Madhukar Sabnavis: Spot the difference

Is electoral behaviour following consumer market behaviour

Traditionally, West Bengal and Kerala have always behaved very differently from the rest of India.

They continue to buy Sunlight while the rest of the country has moved to Surf and Rin; they continue to patronise ICI/Berger Paints "" the British paint giants "" while the rest of the country uses Asian Paints and Goodlass Nerolac; West Bengal continues to be loyal to Thin Arrowroot and Kerala to Cuticura powder; West Bengal continued to buy loose tea and Kerala remained dedicated to Kanan Devan and AV Thomas tea while the rest of the country moved to other packaged brands in the 1990s.

Most consumer marketers have always treated these two states as unique. Incidentally, these two markets have, for decades, been voting for the Left parties or their alliances even as the Cold War broke down and the Left turned Right in the rest of the world.

The recent elections, perhaps, show that the electoral market is now reflecting consumer market behaviour in many ways. Consider the following:

a. Regionalisation of markets: In many consumer markets, national brands are being attacked and threatened by local players who are suddenly connecting better with the local consumers and delivering better value by just being closer to the consumer.

Cavin Care and the Cholayal Group in personal products in the south; Ghadi detergent in the laundry business in the northern markets and a host of local tea packers across the country are just a few examples of such regionalisation.

The same seems to have happened in the electoral market. Regional players like the Samajwadi Party, BSP, RJD, TRS, DMK and AIADMK are representative of this phenomenon. Is this a sign of the disappearance of national brands for both the political and consumer markets?

b. Commoditisation of brands: We are seeing this happen in many markets. Consumers are beginning to see little difference between brands and this has actually helped in the growth of regional brands, which are seen to deliver better value to locals, as national brands tend to be very similar and not offering any additional advantages. The same, perhaps, has happened in the electoral markets.

While political analysts and psephologists have looked at the change as either anti-incumbency or a vote for secular forces, it could just perhaps be a reflection of consumers' (here voters') inability to differentiate.

In such cases, consumers tend to buy (or voters vote for) a brand that catches their fancy at that particular moment of brand purchase (or moment of voting). Interestingly, as the Common Minimum Programme of the UPA has come out, it seems to be a copy or a differently worded statement from that of the NDA!

c. Reducing involvement in category: This is quite evident. As markets evolve and consumers get to battle with a lot of more complicated issues in their lives, they tend to move a lot of "routine" activities into the low involvement category where purchases are more by rote rather than considered behaviour.

Involvement in politics is also gradually getting low priority. Not surprisingly, voter turn out this election was much lower at about 50 per cent from the mid 50s in 1991/96 and the early 60s in 1998/99.

d. Need for brand ambassadors to be refreshed: Brand ambassadors outlive their time and the critical task for a brand is to bring in new ambassadors at the right time. Lux has successfully done that over decades; Boost has successfully moved from Kapil Dev to Sachin Tendulkar and now to Virender Sehwag. With 60 per cent of the voters under 40 and 40 per cent under 25, clearly the need of the hour was younger brand ambassadors.

The Congress with its Rahul Gandhi, Sachin Pilot and Jyotiraditya Scindia and their likes benefited more. The BJP with its old, experienced faces, perhaps, looked a jaded, has-been brand.

Interestingly, much of the younger BJP brigade "" candidates like Pramod Mahajan and Sushma Swaraj "" stayed away from contesting. Younger candidates from other parties "" Akhilesh Yadav of the SP, Omar Abdullah of the NC "" too won. Given the commoditisation of the category and the low involvement, new brand ambassadors brought excitement to the category and attracted votes from those who voted.

e. Star power helps: Marketing theory does postulate that in low involvement, commodity category, salience helps "" and news and new faces add to salience.

The growth of celebrity advertising in the consumer market is the testimony of the power of stars and their ability to get brand salience. And the execution becomes the message.

Coke jumped onto the bandwagon of celebrities to compete with Pepsi; Santro got built by using a star and LG/Samsung have both used a troop of Indian cricket players. The parties that used stars from across fields benefited.

So stars with political track records (Vinod Khanna, Raj Babbar, Sunil Dutt) won but so did political greenhorns with glamour and fame power as diverse as Navjot Singh Sidhu, Dharmendra, Govinda and Jaya Prada. Some matched with constituency profiles and some just rode their star power and won.

f. Convergence of urban and rural India: Marketers are beginning to see that these markets are no longer distinct and different. The expansion of media and movement of people across the geographies is making the groups more similar. The physical needs of the markets could be different given their environment and their economic status, but their emotional needs are very similar.

Not surprisingly, their voting patterns do not reflect any differences. The BJP alliance lost 6:1 in Delhi, 5:1 in Mumbai, 3:0 in Chennai and 2:0 in Hyderabad as they got defeated in the up-country markets.

g. Brand extensions work: It is called dynasty in politics and brand extensions in consumer markets. Both operate from leveraging past equity built by pedigree and consumers tend to buy into it. Candidates with pedigree helped the mother brand by winning fairly consistently.

What does this augur for the future? There are many lessons for the Election Commission and political parties to learn from these parallels.

1. There is a clear need to bring back interest and involvement in the category. This is clearly the responsibility of the Commission if it is to ensure that Parliament is truly representative of the market's voice. There is a clear need for greater penetration (higher turnout) and greater involvement of the voters in their decision making.

2. National political parties need to find clearer positioning in today's market. New ways to segment the market beyond religion and caste need to be found. And brand offers made that are distinctive and compelling to involve the voter more in the process. Hindutva vs secularism; progress for the poor and stability are tired platforms.

3. Recognition that local issues are here to stay. As markets evolve, brands "" consumer and political "" need to recognise that, in the future, consumers will be more concerned about delivery of value in their immediate environment. This, perhaps, means that coalition politics is here to stay (just as the best national marketers realise that regional mixes are the need for the future) Something worth thinking about.

madhukar.sabnavis@ogilvy.com

(The writer is Country Manager "" Discovery, Ogilvy and Mather India. The views expressed are personal)