CASE STUDY OF HUL IN CONTRAST WITH LIFEBOUY
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

CASE STUDY OF HUL IN CONTRAST WITH LIFEBOUY

on

  • 2,100 views

COPYRIGHTED @ AJAZ ONLY

COPYRIGHTED @ AJAZ ONLY

Statistics

Views

Total Views
2,100
Slideshare-icon Views on SlideShare
2,100
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
65
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    CASE STUDY OF HUL IN CONTRAST WITH LIFEBOUY CASE STUDY OF HUL IN CONTRAST WITH LIFEBOUY Presentation Transcript

    • A CASE STUDY ON HUL & SOAP MARKET Designed and prepared by AJAZ UL ISLAM student SMVDU
    • HUL PRODUCT LINEHOME & PERSONAL CARE
    • ORAL CARE
    • SKIN CARE
    • LAUNDARY
    • DEODRANT & COLORCOSMETICS
    • AYURVEDIC & PERSONALCARE
    • COFFEE &TEA
    • FOODS
    • WATER
    • CAUSES OF DIARRHEA• Lack of sanitation facility.• 26% of the urban Indians (173million) and 74% of rural Indians (492 millions) do not wash their hands with soap daily.• Less then 29% of the Indians have access to modern sanitation facilities.
    • Hand wash as a preventive measure:• WHO---washing hands with soap reduced diarrhea attacks by 48%.• Although the penetration of soap in Indian market is very high with 95% of Indian household owing soaps , 665 million Indians do not use soap everyday out of these 26% are Indian and 74% are rural.
    • May 02,2012 Revenue from selling soaps and detergents rose 29 percent to 28.3 billionrupees in the fourth quarter. In the detergent portfolio, Surf, Rin and Wheel reported adouble digit growth while in the soap portfolio Lux and Lifebouy grew in double digit.
    • Why the problem stillprevails????  Disease fell into multiple domain of ministers of public health  Attention paid to hot issues like HIV  Behaviour programs to address diarrheal disease are difficult to design and implement.  Dispersed population
    • How to mitigate theproblem…. Deep experience in conducting and analysing consumer research to identify behaviour. Expertise to craft communication messages and direct contact programs. Strong brands that can serve as routes for driving behavioural change. Vast distribution network. Global reach.
    • The largest soap manufacturerin India
    • HLL’s ability to reach themasses
    • HLL’s formula is working
    • BUSINESS OPPORTUNITYTHROUGH HEALTHHLL accounts 60% of the soap sales in India
    • Leverage Health Messages through theGlobal Public-Private Partnership forHandwashing with Soap
    •  HLL learned of PPP being developed between the World Bank, Water of Sanitation program , London School of Hygienic and Tropical Medicine , UNICEF, USAID and Environmental Health Projects. The structure for the program was based upon the successful Central American Hand washing Initiative , a public private Partnership that united four corporations:1. La Popular.2. Colgate-Palmolive3. Unilever4. Punto rojo
    •  First program needed scientific credibility and leadership in understanding the fundamentals of hand wash on health and hygiene. Team requires expertise in behaviour change and marketing. In order to reach the entire population with hand wash communication the PPP needed government support to utilize existing infrastructure channels.
    • KERALA PROGRAM It was divided into four parts:1. Mass media campaign.2. Direct contact campaign.3. Evaluation.4. Communications development.Only 42% mothers used soaps after using toilet.25% usedsoap after cleaning up a child . 11% used soap before eatingand 10% used soap before preparing food. 70% ofhousehold would be reached 43 times a year via massmedia.35% of household would be reached nine times ayear through the direct contact
    • HLL and PPP: Aim: to stimulate demand for soap through education campaigns.
    • LIFEBUOY
    • It was created in 1894 by mixing theresidues of sunlight detergent andcresylic acid to create a strong soap.
    • Launched in 1895 in U.K.Introduced in 1935 in India.1964 saw the re-launch.Initial jingle “Tandurusti ki raksha…”to “Koi Dar Nahi”.New launches of Lifebuoy clear skin & active soap.
    • In the 1960 the message was introduced throughthe sports idiom and the target group were theIndian male of age group 18-45 with a mediumhousehold income of Rs 2000/month.This person is an average farmer living in thetown of 100000 or less .1986 sales exceeded 100000 tones and 70% ofrevenue was from rural areas
    • Competition Faced from cheaply priced beauty barsegmentBrand revitalization on a health Platform. Introduced talc and shampoo also. Provided information how soap can help u to improve your health Compared cost of soap with cost of health.
    • Product cost and marketing strategyCarbolic smell…………………………………………..fragrant smellHard soap……………………………………………………mildsoapAdded Triclosan which further increased thestrength to kill germs.Which was later replaced by name Active BFor this they incurred cost but since it wasintroduced for masses They increased price fromRs 8.50 to Rs9.50 and also made available in 60gram packs of Rs 4.50
    • NEW COMMUNICATION CHANNELS Multi contact programs and Swastha chetnaHLL conducted research to understand ruralbehavior.Concept of cleanness in villages5/13 before eating, 10/18 before preparing food. Also alternatives were usedConsumers were not using the soap as they did not know their hands are dirty
    • Ogilvy and Mather designed behavioral changeeducational programCommunicate the ill effects of germsHighlight active BMessages was as under:- Invisible germs are everywhere. Germs cause disease common to rural families including painful stomach, eye and skin infections. Lifebuoy soap with Active B can protect you from germs. Wash your hands with soap to prevent infections.
    • HLL titled the program swasthya chetna or Lifebouy glowing health. It triggered the change to wash hands very frequently. It included…  Before eating.  After eating.  After using bathroom.  After playing.  For bathing.
