Product Management
Written by dogosh on 1/12/2009If the bloggers that had knowledge or the experience about product management, please sharing, In discussions this time will see played jobs from some product management? Product development ? was the category of Product determined by attribute or the function from this product ? What is the product packaging? And Is the product packaging to packaging of several features to be one ?
Product management in basically more was like "a pilot" that must be able to manage well the product portfolio of company. the company with various categories of the product often forgot this core competence, that precisely often to causing the cannibalisation.
So basically, how to manage the product portfolio. had one interesting experience from P&G previously more leant in the manage label where respectively brand will be managed by especially one person, but afterwards the problem emerged after evidently was known raised their cannibalisation between this label was playing in the category of the same product.
Finally they decided to bundle various label with the same category of product into one category of the product, despite each other label to continued be leader but they must refer in product management that was formed in order to the unhappen cannibalisation.
The category of the product? Indeed so many methods of categorising the product and not having a standard reference because its really depended on the level of the competition but also the change business landscape happened, if being based on the function, then whether appropriate if our categorized coca cola and ades in one category of product in this company? Together to satisfy the thirst ? But they continued to have to be distinguished.
Trend at this time more stressed in categorized of product from the consumer's point of view alias more market-driven to compared production-driven that divided on the basis of the form, the attribute etc. that possibly irrelevant with the consumer.
How with Product packaging? Its Simple was how the way it looks like. features are part of what customers Will see and feel it. Although staying better the focus in one usefulness, no need the twisted research.
Please with common sense, we will buy medicine behind was calibrated could cure various sorts diseases starting from when catching a cold, the headache, toothache, was offended to impotent?
Whatever you choosing to compared with medicine promotion to focus in one illness, for example the cough? The principle of foundation of the marketing was you can not be everything for everyone!! Any other comments ?
Also will be better if chosen differensiation was the category completely just, immutable laws of marketing
If being asked the profit what be the first in this category, to answer this we must come back to reviewed the rule no. 1 of Al Ries in The 22 immutable marketing laws,... no.1 Is about Perception,... because point of the first impression always the matter most easy to penetrate our heart, for example the Sanyo water pump always to remembered, because their the first time entering Indonesia.
The first President RI more found it easy to remembered than that so many, the first love, the first girlfriend, the first aircraft that to the month etc., etc. ,... the first was felt always more easy to remember,.. so in the other law if that was first has been filled up for the first category more penetrated on the consumer's mind, was not like this?
According to me this case often depended ,
In the further case that is consumption of this food quite the way it was used for various illness sorts. so for example the A illness, B and C. the consumer satisfied with this food because of being proven experienced the improvement with the A illness, B and this C.
If we want to focus, returned to the D illness, and used strategy marketing, focus to where the direction like the "product x = for cough. Not in a manner indirectly we deadly the customer's market A, B and C? back to the businessman, they want to leader in the market D illness and sacrificed the A market, B and C, this case was quite proven that is the existence of the consumer who had the different requirement but could be met by this food.
One case anymore, if you can not be everything for everyone, why the marketer LG, Samsung cleared to the mobile phone market, television, and other electronics, also AC whichever previous as the washing machine or the water pump (if I was not wrong). so practised in Al ries principal, LG famous by what ? The AC or tv or the washing machine or the pump? Even so samsung was rocks with the mobile phone.
It was quite interesting that what it was said above, indeed some extent could several usefulness were made one, but if we wanted Al ries centrally, not Al ries also had shown with the quite convincing data that the product was not focus will produce performance to supervised the product that focus, so that tried to be discussed by Al rise in his book focus.
But let's saw from the point of view a little non Al ries. we took the example about LG etc., entering various category products? the question was whether comparable alias apple to apple when we compared a medicine product with various usefulness compared with the brand that entered various categories?
Not that as comparing the citrus fruit with the coconut tree? Remembered, one brand of medicine with various usefulness had impact that was different from one brand entered the several categories. you can not be everything for everyone by offering every function!! (more complete isn’t it)
What was LG done, Samsung cs, more significant brand extention alias used one brand that was already perceived established to enter the other category, like Pepsodent to entered the toothpaste, medicine of washing mouth.
