Brand Positioning Tactics

Consistency isn’t boring. It’s branding. This BIC pen has looked the same since 1955. Same design. Same transparent barrel. Same blue cap. Bic knew it didn’t need to evolve the design of the product. By sticking to what worked, it has become iconic. Most brands don’t have that kind of discipline. They get bored to easily and change too much. If you change too much, you lose consistency and lose recognition. Great branding isn’t about changing everything all the time. And knowing what not to change is equally as important. A solid brand strategy should do two things: 1. Tell you where to stay consistent. 2. Show you where to evolve to stay relevant. Every brand has core brand assets (or codes)… distinctive elements that drive recognition. KFC has the bucket, the Colonel, the colour red and chicken. the LEGO Group has the brick, the yellow minifigure, the red square logo, and imagination. Bic has this pen shape, the blue cap, the orange packaging and the Bic Boy. When you protect those core assets, show up consistently, and then find relevant, creative ways to show up in culture that’s how you win. Not everything needs to change. Know what to keep. That’s the work.

Hrithik Roshan and Virat Kohli both launched fashion brands. One made ₹1000 crore. The other lost 29% of revenue.  Here's what separated them. HRX by Hrithik Roshan launched in 2013 with Hrithik Roshan and Afsar Zaidi. In its first year alone, it clocked ₹350 crore. Today, it has crossed ₹1000 crore with five-fold growth. [Hindustantimes] WROGN, Virat Kohli's fashion brand, saw its revenue drop from ₹344 crore to ₹243 crore in FY24. Its ROCE stands at negative 72%. [Inc 42] [Entrackr] Both had massive star appeal. Both targeted young Indians. Yet their trajectories couldn't be more different. Here's what set them apart: 📌 HRX built around Hrithik's genuine fitness transformation journey 📌 WROGN positioned itself as "buy Virat's style and look cool." 📍 HRX created an ecosystem. From activewear to smart wearables, everything is connected to personal transformation. Their #KeepGoing campaign turned customers into a community. 📍 WROGN relied heavily on celebrity association without evolving its products or message. Industry experts call it a classic case of burning investor money. 📌 The pricing strategy was equally telling. HRX found the sweet spot at ₹800-1200 per piece: premium enough to feel valuable but accessible enough for college students. 📌 WROGN's pricing strategy focused on competing directly with premium brands by pricing at ₹1200-2500 per piece, missing the accessibility factor. HRX understood Indian wallets better and this shows why HRX became a successful brand while WROGN remained just another celebrity brand. Working in retail and sourcing across markets, I've seen this pattern repeatedly. Brands that understand their customers' real needs outlast those banking on glamour alone. Successful brands solve real problems. They create movements, not just merchandise. Today's consumers invest in authentic stories that inspire action. Which resonates more with you when choosing brands?

While global fashion giants 𝗯𝘂𝗿𝗻 𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗹𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝗼𝗻 𝗰𝗲𝗹𝗲𝗯𝗿𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗲𝗻𝗱𝗼𝗿𝘀𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀 and digital campaigns, one Indian brand quietly built a 𝗿𝗲𝘁𝗮𝗶𝗹 𝗲𝗺𝗽𝗶𝗿𝗲 𝗯𝘆 𝗱𝗼𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗲𝘅𝗮𝗰𝘁 𝗼𝗽𝗽𝗼𝘀𝗶𝘁𝗲. Zudio, owned by Tata's Trent Ltd, has rewritten the fast fashion playbook with a radical simplicity strategy. With 545 stores across India and revenues crossing $1 billion in FY25, this value fashion retailer has achieved what many premium brands struggle with - profitable growth without the marketing noise. The secret lies in their contrarian approach. While competitors chase metro cities, Zudio targets Tier 2 and 3 markets like Surat, Kanpur, and Bhubaneswar - cities with growing disposable incomes but underserved by premium retailers. No celebrity campaigns, no e-commerce push, no premium positioning. Instead, Zudio made pricing their brand identity. Their stores average 9,500 square feet compared to competitors' 21,000 square feet, yet generate ₹16,300 revenue per square foot - double the industry average. In fiscal 2024 alone, they opened 203 new stores and entered 46 new cities, proving that operational efficiency trumps marketing flash. Trent's consolidated revenue hit ₹4,656 crore in Q3 FY25, with Zudio driving the majority of this growth through their disciplined expansion strategy. 𝗞𝗲𝘆 𝗟𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗼𝗻𝘀: 1. 𝗠𝗮𝗿𝗸𝗲𝘁 𝘀𝗲𝗹𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗺𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝗺𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝗻 𝗺𝗮𝗿𝗸𝗲𝘁 𝘀𝗶𝘇𝗲 - Tier 2/3 cities offered higher growth potential than saturated metros 2. 𝗢𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗲𝘅𝗰𝗲𝗹𝗹𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗯𝗲𝗮𝘁𝘀 𝗺𝗮𝗿𝗸𝗲𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘀𝗽𝗲𝗻𝗱 - Superior store productivity created sustainable competitive advantage 3. 𝗦𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝘀𝗰𝗮𝗹𝗲𝘀 - Clear value proposition resonated better than complex brand narratives 4. 𝗟𝗼𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗴𝘆 𝗶𝘀 𝗯𝗿𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗴𝘆 - Strategic placement became their primary customer acquisition tool 𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁'𝘀 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝘁𝗮𝗸𝗲: 𝗜𝘀 𝗭𝘂𝗱𝗶𝗼'𝘀 𝗮𝗻𝘁𝗶-𝗺𝗮𝗿𝗸𝗲𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗮𝗽𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗮𝗰𝗵 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗳𝘂𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝗿𝗲𝘁𝗮𝗶𝗹, 𝗼𝗿 𝘄𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘆 𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘂𝗮𝗹𝗹𝘆 𝗻𝗲𝗲𝗱 𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗱𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗯𝗿𝗮𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗼 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗲𝘁𝗲 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗴𝗹𝗼𝗯𝗮𝗹 𝗴𝗶𝗮𝗻𝘁𝘀 𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗜𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗮? Share your thoughts in the comments below! #FastFashionIndia #IndianBusiness #BrandingDebate

