My experience of learning by teaching

Just recently, I realised I have been at 11 different institutes. I started off in 2009, so it's been a long 12 years. Most appearances were as a guest lecturer, but at one institute, I have been consistently teaching a course too.

So here's my attempt to explain the cliche behind my "great learning experience" of teaching.

1: Talk about your passions, and people will seek you out

I started out in marketing research, and every time I met my professors, I told them how the reality was so different from what was being taught to us in the classrooom, and that I would love to add that to the students. This constant interaction was what got me my first teaching assignment.

Once things began and people knew I was interested in this, I just kept getting more invitations.

2: You will fail first, and that's ok. Keep improving.

My first session was to a group of Executive MBA students on a weekend morning. And I was horrible. I was rejected right after the demo session. But thankfully, I gave it another shot, and then another, till I got good at it.

3: Always ask for feedback. Specific, detailed feedback.

The only reason I got better is that I asked for specific feedback. I explained to the class that I will take the feedback seriously, specify the questions, and then, keep time for students to fill up the forms at the end of the session without rushing through it. It helped me tremendously!

The negative pointers helped me improve, while the compliments boosted my confidence. So it worked both ways. Over time, I used this to also test out something new, and see if students picked on it, liked or disliked it.

4: Prepare for the session, and help others too

Like any other presentation, you will notice a marked difference between a prepared one and an unprepared one. You will sense it in the 'moood' of the room too, even though no one is actually speaking. And to get better at the preparation, it helps circulating your notes. In a way, it keeps the pressure on you to refresh the material for the next sesssion even though you are talking to a new crowd.

5: Share your experiences with others

It sounds like a repeat of the 1st point, but it's a bit different. The more you share, the more you will attract like-minded people, share notes, and improve your own work. And it also works because you will get to speak to more interested, more passionate crowds. Just like your regular job talent, this talent too is in high demand and low supply. So you will end up getting a better experience of talking.

Book Review: The Upside of Irrationality by Dan Ariely

Cropped book cover. Source: Amazon.in

Just like movies, it's true for books too: sequels are rarely as good as the first. But 'The Upside of Irrationality' by Dan Ariely, is an exception.

Dan Ariely's first book on this topic was 'Predictably Irrational'. It introduced us to irrational human behaviour. And gave a few examples from his researches over the years.

But with 'Upside...', Mr. Ariely gives a more application-based understanding of our irrationality. And with each topic he assesses, he shows the variations within that irrational behaviour of ours. Hence, this book remains as enlightening and fun, but ends up being much more useful than the first book.

Also, it has many more examples and lessons that you will find relatable to your life and your decisions. So it has the added advantage of partly being a self-help book too.

Rating: 4.5 stars of 5
You can buy the 'Upside of Irrationality' on Amazon here

Book Review: The Power of Habit by Charles Duhigg

Cropped Book Cover. Source: Amazon.in

If you say yes to one or both these questions, you will find this book very interesting:
(1) Do you like reading about what drives our habitual behaviour?
(2) Do you believe in this saying “culture eats strategy for breakfast”?

Much like the cover explains, this book aims for both explaining human behaviour and taking a shot at self-help and improvement. It also seems reliably applicable in personal and organisational situations (sections 1 and 2), but it seems a force-fit in the social context (section 3).

Rating: 3.5 stars of 5
High rating for the applicability for the framework, cutting a few points for the 3rd section.

If you have already read and liked this book, you will like these too:
- Malcolm Gladwell’s “Tipping Point” and “Blink”
- Thaler and Sunstein’s “Nudge”
- Lewitt and Dubner’s “Freakonomics”

You can buy the ‘Power of Habit’ on Amazon here

Book Review: The Joy of Game Theory by Presh Talwalkar

If Game Theory sounds intimidating and complex, start here to see how it is simply all around us, and while you're at it, learn some tricks too.

While this book is a "collection" of articles, it is written in a very delightfully interesting way and makes for a fun reading. Makes me want to read about Game Theory, so yes, serves its purpose too.

Rating: 4 stars of 5
Free on Kindle Prime Reading

A guide to survive and (maybe) grow through this pandemic

Like me, if you are a normal being, you would have gone through many phases - feeling imprisoned, excited, bored, overwhelmed, even scared of the present and the future. You would have also felt miserable because you aren't any of the cool stuff either. FOMO will set in. Damn, you didn't even learn a new course from those umpteen free websites!

