In sum, there were three critical where-to-play choices for P&G at the corporate level:
⢠Grow in and from the core businesses, focusing on core consumer segments, channels, customers, geographies, brands, and product technologies.
⢠Extend leadership in laundry and home care, and build to market leadership in the more demographically advantaged and structurally attractive beauty and personal- care categories.
⢠Expand to leadership in demographically advantaged emerging markets, prioritizing markets by their strategic importance to P&G.
Related Quotes
With ten countries representing 85 percent of profits, P&G had to focus on winning in those countries. We asked where consumers expected P&G brands and products to be sold, that is, mass merchandisers and discounters, drugstores, and grocery stores. Core became a theme in innovation as well. P&G scientists determined the core technologies that were important across the businesses and focused on those technologies above all others. We wanted to shift from a pure invention mind-set to one of strategic innovation; the goal was innovation that drove the core. Core consumers were a theme too; we pushed businesses to focus on the consumer who matters most, targeting the most attractive consumer segments. Core was the first and most fundamental where-to-play choiceâto focus on core brands, geographies, channels, technologies, and consumers as a platform for growth.
To be successful, how-to-win choices should be suited to the specific context of the firm in question and highly difficult for competitors to copy. P&Gâs competitive advantages are its ability to understand its core consumers and to create differentiated brands. It wins by relentlessly building its brands and through innovative product technology. It leverages global scale and strong partnerships with suppliers and channel customers to deliver strong retail distribution and consumer value in its chosen markets. If P&G played to its strengths and invested in them, it could sustain competitive advantage through a unique go-to-market model.
CHAPTER THREE: Where to Play
âLaundry care, feminine care, and fine fragrances had all been written off as unwinnable categories, before P&G found a way to play to its strengths in only the most attractive segments. In each case, choosing where to play explicitly involved choosing where not to play as well, all within an overall industry structure.
It is tempting to believe that strategy in general, and where-to-play and how-to-win choices in particular, are needed only for outward-facing functionsâthose folks who interact with external consumers and competitors. But every line of business and function
should have a strategyâone that aligns with the strategy of the company overall and decides where to play and how to win specifically for its context. At P&G, corporate functions are all tasked with crafting their own strategies in this way. Joan Lewis, global consumer market knowledge officer, explains: âWhere to play and how to win has been a very important framework for us. Organizations are often good at one or the other without realizing that theyâre two different sets of decisions. At one point, we werenât as disciplined about our where-to-play choices. It was everywhere anybody needed consumer insight or anywhere we thought it could add value. Just like a business dilutes its focus and in turn its growth potential when you try to do too many things at a time or do things that are further away from your core strengths, we were relatively diluted in the nature of the impact we could have.
As discussed earlier, the five capabilities core to P&Gâs where-to-play and how-to-win choices are consumer understanding, brand building, innovation, go-to-market ability, and global scale. The notion of bringing these capabilities to bear on the Gillette business was top of mind. From the first meeting post-acquisition, Bergh set out to incorporate P&Gâs strategy framework into the Gillette DNA, working to articulate Gilletteâs choice cascade.
Once the where-to-play and how-to-win choices were clear, the team could turn its attention to the capabilities required to deliver on those choices.