    • Program designed : low cost , scalable and sustainableInitial cost was estimated to be 4000 per visit but proved costly. Solocal filters were hired. a/v were used in only low cost props. Itreduced the cost to Rs 800/visit since the program can not be started at once in the whole countryso certain areas were chosen. The areas were chosen on the basis of Per capita consumption per state States having strong loyalty to the lifebouy brand Reviewed districts to find which state has high number of infrequent soap users and also which contributed high share to lighbouy. then they cross referenced the data and selected areaswith no accessibility of mass communication. Among those selectedthe villages with middle schools so that it could gain entry tocommunity through local school system At the end lifebouy selected 1000 villages in nine states. They hired127 prson team to reach these areas . Due to low cast they expandedto 70-80 million.
    • Initiation and information Large scale propagation Reinforcement and propagation for sustainability.Each exposure relies upon few key communication tactics Education Involvement Shock Reiteration RewardThese elements were structured in swasthya chetna visit.
    • Contact 1School and village presentation. Raju’s story Facilitator demonstrates invisible germs Chanting slogans of “lifebouy helps to keep germs away” and “swasthya chetna” Students where asked to prepare for skit on health issuesContact 2Lifebouy village health day. Begins with health camp. Gives healthy children award
    • Contact 3Diarrhea management workshop.Dangers of diarrhea.How it is caused.Contact 4 Launch the lifebouy health club. Formation of health club to carry the hygiene activities.
    • Barrier Matrix: Y WORST GAMBLE Low returns High returns High risk High risk BARRIERS EXIT STABLE BEST Low returns LIFEBUOY Low risk High returns Low risk 0 X ENTRY BARRIERS
    • BCG Matrix: LIFEBUOYThis has become the citizen brand because it has gone for mental control
    • Conclusion Differentiating soap product on the platform of health takes advantage of an opening in the competitive landscape for soap. Also many consumer believe a “visual clean is a safe clean” HLL through its innovative communication campaigns has been able to link the use of soap to a promise of health as a mean of creating behavioural change and thus increasing sales of its low cost , mass market soap. Statistics from the world bank founds that the when Indian population was evenly divided into five socioeconomic quintiles , incidence of diarrheal disease was similar across the quintiles
    • Incidence of diarrhea by socio economic quintilesPrevalenc Poores Second Middle Fourth Richest Populatie of t ondiarrhea averagetotal 10.2 10.4 10.2 10.1 8.5 9.9urban 4.9 12.0 9.0 9.5 8.0rural 10.3 10.2 10.4 10.3 10.2
    • The Economist reported that in England, fewer than one-half of British mother washed their hands after changing their children’s diapers. The growing population in developing countries are at risk from many of the same basic health issues stemming from poverty & poverty and its accompaniment of poor sanitation infrastructure lack of access to the health resources & inability to buy affordable preventing measures. HHL build brand equity around its ability to offer a better quality of life through health.
    • Methods for increasing marketsales HLL has helped create twoinitiatives to spread health andhygiene messages and expand thesoap market .
    • Comparison between PPP and swasthya chetna. Health in your hands Lifebuoy swathya chetnaHHL visibility Not branded BrandedScope Whole population, all Targeted population segmentMethod 4 contacts with school 7 contact with school children .daily contact children . 1 contact with with school hand wash community. 1 contact with young mother.Partners Local govt. health care Local government school system . Other MNCs systemTotal program cost (2002) $ 3,493,333.33 $ 695,652.17(2003) $ 2000,000.00 $ 1,252,173.91
    • HHL total program $ 444,444.44 $ 1,252,173.91HHL cost per head $ 0.015 $ 0.018Scalability2001 1st meeting Preparation2002 Preparation India 40m in 10,000 villages2003 Total 49.2m Total :100 m Ghana (20.2) India ( 9states) 70m in May be kerala(29m) 18000 villages. Preparation for bangladesh2004 Total Total Senegal 9.9 India (11 states) 100 m Peru 26.7 Bangladesh Nepal 23.9 China 1.12Benefits Scales quickly can Branded targetted to contribute money to largest growth segment . those compaign
    • Impact on behavior change & soap scales While scalability seems to be greater with the PPP, direct benefit to corporate sales lie with Swasthya Chetna. Through strategic selection of villages , Swathya Chetna has maximized use of limited fund to reach targeted demographics to increase Lifebuoy sales. Research showa that use of a brand can help strengthen the health messages being delivered by conveying quality , increasing customer confidence and ensuring thaat messages are delivered in a non patronzing or demeaning tones.
    • Developing the expertise to sellhealthHHL will undoubtedly continue to evalute the advantage & disadvantage of both program to promote hygiene and soap as they move forward. Both program combine partnership, health education campaign and low cost product in order to successfully translate hygiene behaviour into increased sales in a scalable way.
    • A central challenge in selling health is thedevelopment of successful partnershipbetween private business & public healthoffices and organization. Both groups needto invest together to create the market for aproduct . Both group are investing in &addressing& government are interesting inincreased quality of life , while privatebusinesses seek increased earning.
    • .Thank you