Same pinch!

But there is a way to turn this around. Let's start with understanding ourselves. On one hand, all that talk about WFH feels like a lot of freed-up time, but on the other hand, our brain is telling us that we are locked down in our homes and there is no free will. Every day is an empty canvas, but also chaotic and meaningless.

Hence, start with scheduling your day. It tricks our brains into having a sense of control. Now you are at home all day, because you have a list of tasks to be done at home. Plus, because the unscheduled time is the only "free" time - it becomes valuable. Next, find a purpose to all these tasks. It will make you think you are doing something worthwhile. Now as you move through the day, you will get work done, and feel proud of having done it. Yay!

Next, what should you really do? Here is a hierarchy to follow.

Category #1: Survive. Do all your routines. Get the groceries. Cook. Clean up. Do everything that keeps you alive. Schedule time for this. The less you skip this, the less you will feel overwhelmed and powerless.

Category #2: Socialise. There's a very important reason why we are called social animals. And that Harvard study also gives more details on how our connections lengthen our lives and add to our happiness. So, go ahead and chat. Gossip. Call up that old friend. Cry on a video call with Mom. It will feel good.

Category #3: Selfcare. Don't jump to doing stuff that everybody is posting and getting likes for. Rather, start with what you were craving for during your busy days. Watch that movie. Read that book. Listen to that playlist on loop as you cook some dal-rice or Maggi. Whatever makes you feel cared for.

Category #4: Skill Up. With all this stuff taken care of, it's time to look at the future. Only the near future, though. Start building the skills that will help you stay in your job. Learn the soft skills to become a team leader. Or get certified with those free courses to expand your job profile. It may feel horrible if your job was taken away, but then, you need to work faster to get the next job. Find out about new emerging skills, and get skilled for those. Or start learning something new for a side-hustle. Why not!

Category #5: Serve. Even if you are more privileged than others, don't do this from a place of guilt. You will continue to feel guilty or ashamed, if you do that. Instead, create a 'positive' purpose around it - solidarity, gratitude, positive karma, etc. (And don't post on social media, because you will then keep checking for likes and comments.)

Did it work for me? Yes!

(1) Survive: I slept a lot more, not feeling guilty about my dropping productivity. And I changed my work hours a bit. Once I found my rhythm, I regained my focus during "work hours", and my productivity was up again.
(2) Socialise: I have scheduled after-dinner play time with my family, and it works as a reminder that I am home during their awake hours. Very fulfilling!
(3) Selfcare: Reading books and writing this article is my way of self-care, so yeah, happy about it!
I am yet to do something about (4), and won't discuss (5) for reasons mentioned above.

Like everything else, this requires practice too. Keep switching between these 5 categories. Keep what works. Throw away the rest. And start again. Chances are you will get a lot of stuff done, and also feel good about it.

Book Review: Make Love Not Scars by Ria Sharma

Going through the first few pages felt like "is this even a serious book about acid attacks!"
But that was because the author was taking me on a journey... a roller-coaster ride! Some chapters are so dark I wanted to quit, but continued even as I struggled to cope with the Covid-19-caused lockdown in India. But man, what a story!

Thank you, Ria, for writing this.
And thank you more for the candour with which you have written it.

Rating: 3.5 Stars of 5
Buy it here.

Is disruption a necessity for brand stability?

Recently, WPP's research firm Kantar Millward Brown released the BrandZ Top Indian Brands 2019 report. It has many interesting opinion pieces on the theme of 'Stability and Disruption', in line with the mood of the economy and marketing industry today.

I wrote the below piece in that report, on the topic of 'Is disruption a necessity for brand stability?'

 
“Relax! Nothing is in control.” Maybe you’ve seen this motivational quote. While it is supposed to be liberating – advising us to be detached from the failures and unpleasant aspects of our lives – it ends up being scary, too, by making our successes and glory inconsequential.

A similar kind of ambivalent feeling is shared by those of us in the business of building brands. We want to disrupt something in the market to our advantage, but we want everything else to be stable. Success lies in pushing past this discomfort and uncertainty to find an optimal balance between stability and disruption.

Stability and Disruption: Two sides of the same coin
Apple built its success by disrupting every category it entered – from personal computers, MP3 players, and smartphones, to its later forays into content subscription plans and digital wallet services. But all these disruptions are based fundamentally on the stability of Apple’s closed, protected ecosystem. Because its users are willing to pay for simplicity and data privacy, Apple can continue to provide more and more services at an additional fee. Even with newer technologies and VC-backed investments, start-ups will find it difficult to “disrupt” Apple’s dominance.

