Case Teaching Notes
General Introduction to the Cases in
Best Practice Cases in Branding
There are fifteen in-depth case studies in the Best Practice Cases in Branding supplementary text, each of which can support one — or even parts of two — class sessions. Moreover, many of these fifteen written cases are supplemented by a 10-20 minute video that contains additional information and interviews with key company sources for the case. In general, the written cases are fairly easy to teach and can provoke much student involvement. They can be a valuable addition to your course. The written cases are somewhat different, however, from the typical HBS cases and therefore work best with a slightly different teaching approach. This introductory note describes the recommended general approach to teaching these cases. Detailed specific case notes are provided for each of the fifteen cases. Additional information on the video cases can be found on the Prentice-Hall web site. Some PowerPoint slides with graphics that may be useful in teaching the case can also be found on the web site.
The main difference between these cases and traditional HBS cases is that HBS cases often have a strong decision focus – a certain set of actions that must be evaluated and enacted. The text cases here have a different approach. They concentrate on major brands with which students are generally familiar, review much historical background, and provide detailed information on one particular branding issue, event, or strategy. By and large, the marketers of these brands have done much “right” and, as such, the cases have much more of a “best practice” flavor than may be found in other types of cases. For that reason, student learning from reading the cases alone can often be quite rich and beneficial, and students appreciate the opportunity to learn about high profile brands and companies. Nevertheless, the in-class experience can add extra dimensions as specific topics can be expanded on and additional learning can occur. Thus, discussion with these cases does not aim towards resolution of a marketing problem or opportunity as much as with the HBS cases but instead covers a lot of ground to make a series of important points about branding in general and one particular brand in the process. The video cases can also help in this regard. The basic breakdown of the cases is 1/3 review of case material, 1/3 lessons about branding in general; and 1/3 about next steps and new development for the brand. The videos can be shown in their entirety at the beginning or end of class or shown in segments at different times during the case discussion.
These written cases can, of course, be supplemented by HBS cases, which deal with more specific branding topics (some of which will be highlighted below). The purpose of these teaching notes is to provide you with useful background to organize your teaching of the cases. Given the high profile nature of the brands that are the focus of these cases, it will make sense to update the case with current events and developments that students will find of interest.
These cases represent best practices from a variety of industries, from fast-moving consumer goods to high-tech and online brands to service brands. The cases often include information about global branding issues faced by the companies, with two cases (Nivea and Red Bull) focusing primarily on Europe. The brand management topics covered in the cases will help the reader understand how to:
1) Brand a new product (even if it is a commodity or ingredient)
2) Employ new marketing approaches to build brand equity and brand loyalty
3) Expand a brand into new geographical markets and channels
4) Establish a brand hierarchy and introduce brand extensions
5) Manage a corporate brand
6) Keep a brand strong over time
7) Revitalize a brand that gets into trouble
8) Change a brand name or reposition a brand
Collectively, these cases provide a comprehensive overview of the strategic brand management process and corresponding best practice guidelines. Each of the fifteen cases also yields valuable specific lessons on how to build and manage brand equity.
Intel: Building a Technology Brand
Teaching Notes
Summary
This case concerns the marketing efforts by Intel to build brand equity in the face of a lawsuit preventing trademark protection for their X86 microprocessor series. Intel had to determine how to name its new generation of microprocessors, as well as how to establish competitive advantages and consumer preference for its microprocessor lines. A number of issues are raised concerning the development of an effective branding strategy.
The case also addresses Intel’s expansion of its business beyond PC microprocessors and the various branding strategies the company employed. After being criticized for a “lack of focus”, Intel decided clean-up its product line and limit its focus on microprocessors, servers, mobile devices, and networking equipment. As a result, the company deployed a “platform strategy” and introduced a bundle of products, including its new “Centrino” processor along with other chips designed for wireless communication.
Despite its success in the microprocessor business, Intel recognized that the PC market growth is slow and competition from AMD is becoming fiercer. As a result, Intel’s stock price declined significantly and required immediate action. The new management decided to launch a new brand strategy that attempts to reposition Intel as a “warm and fizzy consumer company.” The new campaign is based on a new logo, and new slogan (Leap Ahead), and new platform (Intel Viiv) and four specific target markets. Will this campaign help the brand achieve renewed success?
Class discussion can revolve around the following questions that students should consider before class:
1. What were the strengths and weaknesses of the Intel Inside campaign?
2. Evaluate Intel’s continued use of the Pentium family of processors. Did Intel make the right decision by extending the name through the Pentium 4 processor?
3. Suppose you were the Chief Marketing Officer for AMD. How would you propose the company position itself to better compete with Intel? Would you propose that AMD institute an Inside-like ad campaign?
4. Evaluate Intel’s segmentation strategy. Is having a good/better/best product line (Celeron, Pentium, Xeon) the best positioning for Intel? Should it discontinue a line(s) and focus on the other(s)?
5. In light of Intel’s move into the “digital home,” did the company’s executives make the right decision in launching an entirely new brand identity? Did it make the right decision in changing a 37-year-old Intel logo and dropping the Intel Inside campaign for Leap Ahead? What other marketing strategies might the company employ?
6. Intel moved into consumer-electronics products, such as digital cameras in 2000, only to withdraw after receiving complaints from OEMs such as Dell. Does Intel face a similar issue with its move into the “digital home?” Does this move too far outside Intel’s core competency of producing microprocessors?
