands currently available inthe market. Therefore the companies need to spend timeand money on market study to determine and devicesuitable market offers.

Being well known brands in Indian market, HUL and P&G cancapital ize the market potential , provided a systematicmarketing mix in terms of product, price, promotion and

physical distribution is effectively blended to adapt to themarket requirement.

Suggestion and Recommendation

Based on the analysis made in the foregone chapter and thegeneral observation made on soaps and detergents market,the following few suggestions are made.

Effective Product-based Market Segmentation

In the study it is found that, soaps and detergents are in themarket, as if they are catering to the needs of the mass in themarket, as if they are catering to the needs of the massmarket. Therefore in the study it is suggested to make a finetune market segments through product differentiation, fore.g. Lux or Hamam soap offered by HUL are targeted on thesame customer segments, competing each other. One isdoing well at the cost of other. Company, either by addingsome different ingredients or by effective positioning thedifference in each brand and creating a separate segmentfor each of the brands, then the existence of the brandscan be managed.

Reaching all ends of the Market

The analysis of the study reveals that, P&G is focusing onthe h igher end of the market . The company being aconsumer goods manufacturer and compete with otherplayers in the market, in the study it is recommended todesign soaps and detergents for lower and mid marketsegments also. Indian market is made up of strong middleclass customer followed by lower income group. P&G isignoring the impor tant market segments. As it is evidencedby many companies, the bottom line of the firms rests onthe sales revenue generated in low and mid market, companycan develop products for the same.

Focusing more on creating Brand Awareness

The analysis in the study shows that brand awareness is thekey for success in consumer market. In India there is a hugegap among the customers in terms of literacy, income, urbanand rural composition, and also media exposure. Fur ther itis known by the study that the P&Gs soaps and detergentbrands are unaware with most of the consumers. Therefore


A Quarterly Journal

it is suggested in the study P&G should pay more impor tancefor promotional offers and adver tisements to target Indianmarket to cover all the segments.

Penetrating in to New Segments

In the study it is found that HUL and P&G soaps are currentlyavailable in adult segment only. Since baby segment is oneof the impor tant segments and presently there are only fewmanufacturer and marketer catering to this segment, HULand P&G also can think of entering the segment with superiorproduct formulation and designing baby soap for all incomesegments.

Marketing Strategy for Rural Market

The study reveals that soaps and detergent brands of HULand P&G are more popular in urban markets. Since realIndia lives in rural areas and it is potential market for all typesof soaps and detergents. In the study it is advised to thecompany develop a tailor made marketing mix with moreemphasis on product mix should be designed by thecompanies. Rural sales promotional activities should bestrengthened especially Proctor and Gamble to take theadvantage of rural market potential.

Reference

Bar tos, Rena. Over 49: The Invisible Consumer Market.Harvard Business Review. 58 Januar y-Februar y(1980): 140-48.

Beer, William R. Househusbands: Men and Housework inAmerican Families. South Hadley, Mass: J.F. BerginPublishers, 1983.

Belch George E., Michael A . Belch, and Gayle Ceresino.Parental and Teenage Child Influences in FamilyDecision Making. Journal of Business Research.13April: (1985): 163-76.

Belk, Russell W. Materialism: Trait Aspects of Living in theMaterial World. Journal of Consumer Research. 12(December): (1985):265-80.

Belk, Russell W. and Richard W. Pollay. Images of Ourselves:The Good Life in Twentieth Century Adver tising.Journal of Consumer Research. 11 March (1985):187-97.

Bennett , Peter C. and Rober t , G. Cooper. The Misuseof Market ing: An American Tragedy. Bus inessHor izons . 24 November -December (1981) :51-61.

B l a c k b u r n , M c K i n l e y L . , a n d D a v i d E . B l o o m . W h a t s H a p p e n i n g t o t h e M i d d l e C l a s s . A m e r i c a n D e m o g r a p h i c s . J u n e : ( 1 9 8 5 ) :19 -25 .

Bloom Paul. Marketing Professional Services. EnglewoodCliffs. N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1984.

Brayton, James A. Motivation, Cognition, Learning: BasicFac to rs i n Consumer Behav iou r. Jou r na l o fMarketing. 22 January (1958): 282-89.

Burnett, John and Alan Bush. Profiling the Yuppies. Journalof Adver tising Research. 26 April-May (1986): 27-35.

Dr.B.Nagaraja. Consumer Behaviour in Rural Areas: AMicro level study on Buying Behavior of RuralConsumers in Kavali Mandal. Indian Journal ofMarketing. 30-36.

Issues and advances in segmentation Research Yoramwind. Journal of Marketing Research. Vol.XV, Aug.,(1978): 317-37.

Ni rmalya, Kumar. Market ing as St rategy. New Delh i :Thomson Press. 2000.

Pradeep, Kashyap Sidar tha Raut. The Rural Marketing. NewDelhi: Himal Impressions, 2006.

Ter ry Grapentine and Randy Boomgaarden, Maladies ofMarke t Segmenta t ion Resea rch . Ma rke t i ngResearch. Spring 2003.

Product Mix Strategies Fmcg

Documents

Transcript of Product Mix Strategies Fmcg