Selecting an overall positioning strategy

Date: 2015-10-07; view: 369.

Choosing the right competitive advantage

Not all brand differences are meaningful or worthwhile; not every difference makes a good differentiator. Each difference has the potential to create company costs as well as customer benefits. A difference is worth establishing to the extent that it satisfies the following criteria:

· Important: The difference delivers a highly valued benefit to tar-get buyers.

· Distinctive: Competitors do not offer the difference, or the company can offer it in a more distinctive way.

· Superior: The difference is superior to other ways that customers might obtain the same benefit.

· Communicable: The difference is communicable and visible to buyers.

· Preemptive: Competitors cannot easily copy the difference.

· Affordable: Buyers can afford to pay for the difference.

· Profitable: The Company can introduce the difference profitably.

The full positioning of a brand is called the brand's value proposition—the full mix of benefits on which a brand is differentiated and positioned. It is the answer to the customer's question “Why should I buy your brand?” Volvo's value proposition hinges on safety but also includes reliability, roominess, and styling, all for a price that is higher than average but seems fair for this mix of benefits.

· More for more: its positioning involves providing the most upscale product or service and charging a higher price to cover the higher costs.

· More for the same: Companies can attack a competitor's more-for-more positioning by introducing a brand offering comparable quality at a lower price.

· More for less: providing good quality or higher amount in product for less compared to other brands. Like some juice products give 20% extra juice with also discounted price.

· The Same for Less: Offering “the same for less” can be a powerful value proposition—everyone likes a good deal. Some products in Carrefour or giant are given by discount.

· Less for Much Less: positioning involves meeting consumers' lower performance or quality requirements at a much lower price.

According to case study:

US airlines do not choose mobile application as tool to position themselves in market. Yet, mobile initiatives could be rather explained as “emergent” strategies, which result from a pattern of trials based on availability of technology and general non-quantitative assumptions how mobile technology can improve customer satisfaction.