This is true with everyday products and categories too. Patanjali and Sensodyne rocked the Colgate boat for a while with their herbal and sensitivity-solving toothpastes, respectively. But Colgate came back eventually with its own variants, and continues to dominate oral care in India.

How should striking the balance between stability and disruption work for your brand? Here are a few lessons that we have learned working with our clients.

Identify what makes the brand stable.
All efforts to define your brand’s essence should be directed at this goal. Once a stable brand core has been identified, the brand is free to disrupt other aspects of its business.

For example, when the Savlon antiseptic liquid and soap brand looked to expand its portfolio, it decided to pivot around the brand promises of providing protection to mothers, and of making healthy habits fun for kids.

With this brand essence as Savlon’s core, its expansion into hand wash was by unlocked with the idea of making hand-washing fun. Ideas like “Healthy Hands Chalk Sticks” and “Id Guard” not only broke through the protection category’s typically serious marketing codes, but also led to stronger behavior change in the long run. The brand’s moves into hand sanitizers put similar tactics to successful use.

Over-invest in disruption to invest in long-term stability.
Pidilite’s brands Fevicol, M-Seal, and Fevi Kwik have been adhesive category leaders for decades. To maintain this leadership, the company has had to invest in multiple new products and consumer segments, sometimes without getting results.

Fevicol struck gold with Fevicol Marine, a variant that promises stronger bonding even when wooden furniture is in frequent contact with water. Not only did Fevicol Marine unlock growth in a new segment, it reinforced Fevicol’s leadership and got the brand firmly entrenched at its core promise of “Ultimate Adhesive.”

On the other hand, M-Seal’s launch of M-Seal Super resulted in only incremental growth, despite being a revolutionary, low-price DIY sealant product with multiple applications. However, had M-Seal not invested in this innovation, it would have left empty space available to new entrants to disrupt its hold on the market.

Ditto with Fevi Kwik. While repair was once seen as the exclusive household domain of the men, Fevi Kwik risked its affinity by targeting homemakers. It urged them to try repairing regular household items with Fevi Kwik, and in the process, to try to earn family members’ appreciation. This strategy turned out to be a great success, and now Fevi Kwik is the go-to instant adhesive for a much larger consumer base, making the category even more uninteresting for competitors.

Each of these projects could have gone wrong for Pidilite, but not venturing into these disruptions would have meant putting these brands’ future stability at stake.

Similar to how you can use disruption to protect, use stability to attack.
Every brand, leader or challenger, is always at the risk of being upended by new technologies, entrants, or policy changes. At such times, the very stability of big brands allows them to take risks smaller brands can’t afford.

For example, ITC’s Mangaldeep is India’s 2nd largest brand of agarbattis. This year, during the Rath Yatra at Lord Jagannath Puri temple in Odisha, it launched a special multi-layered innovation: the first-ever agarbatti with dual fragrances and dual colors, with ingredients that are special to the Lord Jagannath Puri temple (Neem, Tulsi, Kasturi, and Chandan), all in an agarbatti that’s made by women’s self-help groups from Odisha itself. This innovation was so powerful, that it got the endorsement of the Temple Trust, and every pack sold results in a contribution to the temple itself.

In the Mangaldeep example, it was the established brand’s strong, profitable core that allowed it to take bigger risks and handle larger losses. While there are agarbatti start-ups that try innovative ingredients, fragrances, and partnerships, it is likely that they will have to merge with each other to gain economies of scale (or else get bought over by an existing large agarbatti brand). Big, established brands still have strong cards to play in the competition ahead.

Can Colgate toothpaste go beyond Patanjali?

Leader brands usually find themselves in situations where they are working hard on keeping challengers at bay, instead of looking for new ways to grow. Colgate’s present situation in India seems to be similar.

In 2015-16, Colgate’s market share was 55.7% in toothpastes and 46.2% in toothbrushes. Considering that next 2 players in the market are Hindustan Unilever and Dabur, competition is obviously tough and has deep pockets too. But when newspaper reports start talking about new entrant Patanjali’s herbal toothpaste making a dent at the market leader, you know the battle is being fought for each basis point of market share.

