Friday, October 30, 2009

Future young talents want to work for global brands

The Swedish employer branding agency Universum has made a Top-50 list of brands that young talents want to work for. It is remarkable that there are only 2 Asian brands among the global Top 50 - namely SONY and HSBC.

It emphasizes how important it is for Asian businesses to build and sustain more global brands in order to compete for future talents. Asian managers need to step up to the challenge and compete better for the future. Through strategic brand strategy efforts and through better employer branding.

Universum asked 120.000 students in 11 countries including US, England, Japan, China and Germany.

Top-50 for business students:
  1. Google
  2. PricewaterhouseCoopers
  3. Microsoft
  4. Goldman Sachs
  5. Ernst & Young
  6. Procter & Gamble
  7. J.P. Morgan
  8. KPMG
  9. McKinsey & Company
  10. Deloitte
  11. The Boston Consulting Group
  12. BMW
  13. Coca-Cola
  14. L'Oreal
  15. Morgan Stanley
  16. Sony
  17. IBM
  18. Johnson & Johnson
  19. Deutsche Bank
  20. General Electric
  21. Citigroup
  22. HSBC
  23. Accenture
  24. Nestle
  25. Credit Suisse
  26. Bain & Company
  27. Unilever
  28. UBS
  29. Nokia
  30. Intel
  31. Esso/ExxonMobil
  32. Kraft Foods
  33. Shell
  34. Hewlett-Packard
  35. Mars (Masterfoods)
  36. Pfizer
  37. Siemens
  38. Philips
  39. Oracle
  40. Bayer
  41. Philip Morris
  42. DHL
  43. BP
  44. Bosch
  45. Cisco
  46. Daimler
  47. Ericsson
  48. ABB
  49. Novartis
  50. Schlumberger

Top-50 for engineering students:

  1. Google
  2. Microsoft
  3. IBM
  4. BMW
  5. Intel
  6. General Electric
  7. Sony
  8. Siemens
  9. Shell
  10. Proctor & Gamble
  11. Johnson & JJohnson
  12. Hewlett-Packard
  13. Cisco
  14. Esso/ExxonMobil
  15. McKinsey & Company
  16. Schlumberger
  17. BP
  18. L'Oreal
  19. Nokia
  20. Accenture
  21. Coca-Cola
  22. Philips
  23. Goldman Sachs
  24. Nestle
  25. Pfizer
  26. Bosch
  27. The Boston Consulting Group
  28. J.P. Morgan
  29. Deloitte
  30. Morgan Stanley
  31. GlaxoSmithKline
  32. Ericsson
  33. Ernst & Young
  34. ABB
  35. Bayer
  36. Unilever
  37. PricewaterhouseCoopers
  38. Deutsche Bank
  39. HSBC
  40. Kraft Foods
  41. Bain & Conpany
  42. Citigroup
  43. Alcatel-Lucent
  44. Daimler
  45. Novartis
  46. Mars (Masterfoods)
  47. KPMG
  48. Credit Suisse
  49. DHL
  50. UBS

Source: Universum



Wednesday, October 07, 2009

Brand reinvention through pioneering innovation: Case of Mercedes

One of the fundamental tenets of building global iconic brands is to pursue consistency in strategy, identity, communications and positioning. Toyota, Google, the New York Times, Singapore Airlines, Apple, and IKEA are just some examples of global iconic brands that have followed this fundamental branding tenet. Given such religious following of this tenet, it is no wonder that when companies experiment with any aspect of their brand, it manages to catch everyone's attention. More importantly, such moves challenge this fundamental tenet of consistency.

Changes in the global brandscape have brought about rethinking among the global brands. No longer are brands confined to any one particular market. Different markets pose different challenges in terms of customer preferences, local practices, resident competitors and together a challenge to the global brand identity. As such, brands have continually adapted to different demands. However, changing the fundamental identity and positioning of the brand is completely different.

Consider the case one of the most well known brands, Mercedes. The Mercedes brand has consistently been known for luxury, premium pricing, cutting edge technology and superior quality. However, in distinguishing itself from another well known brand, the BMW, Mercedes has focused more on its quality and premium--evel than mere technological superiority.

Given such strong notions of premium, the primary target of Mercedes has long been the high flying executive or mid-career professionals who have a sense of professional achievement and personal status image. Despite the recent sporty models, Mercedes has consistently been touted as the luxury car of the grown-ups. Such a singular positioning although ideal in normal circumstances is proving to be tough for Mercedes in the face global recession, falling demand, tighter environmental regulations across Europe and increasingly in the US and the closing of the gap by competitors like BMW and Audi.

Should Mercedes change its positioning? Or should be it true to the fundamental branding tenet of consistency? And if Mercedes decides to change, how can it do so without negatively impacting the brand image and equity?

Brand consistency is important. But equally important is for the brand to be responsive to the changing conditions. Mercedes has chosen the route of both incremental and substantial innovation to make the brand ever more relevant. Mercedes' (part of Daimler) CEO Dieter Zetsche has instituted a number of companywide initiatives to move Mercedes in the right direction.

For starters, despite cutting budgets in every possible area, Zetsche has kept the R&D budget intact. Innovation in enhancing fuel efficiency, better platforms and better designs have formed the pillars of the basic strategy. On technological innovation, Zetsche has bet hugely on the yet to be proven lithium ion battery technology to kick start the hybrid range of cars.

The company has enlisted many partners including Tesla Motors in the US to build an electric-roadster in the near future. The market has reacted very favorably with Daimler stock rising 50% to US$34 from a low of US$22.

