By QUEEN MUNGUTI
In Summary
- Popular products risk losing their competitive edge as rivals cash in on buyer goodwill.
There are some products that achieve such universal prominence that their brand names become generic identity of similar goods.
The ubiquitous Sellotape is a classic example of such a brand that has become the generic name for pressure-sensitive tape.
But, often, the adoption of a brand as the generic
name for a whole product range is a degree of success that ends up being
too much for the good of the original product.
In her 2005 book, Brand Think — A Guide to
Branding, marketer Lilian Wong observes that the consumer appeal that
such universal brands have achieved transcends both culture and origin.
“An amazing thing about brands that become too
popular is that, despite where they originate, they seem to be able to
transcend borders and cultures to find a following where they go, in
that they do not develop a new name, rather they are adopted into the
country’s language to mean a particular product category.
“There is a common unspoken fundamental
understanding among the brands that appeals across markets regardless of
their culture or origin,” she said.
Such brands usually start to transit from normal
brand strength by adopting a marketing tactic that their consumers
relate to so strongly that the brand wins a huge market share and starts
becoming a household name.
An example of this is Unilever’s detergent, OMO. In
a bid to appeal to the bottom of the pyramid market in Africa, the
company introduced a small package of its washing powder packaged in
celluloid and bearing the OMO emblem.
It was such a success in the region that it led to OMO becoming the generic name for detergents in the continent.
“In Africa, the sachets became known among
consumers as the ‘Blue OMO’ because of the blue colour of the detergent.
Its introduction was a huge success in the continent. In fact, in many
areas of the continent, OMO developed into a proprietary eponym to the
point it became the generic name for all non-soap detergents,” said
Professor of history of Southern Africa at the Institute of History,
Leiden University, Jan-Bart Gewald and Iva Peša, a research historian
focusing on frugal innovations in Africa in their book Transforming
Innovations in Africa.
“So popular was the product that competitors made
use of the phenomenon and introduced washing sachets under slightly
different names such as OEM, using similar package designs and colours.”
It is this risk of losing brand identity that could
harm profits, especially when new players enter the market. This has
led some brands to encourage consumers to use other generic names,
rather than their brand names, to refer to products in the category, so
as to protect their brand name trademarks.
“Companies invest huge sums in new product
development and building their brands. If a brand is spending £10
million on a single advert, the last thing they want is for people to be
using its brand name as a verb to refer to the whole product category,”
said Wendy Lomax, professor of brand marketing at Kingston University
in an interview with UK newspaper, Independent in an article titled,
‘Genericide: When brands get too big’.
An example of a brand that turned to campaigns in a
bid to persuade consumers to use a generic name instead of its brand
name is Xerox. Consumers used its brand name Xerox to mean photocopy: so
popular was it that it was included as a verb in the Oxford English
Dictionary.
However, despite the consumer appeal and market
share that the name brought to the company, it sought to protect it, to
prevent competitors from using it.
It said that the use of its brand name as a verb
means there is a possibility it could be considered a generic word and
no longer a protected trademark, thus competitors can use it to refer
brands.
The company ran advertisements with one reading; ‘You cannot
xerox a document, but you can copy it on a Xerox brand copying
machine.’
- African Laughter
No comments:
Post a Comment