But it shouldn’t be this way.
The oral care market still holds big growth potential!

Per capita toothpaste consumption in India (136 grams) is way lower than China (264 gms) and Brazil (617 gms). And the prices are even lower – providing scope of ‘premiumisation’. Colgate’s own value-added line contributed to just 20% of its sales in FY 2015.

So what has Colgate done to grow?
A lot. Through its ‘Bright Smiles, Bright Futures’ program, it has reached more than 135mn school children across 2mn schools. Its other program ‘Oral Health Month’ benefitted almost 6 million in FY 2016 alone. But these activities are expensive, and involve multiple logistical issues and free giveaways, not to mention the renewed dedication of the entire team year on year.

Are there better ways?
Yes – Using brand strengths
I have always believed that the biggest results come when consumer insights, brand strategy and business goals come together.

Last year, we saw the brand leverage its consumer base through advertising, where mothers talked about their trust for Colgate. But I guess it wasn’t very effective, not because of the ad, but because it didn’t use its biggest strength. Colgate has another franchise more powerful than mothers – dentists. For years, the brand used dentists to claim superiority and preference… Dentists, not mothers!

So let’s use this strength some more, and grow the market!
Consumption in the personal care category generally is habitual – patterns for quantity, purchase, brand choice, etc. are set. Even this brand with all its might has achieved limited success in making people brush twice a day. The Mother’s Trust TV ad, too, talks about not switching from Colgate to other brands - almost suggesting 'hey people, stick to your habits!'

But using dentists could change that, and here’s an idea about it.

The growth potential for toothpaste exists because of low per capita consumption and scope for premiumisation, and dentists can help us drive this growth more than anyone else. All we need to do is drive consumers to dentists.

Consider this.
Indians consume less than 150 grams of toothpaste per capita. That translates to just Rs. 60. In comparison, we spend more on bike servicing (avg. Rs. 150-200 at least twice a year), on haircuts (~Rs. 50 every month), and on mobile phone recharges (monthly ARPU ~Rs. 125).

Using this comparison persuasively can push people to get more involved with oral care. Similar comparisons, if made for preventive oral care versus corrective treatments, can also persuade people to visit their dentists more often. Pushing this further, months in a calendar can be designated as dental check-up months to suggest multiple options in a year – June and December as after-vacation months and being 6 months apart, fit the bill quite well.

Would this work?
Targeting a change in behaviour is tougher than proposing a feel-good idea. But leader brands across categories have taken up causes of all sorts to drive both brand and business metrics. Ariel asks men to ‘Share the Load’ of doing laundry, while Dettol urges mothers not to stop their kids from playing. Surf Excel recently rolled out a TVC where they said prison inmates spend more time in the open than kids. This was part of its ‘Dirt is Good’ campaign.

So yes, it can work wonders.

What do you think?

Demonetisation - an assessment using the Effectiveness Approach

For a few years, my job involved working on tracking advertising effectiveness, and I co-authored an entry that won a Gold at the IPA Effectiveness Awards. This is only to establish that while the below analysis is way out of my league, the logic behind it has been well thought of. Do feel free to poke loopholes, and I will try to reassess accordingly.

On 8 Nov. 2016, India demonetized Rs. 500 and Rs. 1,000 notes with immediate effect. It has been widely proclaimed as a great step in curbing black money in the country. Now, while the move is bold and brave no doubt, I invite you to consider a possibility that the impact may not be as big as it is thought out to be.

Estimating cost of printing new notes At its press conference, the RBI said that it estimates 16.5 billion Rs. 500 notes, and 6.7 billion Rs. 1000 notes to be in circulation. This doesn’t add up according to my calculations.
As mentioned in an article by the RBI, the currency in circulation in recent years is roughly 10% of GDP. Thus, based on the IMF estimate of USD 2.25 trillion for India’s 2016 GDP, and exchange rate of Rs. 66.5 to a dollar, the currency in circulation would be Rs. 14,963 trillion in 2016.

Again, according to the same RBI article, Rs. 500 and Rs. 1,000 are total 47% and 32% of value of money respectively in circulation. Then, total no. of currency notes to be replaced will be:






Anyway, let’s go with the RBI-quoted figure of 16.5 billion and 6.7 billion notes respectively.
In one day, roughly 23.2 billion currency notes stopped being legal tender! Take some time to process that number.