Why brand extention could be successful? The first person who stuck the theory of the foundation brand that is David A Aaker gave 2 conditions so that brand extention could be successful.
Firstly, your brand must have the high equities in the eyes of consumer. for example Pepsodent, because already in good perceive , then more will be easy to boost up the category of the new product with the brand Pepsodent , we certainly would more perceive well Pepsodent toothpaste was compared other toothpaste for example the pepsodong brand.
Sony also entered to various categories beginning with the tv, play station etc. because of Sony already in the good perception, tried if we were offered the free mobile phone with 2 choices of the brand that one had the Sony trade mark and that one had the Sontoloyo. definitely we choose Sony.
Secondly, Brand extention will be successful if the aim category of the product had relations closely in the matter complimentary effect alias this product to complemented each other.
For example Pepsodent toothpaste with the Pepsodent toothbrush, complemented each other ? For example Sony television with DVD player. or LG TV with vcd player but also could with the refrigerator complemented each other because indeed headed to electronic home appliance.
Please if once more given the free option, handycam Philips with the Pilu. make choose Philips, despite we knew its possibly philips was not yet superior in this category handycam but in fact we know how Philips performs on lighting category, don't we ?
Back to medicine, Sony will have not said the tv offered various function sorts ? That’ s why brand extention different from functional extention. For example Panther, always said frugal, isn’t it? Never panther said frugal, fast, safe, comfortable, strong, kept was hit, anti theft, anti caught a cold etc..
Karimun as the example of case that did not want to study against Panther, see first advertisement, small but wide, could for the tree . too many things right? Moreover, the matters to shown again contradictory, how to wanted the sustain? Finaly, to be replaced immediately.
Too many things customers should remember, too many problems your brand will have. So distinguished between functional extention and brand extention.
Possibly wanted to be straightened by me, not meant me compared between food that had many benefits and brand extension.
back to the first case, what yours opinion ? if we ready to sacrifice the customer A, B, of C by focussing himself with marketing strategy to stuck that the product x = the D illness where in real fact was enough customers that used for the A illness, B and C. so any question.
For me, to choosing one function, and sacrificed the others, could not all of suddenly we Judge that we will lose the consumer and loose money, tried to be thought about us, if we focus and how many additions that were interested, how much money it Will create.
Please compared the brand that always to communicate the usefulness with the focus in one illness with offered magic various brand. saw whoever was more successful. I feel the formulation of David Aaker also appropriate to used to analyse the Functional Extension.
However, 1 thing that ought to be stressed here all those must be gazed from the side of the consumer... especially the consumer as the user... not from the Marketer side.
So, to borrowed the second rule from David Aaker that mentioned the Brand extention will be successful if the category of the product aiming had relations so close in the matter complimentary effect alias this product to complemented each other, if the consumer perception the one extension (both functional and brand) as something that had complimentary effect because of 1 and so on the matter, definitely had the possibility to efforts extension to carried out will be successful; although the side marketer different to believing from the consumer perception.
Well, the question is whether the expansion from Brand and/or Functional that will be done was still being gazed at by the consumer as something had 'complimentary effect' or not? This is important to be known because the effect could reinforce/weakened the formed of Brand Equity.
Personally more liked to have cow D that were healthy compared with having 4 cows that very thin and rather flu. Although heavy to 4 cows its same as the cow D, but the production of D cow milk definitely more smooth and certain. It was tolerable that other cows to increase vitamins of D cow milks, Vegeta the first time to launch the positioned as diet medicine (whether the laxative...I forgot).
Although the Brand still susceptible equities , they dared to destabilise the competitor in a changing manner position as health medicine of the heart and intestines cancer. They brave did it because the player in this categories still a little and indeed for Vegeta too long to let the playing alone. So as to have much money to buy advertisement vitamins for rocks despite.
Product management in basically more was like "a pilot" that must be able to manage well the product portfolio of company. the company with various categories of the product often forgot this core competence, that precisely often to causing the cannibalisation.