I was head of branded content for Salesforce and Microsoft. But one day I realized: Brands don’t land the way people do. After 15 years making content strategies, reviewing performance data, and trying to edit out “content voice” anytime I saw it, this is the single biggest thing I come back to: People are the content strategy. ✨ It was always true, but now more than ever, as more content is made by AI. So I made this framework on exactly how to create a people-generated content (PGC) engine with employees, creators, and customers. A PGC engine is when your brand orchestrates a mix of all three that makes your brand both memorable and credible. Real examples of each content type: 🎤 Employee-generated content: Some of the best creators for your brand report to you right now. But they lack the permission, tools, and strategies to meaningfully create. When I worked at Microsoft, I piloted an employee influencer program to help team members make their own LinkedIn content. It outperformed brand channel benchmarks by 200% and got millions of views. (On average, personal LinkedIn profiles get 8-12x the reach of brand profiles.) 🤳 Industry creators: Basically you partner up with people who already influence your target audience. This accelerates your discovery and sales cycle. The marketers at Later, whom I’ve been working with since February, recently ran a paid media test on boosted posts. Creator CTR was 386% higher than a boosted brand post, and the CPC was 70% cheaper. The right creator is well worth the cost. 🧑💻 Customer voices: Every B2B company has customer stories. But are they formulaic or legit? Instead of the predictable before and afters, let customers create on their own channels and talk honestly about your products, then upcycle into branded content. For Salesforce, Trailblazer communities allow customers to tell their stories their own way. When I worked there, the most predictable edit I’d get on my content was: “Can this have more customers?” I believe humans (not AI) will generate the most efficient and influential content for B2B brands today. Let me know what you think. P.S. I work with companies on all this stuff, from creating custom content strategies to running content workshops for execs and employees with Vincent Pierri. So let me know if you need help :)