For cost of printing, a Mint analysis (which is brilliant, by the way!) quotes RBI information that cost of printing new currency notes are Rs. 2.5 for a 50-rupee note and Rs. 3.17 for a 1,000-rupee note. The new notes will be more expensive to print due to costs of designing and adding new security features. But since the volume to be printed would be large too, let’s go only a little higher for pegging the cost of printing –Rs. 2.6 for a 50-rupee note and Rs. 3.5 for a 2,000-rupee note.

Let’s say we replace all old Rs. 50 notes with new Rs. 50 notes, and all Rs. 1,000 notes with Rs. 2,000 in equivalent value. The cost of printing these many notes will be:

We would spend Rs. 54.63 billion to print the new currency notes only for replacing old currency!

Before we look at other costs of this massive decision, let’s look at the benefits arising from this. The two big benefits expected from this move are curbing black money and curbing funding of terrorist activities.

Estimating impact on Black Money: The press release of the announcement puts the value of the black economy in India at 23.2% of GDP in 2007. Considering that same ratio for 2016, while highly unlikely, gives us a figure of Rs. 34,713 Trillion. However, not all of it is cash. In fact, a huge proportion of it will be in the form of real estate, gold jewellery and investments. Replacing currency notes doesn’t affect this at all.

So how much of black economy does it affect?
The black economy would have limited financial services as its disposal, but it would also have fewer participants, hence, fewer hands to exchange. Therefore, purely as a guess, let’s say the currency required for the black economy to operate is half of what is required for the white economy. Thus, 5% or Rs. 1,736 trillion will have to be replaced by black marketers in the event of replacement of currency notes.

Note that this Rs. 1,736 trillion turns out to be only 15% of the total currency in circulation in 2016 – Rs. 14,963 trillion. Doesn’t feel good, right? Ok, let’s push our original guess of 5% to 10%, so that this ratio goes up to 30%.

So does all of this cash become “white money”?
Not really, since black marketers can continue exploiting all existing loopholes to plough this same cash back into the black economy. But let’s still consider that this becomes white.

Reversing the Currency-to-GDP ratio, this will grow India’s GDP by Rs. 34,720 trillion in the first year. Converting black money to white by itself doesn’t matter much, what really matters to the government and to us, is the tax income generated from it.

Estimating incremental tax income Last year, the income from Central Taxes to the government was about 0.01% of GDP (Rs. 14.6 trillion on Rs. 1,37,855 trillion), thus, this new white money will give the govt. Rs. 3.47 Trillion more money.

Note that we will spend only 2% of that amount in printing new currency! Cool!!

But then, we have calculated only first year tax income, that too, only for Central Taxes. What about additional tax income to states, and also the multiplier effect of tax income spent as government's capital expenditure over the years? That will increase the benefit. But, for sake of ease, I assume that this impact gets balanced off by the fact that this tax income to government also takes it away from the hands of people who would have spent it, and that the original amount spent by the government on printing new currency would also have a similar multiplier effect over the years.

Let’s look at the second big benefit – lesser fake money for terrorists.

Fake money estimates An Indiatimes article says that ISI makes a profit of Rs. 500 crore a year by printing fake money and smuggling it into India. Cancelling old notes makes all that money worth nothing, but ISI has already made its profit on that money, so it hardly makes a difference.

Let’s say it takes ISI or its partners a full year to figure out how to make counterfeit new currency notes. Then, it loses Rs. 500 crore in this one year. Now what matters is... how much of ISI’s income comes from printing fake money. We wouldn’t know this.

But what we can estimate is that ISI will earn higher profits right from the moment it figures out how to print fake currency notes of Rs. 2,000.

Makes the whole step seem pointless, no?

Let’s assess the third factor now – removing corruption We keep forgetting that the black economy is an economy – meaning it already has figured out the loopholes of the official system, and has been exploiting it for years, perhaps decades! A change in currency notes is nothing more than a speed breaker in the journey.

Will replacing currency notes stop people from asking for dowry, paying ‘donation’ for school admissions and college degrees, escaping tax assessments, asking for undue promotions in government jobs, etc.? No way!

Let’s now come back to the additional costs involved in replacing currency notes in a knee-jerk manner like this.

The biggest cost is of transporting this money all over the country to bank branches and ATMs. It’s difficult to put a number to it.

The next cost is a nominal one – Business lost during this time. A recent nationwide strike of trade unions estimated losses to be in the range of Rs. 180 billion. That’s for a single day, for a section of the entire economy.

