Brita Case Study
Essay by a855110 • June 15, 2019 • Case Study • 1,807 Words (8 Pages) • 1,831 Views
Assigned Questions:
- What factors were responsible for Brita’s success in the years since its launch to 1999?
First mover advantage with attractive unique value proposition – providing household healthy and safe water with Brita’s Pour-Through (PT) Pitcher system. This was particularly successful especially after notable outbreaks of illness related to tap water from municipal water filtration system
1988 – Parent company Clorox gained Brita’s right for the USA market
1993 – “How it works” and ”Waterfall” campaign are product-promotion advertisements focused on cognitive and emotional elements of the client decision making process. Its marketing campaign and mass channels resulted brand awareness of 70%
1999 | Water Purification Industry | $ 350,000,000.00 |
Annual Revenue | $ 248,500,000.00 | |
Revenue Share/Market share | 71% | |
Brand awareness | 70% | |
# Households in US | 103000000 | |
user percentage | 18% | |
#Users | 18540000 | |
% Users remained after 1 year | 80% | |
# Users remained after 1 year | 14832000 |
- Problem identification: what factors are responsible for Brita’s problems and provide evidence. Why didn’t the strategies attempted between 1999 and 2006 work?
Externally
- Rise of bottle water consumers in 1997
- Bottled water made up 8% of all liquid that people paid to drink
- Industry’s fastest growing category
- Coke launches Dasari bottled water
- Introduction of the faucet mounted filter (FM) in 1999
- PUR FM removes illness-causing bugs
- Brita responds by establishing a R&D department and continues to focus on removing contaminates.
- Brita remains hesitant on entering the FM category
Internally
- Brita has lost sight of its market
- Unclear client segmentation and attempts to continue with mass marketing strategy.
- Lost its position as an innovator to follower
- Series of short-term and ineffective campaigns
- Top to bottom approach versus Bottom-up approach
Strategy | Unique Value Proposition | Problem (s) | Evidence |
Strategy 1 – where does water belong | - Positioning based on “healthy lifestyle” Consulting Firm recommended: - Brita should come across as a beverage, not an appliance - Focusing on the emotional driver of water consumption | - Brita PT lacks mobility -Emotional drivers are more personal versus public. - Survey of Drivers of at-home does not necessary correlates with outside from home | - Brand awareness sits at 70%. Could be a disadvantage because it is known for “transforming tap water” |
Strategy 2 – Bottled water as the Bad Guy | - Bottled water taste without the bottle - unlimited supply of great water | - Difficult to get people who were happy with bottle water to switch to Brita | Exhibit 3b and 4 – Perceptual map shows two complete customer segments. Bottled water are perceived as superior in taste and convenience while PT is more economical |
Strategy 3 – Leaky bucket | Smart Pitcher Campaign The “Windows” project - Boost consumer engagement through innovations that delivered a better balance of convenience and reward, reduced the thinking required and maintenance - Prevent customer who bought the product but eventually stopped using the brand | Product re-engineering focused on functionality but failed to convince users. Re-engineering also failed to recognize aesthetically-driven segment. PT does not differentiate from built-in refrigerator filtration system and perceived as lower end compare to bottled water. Once the customers abandoned the product, they are gone. Rise of built-in water filtration in refrigerator | Product indicator didn’t seem to relate to volume, thus lack credibility. 46% of PT users likely to lapse within the first year Refrigerator with in-built filtration had reached 10 million households and were expected to grow by at least 2 million per year. |
Strategy 4 Tap Water Turn-Offs | “Transform the taste of tap” Play on consumer doubt and fears about impurities in tap water | - Bottled water becomes prevalent - Water may still contain impurities, but why choose Brita but not others? New undeveloped client didn’t make Brita into their selection set | - Technology advancement – less water contamination vs 1999. |
Strategy 5 – Bottled Water as the Bad guy revisited | Simple Solution: easier and cheaper “Less costly and for some, more convenient versus bottled water” | - Attempt to draw conclusion that PT is cheaper than bottled water, downgrades the health and safety focused brand position | - Water filtration system may be on average, cheaper than bottled water, but that doesn’t necessary mean Brita is the most affordable one in client’s water filtration selection set. |
...
...