Teaching Strategy
This case can generate and support discussion on a number of topics, e.g., high-tech marketing, ingredient branding, corporate branding strategies, brand name choice criteria, brand hierarchy, brand migration, etc. The case also can be supplemented in a number of ways to incorporate current developments. Specifically, this is an excellent case for demonstrating, among other things, the following:
1) Added-value that a brand can provide over and above that offered by a generic product — less than five years after the ingredient branding program began, Intel was ranked the third most valuable brand in the world
2) Challenges of marketing “generations” of products and brands
3) Critical importance of implementation
4) Complementarity of push and pull marketing
5) Challenges of combining an ingredient brand strategy with a corporate umbrella brand strategy and a sub-brand strategy
6) Role of branding in a highly competitive, constantly changing environment
It is useful to begin the case discussion with a quick review of Intel’s history to provide some perspective and a few quick lessons. Intel’s shift from memory to microprocessors was a fortuitous one as their microprocessors became the industry standard. It is worthwhile for students to understand Intel’s broader business model and how they invested in research and development to create a competitive advantage for their products during this time. Their marketing strategies, however, were not as strong and they faced a number of challenges. In terms of naming, internally, a proliferation of numbers and letters created an “alphabet soup” of brand; externally, competitors could copy “more or less” but still use the same name. Moreover, greater competition was emerging period. As a result, there was much consumer confusion as to who made a particular generation microprocessor and also what level of performance to expect from a particular product. Losing the court case in March 1991 and Cyrix’s introduction of the 486 SLC chip in March 1992 brought Intel’s branding issues to the forefront.
It is also important for students to understand how Intel’s target market strategy moved from a “push” to a “pull” strategy, with the mass market, non-technical business and home PC users in mind (e.g., the Circuit City or Best Buy shopper). At this point, the Intel Inside campaign can be analyzed. To provide some focus, it is useful to put the Intel brand hierarchy on the board. Intel Inside was an attempt to brand microprocessors as a whole. The word “Intel” established an umbrella brand for the company, while “Inside” established the company as an ingredient brand. The logic of such a strategy can be explored in terms of pros (e.g., efficiency of marketing expenses, simplicity of message, ability to transfer equity to new product categories) and cons (e.g., lack of product specificity). The implementation of the strategy also can be reviewed, combining pull marketing programs directed to consumers (in the form of media advertising) with push marketing programs directed to OEMs (in the form of co-op advertising). It is worth noting how consumer advertising and cooperation from 2nd and 3rd tier OEMs put pressure on 1st tier OEMs to get with the program.
The logic of the whole campaign must be spelled out: to create brand (and category) awareness for Intel as a microprocessor and a key ingredient to the computer, as well as linking two key brand associations (safety or upgradability and power or performance). This marketing program – designing state-of-the art chips and communicating to consumers through a highly integrated push and pull program – was remarkably effective in achieving those goals. Intel gained credibility in the process as a standard-bearer worthy of consumer trust, and, due to the high-tech fantasy look of their ads, gained some brand personality. It is instructive to ask students whether any other companies have adopted similar marketing strategies. In some ways, Gillette, Nike, and others play a similar game by pouring money into R&D to achieve technological advantages, adopting sub-branding strategies where the corporate brand is combined as a family brand with an individual brand that designates a particular type of technology. Minor improvements, on the other hand, are designated with a modifier as yet another brand element (e.g., Gillette Sensor Excel, Pentium II).
It is also instructive at this point to broaden the discussion to have students identify success factors for ingredient branding in general. The text reviews the concept of ingredient branding in Chapter 7 and offers several guidelines that can serve as a backdrop for this discussion (e.g., ingredients must matter and be instrumental to product performance in some way; ingredients must add value and be differentiated; ingredients must be noticeable or visible or there must be some means to identify and signal its presence; and there must be OEM or producer cooperation). The pros and cons for the host brand and the ingredient brand should also be considered. For example, in terms of the ingredient brand maker, there are many potential downsides: the promotional cost of the pull and push programs; the potential loss of control; the challenge to secure OEM acceptance and the possible power struggle and conflict that may ensue; the difficulty of managing the brand meaning; and so on.
If desired and if time permits, the evolution of Intel’s ad campaign over the years and some of the lessons that they learned along the way can be reviewed. For example, the company learned how advertising can create personality and build a brand even with a technology product (e.g., with the “graffiti” ad campaign). It learned how focus on the brand in an ad could enhance brand awareness (e.g., with the “measles” ad campaign). Intel’s initial “Intel Inside” ads had very high consumer attribution scores, which meant if consumers remembered the ad, they also remembered the brand associated with the ad. It learned how television can be more effective at the brand level and how print can be more effective at the product level (e.g., with the “Room for the Future” ad campaign). In terms of this latter point, it is worth noting how tightly integrated this campaign was – the visual of the print ad literally contains a key scene from the TV ad. Such coordination made sense given their dual brand and product communication needs (Chapter 6 of the text addresses issues with coordinated media).
The discussion could also touch on the launch of the Pentium II chip and the “bunny people” spots to support their MMX sub-brand. MMX seemed like a logical way to communicate the new multi-media capabilities of their chip. The bunny people spots were consistent with the technological focus of Intel advertising, but they got the brand out of the inside of the computer and added desired personality. Once the characters got “a life of their own,” and began taking road trips in advertising, they distracted consumers from the desired message. Intel’s subsequent ads for the Pentium III, involving the performance-art collective Blue Man Group, can be critiqued, as can the Pentium IV ads with the group and later ads with alien spacecraft. The Blue Man Group ads were artistic and abstract and may have been able to create brand awareness, but were not technological or concrete. The alien ads focused solely on technology, but also contained personality. Students can debate the merits of these approaches.