In our present case, nearly 80% of all currency notes, Rs. 14,950 billion in value, are rendered useless overnight, and are replaced over 50 days. This is in an economy where 2/3rd of transactions are in cash as per a Hindustan Times article.

During this 50-day period, even if we consider that the impact is equivalent of lost business of only 5 days, it totals to a massive Rs. 0.9 Trillion loss.

In other words, we would have lost 26% of our incremental tax income expected over the next one year, at the beginning of the exercise itself.

Impact on poor This cost, while not nominal, will be hidden and difficult to estimate too.

According to a 2015 study, while 53% of Indian population has a bank account, it is with a 43% dormancy rate – no deposits or withdrawals in a 12-month period. Again, go back to the previous mentioned cash becoming illegal overnight.

The timing makes it worse too - first week of the month, and just a week after Diwali, when quite a lot of them receive their festival bonus.

Now imagine 125 crore Indians, only 10% of them with an active bank account, scrambling to replace 80% of their cash.

Theoretically, it should affect only black money. But we already know black money in cash is only 15-30% of all cash in the economy. Be my guest in estimating the losses Indians will occur!

---
Disclaimer: This analysis has been done using all openly available figures and study reports. This massive move will undoubtedly have far-reaching effects in terms of scale and time. I have made an attempt at calculating a short-term impact using my skills from another field. It does not reflect the views of my present or past employers.

Get more from your Brand Tracking Study

Most brands that spend a lot on advertising have some kind of a tracking study in place. And more often than not, use of the findings are restricted to checking whether the marketing team performed better or worse in the last week / month / quarter.

But once in a while a team of good researchers (or, as it happened with me, great researchers!) come along and teach others to do better.

Here's what I learnt:
1. Find what is generic to your category, and what drives the niches
A tracking study has a lot of image parameters and not all of them are equally important in the market. So how do we know which ones are the critical ones?

Take a dump data of fairly long period (say six months for a weekly tracking study) and run a Jaccard analysis on the image parameters and brand preference as the two sets of variables. What you will get is a score for each image parameter. These scores indicate how strongly the image parameters drive brand preference. Sort them in order and look at both the ends of the spectrum.

At one end will be the ones that drive preference the strongest across brands. These are the category generics. Your brand can't score low on these. At the opposite end, are the ones that drive preference for one or few brands, but not for others. These are the image parameters driving the niches. Pretty good data to look at while making brand portfolio decisions.

2. Track how consumer preferences change over time
Even the most boring categories will see changes in consumer preferences over time. To check this, just take two dumps of data over, say, two years and compare scores for image parameters. You can look at average score across brands, or average brands chosen for each image statement, etc. and figure out if certain factors are becoming more important over time.
There's a catch here. In some categories, these changes are a result (and not cause) of communication. For example, if deodorant brands talk about no-gas deos, it may lead to consumers asking for no-gas deos over time. Hence, discretion is advised. :)

3. Measure the lead time of communication on brand scores
The tracking study already tells you how much impact your communication has on the brands scores for you and competition. It can also give you an idea how much time it takes for your communication to show impact on the scores.

Take 2 trend lines - your advertising GRPs and one of your brand scores. Normally, we look at these trend lines as they happen in real life. But creating an overlap can provide a completely different analysis. What if you see the brand score with a one-week or a two-week lag? Maybe it shows a higher correlation between the two trend lines. This can be checked for promotions too. Then, you will theoretically have a better idea on when to begin your Diwali promotion, or back-to-school sale.

If you have already tried these or other such ideas, do share the hits and misses.
Because, well, it helps.

--
With thanks to Ipsita Arora for helping me with this post.

Our research 'logic' is flawed (and we don't even know it)

We say and hear phrases like "our research suggests that...", or "I have observed this myself..." pretty often. What follows the phrase is usually logical... or at least presented that way. But it may not be so.

As much we love to believe and portray that we are rational managers, using logical decision-making trees, and considering all possible alternatives, we don't do so. So what comes in our way?

1. We have made up our minds even before we see the actual research findingsTake two people with opposing views, and present some data favouring one side. One side is as quick to dismiss it, as the second side is to accept it. The data couldn't influence the decision. Instead, it got 'rationalised' by the receiver.

