In reading the HBR Blog about Why Big Companies Can't Innovate and the Gerber example I tend to disagree with the post. While Gerber Singles failed I don't see it as a big company not being able to innovate; I see it as a branding and marketing problem. It is perfectly feasible for Gerber to introduce healthy food options for adults, but having the Gerber brand name on the packaging was the mistake. Gerber is a well know brand known only for making baby food. Although baby food tastes good, (I have a 1.5 yr old and have tried it) it is not visually appealing and is not appetizing to most adults. If they would have tried to re branded under a different name, I think they could have been successful.
I agree with he blog that larger more mature companies are always looking to drive costs out of the business by being more efficient and streamlining existing processes. There are also examples of large mature companies still being able to successfully innovate. Companies like 3M and DuPont have built innovation into their culture and are constantly coming up with new innovative products. I think the main issue for larger companies that have trouble innovating is that the culture of the company never fostered innovative spirit and it is not something that can be changed overnight.
Brett,
ReplyDeleteTo your first point, I agree that Gerber’s major problem when trying to introduce adult food was primarily a branding and marketing issue. I know that I never would have been interested in a food that reminded me so much of baby food. At the same time, I think that this issue IS a lack of innovation. Rather than just thinking of innovation as just a new type of product or service, or a new way to bring a product or service to market, I think it goes much further than that. A clever new brand or marketing scheme that brings a lot of attention to a product can also be a form of innovation.
With that said, I do agree that the issue was not Gerber’s inability to innovate that made them unsuccessful. I think it was their lack of effort toward their innovation. Taking an existing product and somewhat, sort of, trying to pretend it is something new is simply lazy. Giving it a new brand, running a creative marketing campaign, and fully promoting the product in a new way takes more effort, but can also be more innovative.
Brett you bring an interesting perspective with your post by saying that the Gerber case is a branding and marketing positioning issue over innovation. Rethinking the Gerber case I would agree with you. By just slapping a new label would not get their product to a whole new customer segment even though they had a well established market. For their adult-food category to sell they could have modified the packaging of the product.
ReplyDeleteI think of dove chocolates to be a very interesting branding position. Long before the chocolate came to existence Unilever's dove soap and entire product line of skin care was widely recognized to be a good and trustworthy product especially because of its proven moisturizing capabilities leaving skin softer and smooth. So when Mars came up with the dove chocolate I could not even imagine what the taste would be. This bring up an interesting question of what made Mars choose the Dove brand name. Ironically it is marketed as a silky smooth chocolate. I guess Gerber got too caught up in making large profits as opposed to efficiently channeling their product to a new customer segment effectively.
You got my attention when you said that "...the culture of the company never fostered innovative spirit ..." because that is a big truth. I find that organizations that have a longer existence face really hard challenges change their mentalities and approach to consumer's demand. And at time comes from all the different levels with in the organization, either because management has changed and they want to move forward, but middle and lower is still leaving the old model, or because there is a high rotation of lower and middle causing the original goals of the company to dissipate or not get completely transmitted on. Getting to hang up on prior success can also cause this reaction, where when the need to pivot or innovate comes around the staff is not ready for it.
ReplyDelete