Lou Gerstner walked into IBM in 1993 expecting a strategy problem. What he found was worse. Here's what leaders need to learn: Every division had a strategy. Every executive had a vision. Every team was chasing a different goal. Engineering was building for one future. Sales was selling into another. Marketing had its own roadmap entirely. At his first exec meeting, each leader presented different success metrics: Revenue. Market share. Innovation. NPS. Same company, completely different definitions of winning. Gerstner didn’t write a new strategy. He did something more powerful: He mandated one framework for priorities. Same metrics. Same language. Same scorecard. Within 6 months, misalignment became visible. Within a year, IBM started moving as one. I saw the same pattern play out in a Fortune 500 basement. The quarterly review was nearly over when the Head of Ops paused: “I need to be honest. I don’t even know what our top 3 priorities are right now.” Silence. Then heads nodded. The CMO had been focused on brand. Sales thought revenue was the priority. The CTO was deep in infrastructure rebuild. The CFO was chasing cost control. 9 executives. 27 different priorities. 3 overlaps. That’s not a team. That’s a collection of soloists. Strategy isn’t the problem. Alignment is. Everyone knows the strategy. But what are they actually optimizing for this week? I’ve seen it again and again: • Monday: “Retention is everything” • Friday: Sales signs three bad-fit clients to hit quota • Product starts chasing new features • Success never gets the memo 5 days. Alignment gone. So how do you fix it? 1. Make priorities visible weekly Every Monday: top 3 org-wide priorities, posted publicly. No guessing. No side quests. 2. Create explicit handoffs Marketing, sales, product, and success - define the exact criteria for every handoff. Spotify did this. Discovered 40% of handoffs had misaligned expectations. 3. Run weekly alignment checks One question: What are you optimizing for this week? If it doesn’t match the org’s top 3, you catch drift instantly. 4. One source of truth No more 50 dashboards. Microsoft did this with their Customer Success Score. Every division had to contribute to the same North Star. Alignment doesn’t happen by accident. It deteriorates by default. Great companies don’t assume alignment. They build it systematically. That Fortune 500 team? 6 months later, they went from 27 priorities to 3. Revenue grew 18%. Engagement jumped 43% → 71%. All because they stopped guessing. Want more research-backed frameworks like this? Join 11,000+ execs who get our newsletter every week: 👉 https://lnkd.in/en9vxeNk

India’s digital-first fashion brand journey - from Clicks to Bricks India’s homegrown D2C fashion landscape has entered its next chapter in the last decade or so Cava Athleisure recently launched its first offline store in Bengaluru Orion Mall And not just Cava, after years of building strong digital communities, brands like Freakins, Blissclub, Snitch, The Bear House etc are stepping confidently into the offline world, opening physical stores after initial few years of operating digitally 🔶 Why - the shift 🔸Brand-Building & Community Physical stores offer experiential branding, events & community-led engagement including consumers & influencers, something digital can’t fully replicate The store facade & window, be it in a mall or high-street also works as an impactful billboard in the consumers mind amidst the digital clutter - announcing the brand has arrived 🔸Consumer Trust & Tangibility Fashion is tactile. As brands scale, offline stores become powerful trust signals, letting consumers to see, touch, feel & try before buy Also enables brands to do visual product storytelling and store team engaging with consumers in a much better way 🔸Higher AOV & Better Conversions Stores often deliver higher average order values and far stronger conversion rates than digital channels Customers walking in these stores are mostly brand loyalist with real purchase intent, and more often than not asking - naya kya hai? 🔸CAC Optimization With rising acquisition costs online, offline retail becomes a strategic lever to reduce dependence on paid performance marketing While for customers, they get the flexibility to explore amongst the considered set of brands before zeroing down to their final purchase ◼️Opportunities Ahead Omnichannel flywheel: Unified single view of inventory, possibly endless isles + data + loyalty + flexibility of click-collect or buy-return → seamless journeys and a happy customer Experiential retail: Stores doubling as multiple touchpoints from content studios, event spaces to even micro-warehouses ◼️Challenges to Navigate High real-estate rentals & operational costs Supply-chain discipline needed for consistent in-store experience Balancing product assortment and price parity across channels Maintaining brand freshness in an offline setting ◼️The Way Forward The future belongs to digitally-built, omnichannel-scaled brands While online gives speed & reach, offline gives depth & loyalty The most successful D2C labels are those that treat physical stores not as an afterthought or fomo, but as a strategic extension of their brand ecosystem Interesting fact: The D2C brands who started over a decade ago took slightly longer for online to offline shift (~7 years), vis-a-vis within the last decade (~5 years), and the more recent ones much lesser than that Clicks create the brand, Bricks will only compound it. Your thoughts! #Indian #Fashion #Retail #D2C #Online #Brand #Offline #Expansion