2. Our 'sample size' is too smallLike it or not, we move around in the same kind of groups and people. As a result, we get to observe or receive only a limited set of information. Even the first-hand research done through market visits and 'vox-pops' are exactly this - small samples of a huge population. How can our findings be complete?

3. We tend to polarise all findingsMost data is presented as averages, and the differences are less / more significant. But during decision-making, we categorise it into yes/no or present/absent groups. Just a few minutes into a discussion, data presented as 'men use gadgets more frequently than women' will morph into 'men are gadget-crazy, and women don't use gadgets at all'.

4. Our minds can't hold opposite views togetherPeople are both selfish and generous, passive and aggresive, friendly and unapproachable (in different situations, at different times). The same is with the research findings. But we expect things to be either good or bad. We simply can't synthesise information when they're partly good and partly bad. Of course, we do lose out on important information when we force things to be that way.

So in a nutshell, our interpretations are neither right nor wrong, just incomplete. Now if only we could be ok with that.

Life in a non-Metro: Ch. 2 Time isn't money

This post is part of a series.
You can read the introduction, and chapter 1 here.

Chapter 2: Time Isn't MoneyMost consumers you come across in a metro will go to lengths to explain how fast their life is, and how little time they have. That would be true for non-metro consumers too... but only the explaining part.

Given that everyone is brought up with the adage of 'Aaram haram hai', people everywhere want to show that they are busy, but it takes only a little investigation to understand how relaxed life in a non-metro is.

Let's also understand why this is.
They save time on commute: In a non-metro town, people's residences are fairly closer to their workplaces. Moreover, the traffic jams aren't as bad or as frequent.

Their working hours are much shorter: Be it an industrialist, businessman, or employee, the non-metro person's scope of work is pretty much restricted to his own time zone, and perhaps to the head office that's located in Delhi or Mumbai. So it's fairly easy to complete a day's work within 8-10 hours (maybe even lesser, depending on your industry) and go home to eat dinner with family. (Yes, sigh!)

While they follow a 6-day week, Saturdays are either half-days, or pretty relaxed when otherwise.

So what would these people do with so much time at hand?

1. They socialise
Most people will be part of social groups, connecting to their communities, social and professional circles at coffee shops, restaurants, gyms, and clubs. They participate in their society's / housing colony's management, organise events and get-togethers. They attend many such events too. As a result, businesses don't mind having exhibitions and workshops on weekdays; they are able to attract a decent audience.

2. They compare before buying
Imagine having just one hour extra every evening. Would you still buying all your groceries, toys, and electronics from the single neighbourhood mega-store? People in the non-metros do the same. They visit multiple stores, multiple times, and make multiple calls to compare, negotiate, and get the best price.

3. They watch a lot of TV
The TV stays on for most part of the day. The lady watches many more soaps, even splitting them between afternoons and evenings if they overlap; the man watches news and sports and movies, and the kids would watch the cartoons.

Other implications:
1. When it comes to purchases, they are willing to wait to get a better deal.

2. As deliverers of service, they aren't punctual. They won't bother to be there at 3pm for a 3pm appointment. Most deliveries for most categories of goods are expected to be late, and are late too.

3. Perhaps as a consequence of this culture, as customers, they know that deliverers will over-commit and under-deliver. Hence, they create non-existing urgencies all the time to ensure that work gets done (and preferably, in time).
Interesting, isn't it? More about the non-metros in the coming posts.

Any unique observations, or anecdotes about the non-metros?
Do share in the comments.

Life in a non-Metro: Ch. 1 Religion-, not Retail-Therapy

Introduction
Since this post is planned as a first in a long series, let me give a short background here. I had been in Mumbai all my life till I shifted to Indore a year and a half ago. In this series, I wish to compare Indore and Mumbai, highlighting how non-metro consumers are different from the way consumers are usually described in MBA schools and boardrooms of metros. These are all personal opinions and don't reflect the views of my present or past employers. And while I have tried my best to be objective, my sincerest apologies to anyone who finds anything offensive. Do point it out, and I would try to revise wherever possible.

Chapter 1: Religion-, not retail-therapy

What brings people to a metropolis are the job opportunities. Hence, professional networks assume priority over personal relationships. In stark contrast, the reason for a group of people coming and staying together is religion or community practices. This presents a social construct very different from the one we see in metros.