So basically, how to manage the product portfolio. had one interesting experience from P&G previously more leant in the manage label where respectively brand will be managed by especially one person, but afterwards the problem emerged after evidently was known raised their cannibalisation between this label was playing in the category of the same product.
Finally they decided to bundle various label with the same category of product into one category of the product, despite each other label to continued be leader but they must refer in product management that was formed in order to the unhappen cannibalisation.
The category of the product? Indeed so many methods of categorising the product and not having a standard reference because its really depended on the level of the competition but also the change business landscape happened, if being based on the function, then whether appropriate if our categorized coca cola and ades in one category of product in this company? Together to satisfy the thirst ? But they continued to have to be distinguished.
Trend at this time more stressed in categorized of product from the consumer's point of view alias more market-driven to compared production-driven that divided on the basis of the form, the attribute etc. that possibly irrelevant with the consumer.
How with Product packaging? Its Simple was how the way it looks like. features are part of what customers Will see and feel it. Although staying better the focus in one usefulness, no need the twisted research.
Please with common sense, we will buy medicine behind was calibrated could cure various sorts diseases starting from when catching a cold, the headache, toothache, was offended to impotent?
Whatever you choosing to compared with medicine promotion to focus in one illness, for example the cough? The principle of foundation of the marketing was you can not be everything for everyone!! Any other comments ?
Also will be better if chosen differensiation was the category completely just, immutable laws of marketing
- it's better to be the first than it is to be better.
- if you can't be the first in a category, set up a new category where you can be first in ...
If being asked the profit what be the first in this category, to answer this we must come back to reviewed the rule no. 1 of Al Ries in The 22 immutable marketing laws,... no.1 Is about Perception,... because point of the first impression always the matter most easy to penetrate our heart, for example the Sanyo water pump always to remembered, because their the first time entering Indonesia.
The first President RI more found it easy to remembered than that so many, the first love, the first girlfriend, the first aircraft that to the month etc., etc. ,... the first was felt always more easy to remember,.. so in the other law if that was first has been filled up for the first category more penetrated on the consumer's mind, was not like this?
According to me this case often depended ,
- depend on the level of the available competition.
- depend on the product and the usefulness.
- depend on the market size that wanted to aim, etc. So quite true, all depended on the situation:) if the problem being the first, I had read the journal concerning this very interesting topic.
- Before the existence of brand in the segment of market, the consumer had the reference point on their mind about a product,
- after having the first brand to entered step by step the reference point shifted to the first brand point. Note: this point was formed from several fuses, for example 2 price fuses and feeling.
- Afterwards this first product was the point reference that had several profits if to managed continuously.
In the further case that is consumption of this food quite the way it was used for various illness sorts. so for example the A illness, B and C. the consumer satisfied with this food because of being proven experienced the improvement with the A illness, B and this C.
If we want to focus, returned to the D illness, and used strategy marketing, focus to where the direction like the "product x = for cough. Not in a manner indirectly we deadly the customer's market A, B and C? back to the businessman, they want to leader in the market D illness and sacrificed the A market, B and C, this case was quite proven that is the existence of the consumer who had the different requirement but could be met by this food.
One case anymore, if you can not be everything for everyone, why the marketer LG, Samsung cleared to the mobile phone market, television, and other electronics, also AC whichever previous as the washing machine or the water pump (if I was not wrong). so practised in Al ries principal, LG famous by what ? The AC or tv or the washing machine or the pump? Even so samsung was rocks with the mobile phone.
It was quite interesting that what it was said above, indeed some extent could several usefulness were made one, but if we wanted Al ries centrally, not Al ries also had shown with the quite convincing data that the product was not focus will produce performance to supervised the product that focus, so that tried to be discussed by Al rise in his book focus.
But let's saw from the point of view a little non Al ries. we took the example about LG etc., entering various category products? the question was whether comparable alias apple to apple when we compared a medicine product with various usefulness compared with the brand that entered various categories?
