Target Markets

The three markets chosenIndia, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistanwere the most significant to Unilever because of their sizes and growth opportunities. If it did not "fire" in these markets, Unilever would not be a viable player in the global liquid handwash market.

India: The largest and most valuable among all of Unilever's markets. Lifebuoy was an established brand in India in bar soaps, but the brand's closest competitor owned more than half the market in the liquid handwash category.

Saudi Arabia: The largest market in the Middle East, where Unilever faced a dominant competitor that was growing even larger.

Pakistan: The second largest market in the Indian subcontinent, with two strong Unilever competitors.

Strategic Challenges

In the three countries, antibacterial handwash was widely used, but there were established antibacterial liquids that have been household names for years.

To illustrate the importance of consumers' need for the product and knowledge of its effectiveness, let's consider Argentina. Because of a swine flu outbreak, public messaging exhorted people towash with soap but did not specify antibacterial soap. Hence, consumers questioned the necessity ofan antibacterial soap.

Because Lifebuoy Handwash was high-priced, it was expected to appeal to higher-incomegroups. This was a difficult issue because, in India, the brand's bar soaps were popular among lowerincome groups.

In each of the three markets, competitors offered "all powerful" antibacterial solutions. Consumers perceived these products as "germ killers" that offered long-lasting, all season's protection.

In Pakistan, India, and Saudi Arabia, Lifebuoy had to create unique image. It was a new, high-priced entrant to the liquid handwash category, and could not easily take on dominant competitors.

Across the three countries, Unilever wanted to target higher-income mothers who were potentialhandwash users and convince them to use Lifebuoy Handwash for their families. These mothers hadkids aged between 4 and 12 years and were using competitive brands. When it came to protection,the target mothers believed that their families deserved the best and were not willing to compromise.This gave Unilever a foot in the door opportunity. If the company could convince these mothers thatLifebuoy offered the best protection, it had a chance to capture meaningful market shares.

Objectives

1. Increase preference for Lifebuoy among higher-income segments (defined by a socioeconomic classification index).

This would be tracked by a consumer household panel that Unilever commissioned through aretail audit agency.

2. Establish the Lifebuoy proposition as unique and differentiate it from the competition.

This would be tracked by using quantitative research among consumers after the communicationhad run for at least a month to measure recall of messaging.

Insights

Through lab research, Unilever could claim that Lifebuoy were better than competitors' products ongerm kill: it could kill even more germs.

During consumer research studies, when the results of the lab research were shown to them,consumers said this was unbelievable. Proof or no proof, they were unwilling to budge. That's whenUnilever realized that beating competitors by going head to head against them would not work.

During the same lab tests that showed that Unilever's product killed more germs than the competitors' products, the R&D scientists also discovered that Lifebuoy could kill germs faster than thecompeting products. In fact, Unilever's handwash could protect hands from germs in 10 seconds,whereas all other handwashes took one full minute to do so!

This was exciting, but Unilever did not want to make the same mistake as before of just usingfacts and figures to position its product. Rather than going in with just the claim (what good is a fasterhandwash anyway?), the company looked extensively for a consumer angle to frame the "faster kill"claim. It was while observing children's habits that the company hit a gold mine!

Universally, children are always in a rush or lazy while doing things they don't particularly enjoy(e.g., eating vegetables, doing their homework, etc.). When it comes to hand-washing, it is no different. Forkids, it is an unnecessary chore that they do as quickly as possible, as they just want to be finished with it.So, regardless of how many germs anyone claimed that their product would kill, it would all berendered useless by the habits of children, who always wash in a hurry.

The campaign titled "Superfast Handwash" used the underlying insight on children's behaviornot only to make germ protection in just 10 seconds new and relevant for Lifebuoy, but also to renderthe competition's perceived high ground on germ protection vulnerable. The double blow of a newparameter of time, combined with the lens of children's habits, managed to dislodge the company'scompetitors as the last word in germ protection in consumers' minds.

The Big Idea

Lifebuoy Superfast Handwash: 99.9% germ protection in just 10 secondsbecause children arealways in a hurry, especially when it comes to hand-washing.

Questions

1.Design one TV commercial (a story board) and one print ad that "bring to life" the "big idea."

2.Why didn't Unilever use factual-information (e.g., results of lab tests) about the "faster kill" todifferentiate Lifebuoy from competition?

3.How did Unilever use qualitative and quantitative research (refer chapter: Consumer Research) to develop the positioning claim for Lifebuoy?

4.Does the name "Lifebuoy" convey the product's core benefit effectively? Why or why not?

5.It is unlikely that competitors would let Unilever take market shares away from them in the liquid antibacterialhandwash category. How can they fight Unilever?