Another tactical innovation has been to break down every Mercedes car into different modules to make sure similar parts can be used across the different models, thereby enhancing efficiency and achieving scale. It is forecasted that the soon to be launched next generation C-Class will use this sharing strategy completely.

In addition to these tactical and incremental innovations, Mercedes is also involved in innovation is two other fronts - dealing with competitiors and responding to customer needs. In a rare turn occurrence, Mercedes and BMW are collaborating in procuring parts and leveraging commonalities. Such collaboration has not only garnered positive reaction from the market, but also is expected to help both brands minimize costs.

Additionally, Mercedes has finally decided to expand its portfolio to target young but affluent customers, who traditionally have preferred the much sportier BMW or Audi, by launching A and B-class models. Although such a strategy is never easier to pull off given the traditional associations with a brand such as Mercedes, the new push by CEO Zetsche is seen as a move to stop the declining trends of Mercedes. From earning of around US$8 billion in 2000 to a loss of US$4.8 billion in the first quarter of 2009, from a market share of 24% among luxury car brands in 2003 to losing the market leader position to BMW in 2008, Mercedes is under immense pressure to show a turnaround.

In such circumstances, iconic brands do not just change their entire strategies, betray their brand identity and start afresh. Rather, they adapt a clever strategy of pursuing simultaneously incremental innovation that would streamline their process and cost structure while also pursuing strategic innovation that positions them well. As such, although consistency is a fundamental brand tenet, it can only be effective when practiced along with strategic adaptive capabilities.

First-mover advantage and branding: Apple versus Blackberry

Competition is a core characteristic of business. Corporations around the world strive hard to outsmart competition to achieve sustainable competitive advantage. Much has been researched about the how companies can formulate strategies that can narrow the gap between market leaders and new players. Similarly, much is discussed about how companies choose strategies depending on the specific competitive landscape.

A central feature of such strategies is what has come to be known as first mover advantage (FMA). First mover advantage refers to the phenomenon whereby companies can achieve a considerable lead time over their competitors by being the first in a host of activities such as entering a market, introducing a new product, launching a new service, creating a distinctive positioning, creating a unique community or developing an enticing web presence. The argument is that whoever does these things first will have a significant advantage over their competitors, who will be forced to imitate.

Consider the case of two of the biggest brands in the mobile communication industry: Apple's iPhone and RIM's Blackberry.

Blackberry was the first brand to introduce mobile email that was compatible with corporate requirements. Based out of Canada, Blackberry easily became the market leader, and has continued to dominate the market. Even though there have been many other makers of smart phones before Blackberry, Blackberry was the first brand to seamlessly integrate mobile communication, internet capabilities and corporate email into a convenient hand held gadget.
Not surprisingly, many competitors have since then tried to imitate those features in their own handsets. But since the introduction of Blackberry in 2002, it has been the market leader in smart phones till today.

Blackberry's stranglehold on smart phone market was strongly challenged by Apple with its introduction of iPhone in June 2007. Unlike many other competitors such as Motorola, Nokia, Sony Ericsson, and Samsung, that aggressively imitated many of Blackberry's features in similar looking handsets, Apple did the unthinkable. Apple created a totally new design with appealing features and build.

The iPhone was a very slim and handy gadget with a very large touch screen that lacked a physical keyboard. Furthermore, unlike Blackberry, it significantly improved the convergence of a mobile phone, a music player, an internet browser, a digital camera, and an in-built GPS. Furthermore, iPhone was efficiently connected to iTunes, Apple's online store to purchase music and movies. That way, iPhone not only bettered what Blackberry had done, but also created a new standard.

Challenge the conventional wisdom
This represents a classic case of challenging the conventional wisdom of FMA. Although it was Blackberry that created the industry standard for almost five years, iPhone seems to have changed those rules despite not having FMA. This begs a couple of very important strategic questions. First, is FMA sustainable or only temporary? Second, how can companies undertake strategic initiatives to sustain FMA?

Sustainability is a relative term. Nothing is sustainable forever. Even the mighty IBM had to bite dust and the once leader General Motors is struggling. However, sustainability is very important for companies. If all strategies were easily replicated, then competition would be ruthless and eventually lead to a zero sum game.

First mover advantage certainly creates a very significant advantage for companies depending on the underlying basis of FMA. Early entry into a market allows early penetration into different segments and market domination. Similarly, in this case, Blackberry was able to define the industry standard by being first. However, iPhone not only conformed to those standards by including all the features Blackberrys offered, but improved every single of them. As such, innovation and customer insight helped iPhone redefine the standard.

An even more important question is then, are companies that are not first are doomed to failure? The answer is certainly no. Companies can undertake certain strategic initiatives to overcome the FMA deficit.

As in this example, Apple initially conformed to the industry standard, but additionally practiced innovation. Constant innovation to improve the status quo always allows companies to overcome the FMA deficit. Additionally, building strong brands is an extremely important strategic necessity. Despite Blackberry's FMA, Apple's brand equity was so strong with cult like following among its customers, that it allowed iPhone to overcome its FMA deficit.

As such, strong brands can both be a cause and a consequence of first mover advantage. As companies formulate their strategies, they should clearly evaluate their FMA status and accordingly take strategic initiative to compensate for their FMA deficit. As has been consistently demonstrated by global iconic brands like Apple, brand equity provides one of the strongest and most enduring strategic assets to correct FMA deficit.
eXTReMe Tracker