Thus, implications:
- Places of worship, not shopping or entertainment, are the common meeting places.
- Days of festivals, and not days of end-of-season sales, are the prime drivers for purchase of new garments and durables.
- Days of importance to community are celebrated (and are much bigger celebrations) than that of personal importance like birthdays and anniversaries. For the same reasons, the weddings too become occasions for big-ticket expenses, gifting, etc.
- Rallies and gatherings organised by politicians are around festivals. Sometimes, rallies are organised as 'yatras' with local customs and practices influencing start and end points.
- These customs and traditions are a critical source of income for shopkeepers and traders who have built their businesses around items required at these occasions.

Interesting, isn't it? More about the non-metros in the coming posts.


Any unique observations, or anecdotes about the non-metros?
Do share in the comments.

Consumers need brands too

As marketers, advertisers and brand owners, we are pretty weird. We talk of brands as lovable and significant entities: adored by consumers, playing an important role in their lives, making a difference in the world, and so on.

And at the same time, we also talk of marketing as mostly 'interruptive' - things that stop consumers from going about their daily lives and pitch sales stories to them. From this lens, brands are seen as desparate entities fighting for survival. When consumers notice our brand, and recall it from our ad campaigns, we celebrate. When consumers recommend our brand, and talk about it through their social media profiles, we earn the title of industry experts.

But how can an entity worry about relevance, and talk about affinity at the same time? Perhaps, it is led by our perception we aren't too willing to admit - Brands need consumers, consumers don't need brands. "We" need "them" because they buy our products, prefer dealing with us, pay more for our services, etc.

But we never think that consumers need brands too.
We don't discuss from this perspective. We don't have conferences or conclaves from this point of view. We are busy proving advertising effectiveness, calculating social media ROI using grand metrics, even creating new metrics, all in an effort to justify the existence of our brands.

Of course, we are taught all the right theories on how to tap into consumer needs, and building great brands. But the perspective is always that of a survivor. Books and speakers address their audience as people struggling with identity crisis.


Perhaps it's time to change this point of view.
Perhaps it's time to treat brands on an equal platform with consumers.
And perhaps, with that stance, brands will truly make a difference in the world.

--
Crossposted on LinkedIn

Truths about ‘insights’

Let’s get the most agreeable truth about ‘insight’ out of the way – it is a much often used, overused, and abused word.

Agreed! But since we haven’t learnt to discuss advertising without this word, let’s continue on this topic.

There are two more, perhaps equally obvious, truths about insight. But they don’t get talked about much; hence, this post.

One, not every ad campaign needs an insight.
Sometimes, a great ad campaign is great simply because it’s a fresh idea or fresh storytelling. The first TVC of Sony Bravia just showed colourful balls filling up the streets of a small town; it was brilliant art direction. ‘Chal Meri Luna’ and ‘Dum Laga Ke Haisha’ became path-breaking campaigns because of brilliant copywriting. Calling a memorable moment a ‘Kodak moment’ is brilliant marketing. There’s no consumer insight in the ad. Creatives, planners, and servicing people know this, understand, and even accept this truth. A few clients would, too. Most others can’t. They would probably get nightmares if they were told that their ad agency would be presenting a script without an insight behind the idea. Nevertheless, if it’s a fresh idea, it would work even without an insight.

The second truth: Insights don’t and can’t exist in isolation.
Have you ever tried to think of insights without a brand or product in mind? Try it... in vain.

Because we think insights are about consumers, we believe that they are independent of brands and products. But they aren’t. When CEAT Tyres said “the streets are filled with idiots”, it said so because the brand offer was safer tyres. When Tata Sky said “Poochhne mein kya jaata hai”, it said so because consumers considered the brand so premium, they didn’t ask about its packages and prices when they were out to buy an inexpensive DTH service. Olx says ‘Bech De’ because it relies on people growing distant from their possessions to the point that they want to dispose them of, at a small price. Would these insights mean anything without the brand offer?

This brings us to the most controversial aspect of insights – their definition.
Based on truth no. 2, we know that we would have to consider both the brand / product and the consumers to be able to arrive at an insight.

Hence, here’s what I propose:
An ‘insight’ is an already-known truth about consumers that makes the brand proposition compelling and irresistible to them.

This truth could be how consumers use the product, how they buy it, or even the emotions and imagery around the brand that is offering the product. But it can’t be bereft of the brand / product. If it is, it’s just great storytelling at work, not insightful.

What do you think?

---
This is my post on LinkedIn. It has been cross-posted here so that it has its own URL.