Okay, two down, two to go. Last month I discussed the combinations low design & low marketing and high design and low marketing. With this column we are not going to waste some time on introduction. We are going to start right off. The third combination to be discussed is when there is a situation with low design and high marketing. In this case the design department has not been able to add an innovative twist to the product. On the other side, marketeers have been working hard to create some substantial competitive difference. When we try to reflect this to a car metaphor I suggest that we would end up with a Hummer. The Hummer is well known and well driver over the last couple of years, but I have never heard somebody talk about the comfort or the smooth steering abilities of the car. And now I even forget to mention that you will need more than 15 litres of benzene to drive only 10km’s. Although this car is quite different from its competitors we won’t define it as innovative in this case because the innovations don’t contribute the essence the car is bought for. The innovations of the Hummer go back to the days these cars were only driven by the US-army.

From the day Hummer decided to go out and sell these vehicles on the ‘human market’ it was instantly positioned very well. The Hummer-marketeers immediately felt which persons were most sensitive for this car. Within a couple of months the Hummer changed from ex-army vehicle to a status product to be owned by the rich and famous of this world. And to end as ever with the case to girl comparison, I would like to nominate Paris Hilton for this low design high marketing category. Although La Hilton definitely ain’t the hottest girl you’ve ever seen, most man wouldn’t mind to make some private video tapes with this future inmate.

Skip your private thoughts and refocus, because we are about to discuss the final case in the design and marketing comparison. High design and high marketing. In this case both design and marketing departments are able of creating some substantial difference. The design department supplied the company of innovative input, while the marketing department was able of fulfilling their expectations by creating a situation in which the product is relatively easy sellable. A true candidate for this situation is Audi. The car manufacturer is known about its innovative, well styled cars. Their ‘Vorsprung durch Technik’ or in English ‘Advantage Through Technique’. In some way they really lead to car scene, their prototype cars steal the hearts of car-lovers. On the other side their communication with the customer is of a high quality. Audi has a high awareness and they know very well how to trigger their customers. Although the German manufacturers of Audi have some fierce domestic competition with Mercedes and BMW, they found a way to create a compelling innovative car for their customers. The female to come close to this the Audi comparison would probably be Beyonce or Shakira. Hopefully no further explanation necessary.

What do we have now? Some Lada/Wiesmann/Hummer/Audi-related stories? A secret female rating standard? Probably yes, that’s what we have so far. However to really understand the relation between design and marketing we should be able to draw the lines between the two components now. In most situations marketing and design react to each other. To take for example the car stories. Lada’s low design and low marketing are a result of their strategy to build the a cost saving car. It would be far too one-sided to say low design and low marketing are bad. Not definitely not. Just think about sugar, are people willing to pay 3 times more money for sugar because it’s perfectly cubusculus (slang for cube-shaped) ? Or is it a shame that Wiesmann doesn’t spend millions more on marketing to sell more cars? No it ain’t. Wiesmann cars are rare products, by over-marketing the product it will lose it’s exclusivity and all your money would probably be thrown away. Like with every other status product, they probably rely on worth-of-mouth marketing. The people that buy the car want it to be exclusive. The same holds for the Hummer, marketing and design contradict each other on first sight. The design is based on a army vehicle, while the marketing is based on selling a car to the rich and famous. As a fact most rich and famous aren’t soldiers, so why this combination. It’s just another way to differentiate yourself from your competitors. So in fact marketing and design work together pretty good, despite the contradiction on first sight. The design department delivers an exclusive car, while the marketing department is able of selling it to the target group. At Audi there is a situation in which the design department works on innovations, while on the other side there is a extensive collaboration with the marketing department to build cars that fit within the customers’ desires. With this combination Audi is able to deliver high design and marketing.

This leaves us with the conclusion. The fact that low or high design is good or bad, or the fact that low or high marketing is good or bad all depends on the fact what the product strategy is. If you for instance go for cost leadership, you might choose to go for low design and marketing to try to reduce unnecessary costs. Using high marketing and/or design is a way to differentiate your product from competitors. You try to create a substantial competitive advantage, so your product is chosen in favour of your competitors’ products. Both marketing and design should be considered when defining on which element the product should differentiate from it’s competitors. Only a good internal cooperation will result in a beneficial difference that will last.

Although one can build a success with only high design or high marketing. In the end you will probably need both to keep an advantage upon your competitors. Therefore I guess it would be advisable for both divisions to start working together as soon as possible within the process. Sooner or later we’ll need each others support to beat the competition. If we don’t our competitors probably does.

This entry was posted on Monday, May 14th, 2007 at 9:39 and is filed under Column. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.