Not that as comparing the citrus fruit with the coconut tree? Remembered, one brand of medicine with various usefulness had impact that was different from one brand entered the several categories. you can not be everything for everyone by offering every function!! (more complete isn’t it)
What was LG done, Samsung cs, more significant brand extention alias used one brand that was already perceived established to enter the other category, like Pepsodent to entered the toothpaste, medicine of washing mouth.
Why brand extention could be successful? The first person who stuck the theory of the foundation brand that is David A Aaker gave 2 conditions so that brand extention could be successful.
Firstly, your brand must have the high equities in the eyes of consumer. for example Pepsodent, because already in good perceive , then more will be easy to boost up the category of the new product with the brand Pepsodent , we certainly would more perceive well Pepsodent toothpaste was compared other toothpaste for example the pepsodong brand.
Sony also entered to various categories beginning with the tv, play station etc. because of Sony already in the good perception, tried if we were offered the free mobile phone with 2 choices of the brand that one had the Sony trade mark and that one had the Sontoloyo. definitely we choose Sony.
Secondly, Brand extention will be successful if the aim category of the product had relations closely in the matter complimentary effect alias this product to complemented each other.
For example Pepsodent toothpaste with the Pepsodent toothbrush, complemented each other ? For example Sony television with DVD player. or LG TV with vcd player but also could with the refrigerator complemented each other because indeed headed to electronic home appliance.
Please if once more given the free option, handycam Philips with the Pilu. make choose Philips, despite we knew its possibly philips was not yet superior in this category handycam but in fact we know how Philips performs on lighting category, don't we ?
Back to medicine, Sony will have not said the tv offered various function sorts ? That’ s why brand extention different from functional extention. For example Panther, always said frugal, isn’t it? Never panther said frugal, fast, safe, comfortable, strong, kept was hit, anti theft, anti caught a cold etc..
Karimun as the example of case that did not want to study against Panther, see first advertisement, small but wide, could for the tree . too many things right? Moreover, the matters to shown again contradictory, how to wanted the sustain? Finaly, to be replaced immediately.
Too many things customers should remember, too many problems your brand will have. So distinguished between functional extention and brand extention.
Possibly wanted to be straightened by me, not meant me compared between food that had many benefits and brand extension.
back to the first case, what yours opinion ? if we ready to sacrifice the customer A, B, of C by focussing himself with marketing strategy to stuck that the product x = the D illness where in real fact was enough customers that used for the A illness, B and C. so any question.
For me, to choosing one function, and sacrificed the others, could not all of suddenly we Judge that we will lose the consumer and loose money, tried to be thought about us, if we focus and how many additions that were interested, how much money it Will create.
Please compared the brand that always to communicate the usefulness with the focus in one illness with offered magic various brand. saw whoever was more successful. I feel the formulation of David Aaker also appropriate to used to analyse the Functional Extension.
However, 1 thing that ought to be stressed here all those must be gazed from the side of the consumer... especially the consumer as the user... not from the Marketer side.
So, to borrowed the second rule from David Aaker that mentioned the Brand extention will be successful if the category of the product aiming had relations so close in the matter complimentary effect alias this product to complemented each other, if the consumer perception the one extension (both functional and brand) as something that had complimentary effect because of 1 and so on the matter, definitely had the possibility to efforts extension to carried out will be successful; although the side marketer different to believing from the consumer perception.
Well, the question is whether the expansion from Brand and/or Functional that will be done was still being gazed at by the consumer as something had 'complimentary effect' or not? This is important to be known because the effect could reinforce/weakened the formed of Brand Equity.
Personally more liked to have cow D that were healthy compared with having 4 cows that very thin and rather flu. Although heavy to 4 cows its same as the cow D, but the production of D cow milk definitely more smooth and certain. It was tolerable that other cows to increase vitamins of D cow milks, Vegeta the first time to launch the positioned as diet medicine (whether the laxative...I forgot).
Although the Brand still susceptible equities , they dared to destabilise the competitor in a changing manner position as health medicine of the heart and intestines cancer. They brave did it because the player in this categories still a little and indeed for Vegeta too long to let the playing alone. So as to have much money to buy advertisement vitamins for rocks despite.
| Posted in »
0 Comment: Responses to “ Product Management ”