Your marketing team is guessing what your sales team already knows. I see it every single week: Marketing creates campaigns. Sales talks to customers. Zero collaboration. Wasted opportunity. 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗹 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗯𝗹𝗲𝗺: - Marketing creates personas (guessing) - Sales hears actual pains (knowing) - Marketing writes messaging (guessing) - Sales handles objections (knowing) - No information sharing - No collaboration - No growth 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗻𝗲𝗰𝘁 𝗰𝗿𝗶𝘀𝗶𝘀: Your marketing team creates content, campaigns, and messaging based on assumptions, marketing research, and industry reports. In contrast, your sales team has actual conversations every single day with prospects who share their real pains, objections, and buying criteria. Yet somehow, these valuable insights never make it back to influence marketing strategy. [𝐖𝐚𝐭𝐜𝐡 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐰𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐜𝐥𝐢𝐦𝐛𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐯𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐨] One person creates the foundation and the other leverages it to reach new heights. Your sales and marketing teams need to function as a single unit. Sales should provide real-world insights and direct customer language, while marketing should amplify and scale these proven messages through channels that reach more people. 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗮𝗹𝗶𝗴𝗻𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗳𝗿𝗮𝗺𝗲𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗸: 1. 𝐂𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐒𝐡𝐚𝐫𝐞𝐝 𝐑𝐞𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲 Not separate worlds: - Weekly sales-marketing sync - Marketing joins sales calls - Sales reviews all content - Customer language documented 2. 𝐁𝐮𝐢𝐥𝐝 𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐨𝐧 𝐆𝐨𝐚𝐥𝐬 Unite the metrics: - Pipeline over MQLs - Revenue over activities - Quality over quantity - Customer success over volume 3. 𝐄𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐬𝐡 𝐅𝐞𝐞𝐝𝐛𝐚𝐜𝐤 Loop Make it systematic: - Sales validates personas - Marketing tests messages - Results shared transparently - Continuous improvement 𝗬𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝘁𝗲𝗮𝗺 𝗮𝗹𝗶𝗴𝗻𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗽𝗹𝗮𝗻: 1. Schedule weekly sales-marketing sync 2. Create a shared customer language doc 3. Have marketing join sales calls 4. Build a unified dashboard Remember: Like those wall climbers, Neither one could make it alone. But together, they're unstoppable. ---- ❤️ 𝐈𝐟 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐬𝐮𝐩𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬. ♻️ 𝐭𝐨 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐧𝐞𝐭𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐤. 🔔 Follow me for more helpful and entertaining videos to improve your go-to-market approach. 🤟

We talk a lot about how brands can connect to women. But here’s where I think the conversation goes wrong: Women are not one group of like-minded consumers. The category of “women” comprises 4 billion people with different preferences, professions, purchasing habits, and personal lives. So how can brands connect with women? Authenticity. I'm talking about the kind of authenticity that comes from truly understanding, representing, and serving the people your brand reaches. Why does this matter? Let's look at the numbers first:  • Women are overseeing $32 trillion in spending globally.  • By 2028, 75% of discretionary spending will be controlled by women. These aren't just statistics—they're a wake-up call for brands trying to connect with women. Brands historically miss the mark when they focus on women as "consumers," rather than as people. Take Dove's work with the CROWN Act, a movement and legislation aimed at prohibiting race-based hair discrimination in workplaces and schools. By bringing attention to how women of color—particularly Black women—have historically been told how to wear their hair at work, Dove drove meaningful change that extended far beyond marketing. The result for Dove (and its parent company Unilever) hasn't just been products sold, but actual legislative change—all because they stood for something that impacts the day-to-day life of their consumers. The key to the consumer paradigm: You cannot effectively serve women if you don't represent them at every level of your organization. Women continue to hold relatively few leadership positions in industries primarily serving women. The fashion and beauty industries, for example, are dominated by male leadership. When brands get it right, it shows. A few examples? FERRAGAMO appointed a female CEO back in 1960—long before it was trending—and that commitment to women in leadership has been woven into their DNA ever since. It’s not a campaign. It’s who they are. Or formula company Bobbie, which doesn’t just have consumers, they have devoted brand ambassadors, families, and loyal subscribers. True representation isn't about optics—it's about women making decisions at all levels—from product development to marketing to the C-suite. Maybe we need to retire the word "consumer" altogether. Because if we're talking about real, authentic connections, shouldn't we instead be focusing on people as human beings. It's no longer about thinking what you “should” create to get them to buy—it's about genuinely making that woman’s life better because you know exactly who she is. And your company’s leadership reflects that. 

When everything is the same, Brand is everything. Let’s play with a thought experiment: In a truly perfect market, branding should not exist. No differentiation. No price control. No customer loyalty. Just one identical product sold by many players at a fixed price. Sounds clean. But also completely detached from reality. Almost like a Black Mirror episode… The Theoretical Paradox: Branding has no place in perfect competition - Products are identical - Buyers have full information - No business has pricing power - Under this model, branding is irrational. Useless. Any marketing effort is a waste of money because buyers already know all products are the same and will pick the cheapest. There is no choice to make. So if branding is economically impossible here… why do we see branded water, branded salt, and branded milk? No market is truly perfect. Ever. Real-life buyers: - Aren’t fully informed - Rely on emotional shortcuts - Don’t always optimise, they satisfice (thanks, Herbert Simon) Even in industries close to perfect competition (B2B), branding thrives by: - Reducing perceived risk (trust) - Offering lifestyle alignment (identity) - Providing a memory shortcut (mental availability) Morton Salt didn’t win by being saltier,  it won by being unforgettable. Liquid Death turned water into rebellion, not hydration. Slack didn’t win on features, it won by branding work as fun, fast, and human. Oatly made oat milk weird, loud, and proudly anti-corporate. Who Gives A Crap made toilet paper feel cheeky, ethical, and worth talking about. Let’s get more real: The Role of Branding in Highly Competitive Markets 1 - Differentiation is a Survival Strategy When features are indistinguishable, innovation is hard to defend, storytelling, emotion and memory step in. Branding manufactures difference where none exists. 2 - Customer Loyalty Beats Race-to-the-Bottom Pricing A loyal customer is less sensitive to small price differences. That’s a margin win. 3 - Perception Drives Premium A brand with trust equity can charge more even in commoditised sectors. Just ask Evian. 4 - Brands Reduce Decision Friction We don’t want to evaluate every choice every time. Brands give us shortcuts and today we need them more than ever… Strategic Moves for Leaders: For CEOs: Compete on brand, not price. Find a purpose customers care about and tell that story consistently. For CMOs: Treat branding as demand creation. Lead gen without memory-building is wasted budget. For CFOs: Brand equity isn’t fluff…it’s a long-term value. Track it like any other asset. So: If you sell in a market where everyone claims the same features, why should a customer pick you? Because when products look the same, the brand becomes the choice. Ask yourself: What are you branding: a commodity or a conviction?

The next $227 billion ecommerce channel isn't a retailer. It's AI platforms. These aren't search platforms or mere GEO / AEO LLMs anymore. They're becoming storefronts. AI platform-driven ecommerce is projected to hit $144.5B by 2029, representing 8.8% of total retail ecommerce. By 2030? $227.3B and 13.2% of the market. 📍 For context: that's larger than the entire US ecommerce market was in 2012. But here's what the ranking table above should make every CPG CMO uncomfortable: Kimberly-Clark scores 94. Henkel scores 43. Nestlé and Procter & Gamble haven't been scored yet, but they're more likely to be in the Top 10. The gap between AI-ready and AI-invisible brands is already opening, and it will be brutally difficult to close once consumer habits calcify around AI-recommended purchases. The brands winning in AI commerce today aren't just spending more. They're doing three things differently: 💡Optimizing product content for AI indexing, not just search algorithms. 💡Treating availability signals as media, because #AI won't recommend what it thinks is out of stock. 💡Pricing with AI recommendation logic in mind, knowing these platforms surface value differently than traditional search. Most CPG brands are still debating whether this channel is real. 23% of Americans bought something via AI last month. Let that sink in. Morgan Stanley calls it. Bain confirms it. eMarketer quantifies it. Sig ranks it. And the chart below shows which #CPG / #FMCG brands are positioned to win, and which are sleepwalking into structural irrelevance. ++ Key Figures ++ - $227.3B in AI-driven ecommerce sales by 2030 (ecommert) - $385B upside scenario by 2030 (Morgan Stanley bull case) - 13.2% of total US retail ecommerce flowing through AI platforms by 2030 - 44% of AI users already use it for product recommendations and comparisons And Grocery/CPG? Morgan Stanley explicitly calls it "the largest agentic unlock over the next five years." Look at the AI Visibility Rankings below. A 51-point gap between rank 1 and rank 9, among the world's most sophisticated consumer goods companies. This isn't a technology gap. It's a strategy gap. Bain&Co frames it perfectly: retailers and brands face three choices: Embrace third-party agents, build your own, or fortify your home-site moat. Here's what I believe separates the winners in AI commerce: 1️⃣ Content is the new shelf placement, but with an LLM twist. If your product data isn't structured for AI ingestion, clean attributes, rich descriptions, and real-time availability signals, you don't exist on the AI shelf. 2️⃣ Availability = recommendability. An AI agent won't suggest what it thinks is out of stock. Your in-stock rate is now a marketing metric. 3️⃣ Own the checkout or lose the customer. As Bain warns: cede the transaction, cede the data, cede the relationship. The brand that doesn't own checkout becomes a fulfillment pipe. #AgenticAI #AgenticCommerce