Pampers: P&Gâs Single Most Important Strategic Lesson â A.G. Lafley
After another six market tests, further refinements in design and engineering, and the development of an entirely new manufacturing process, P&G finally had a successâthis time at $0.06 a diaper.
The company launched the new diaper as Pampers. Throughout the rest of the 1960s and the 1970s, Pampers built significant unit volume and dollar sales by converting cloth- diaper users to disposables users. P&G effectively created a new category and easily won a leading share in it. Looking back, the Pampers story is a great example of strategic insight and vision. A better product fulfilled an unmet consumer need, delivered a better user experience, and created better total consumer value. In Peter Druckerâs terms, Pampers
disposable baby diapers âcreated customersâ and served them better than competitors did. By the mid-1970s, Pampers had achieved a 75 percent share in the United States and had been expanded to about seventy-five countries worldwide.
Imagine what Pampers could have become, then, had P&G chosen a different strategy in 1976. Thatâs when it introduced a second diaper brand, Luvs, which featured an hourglass- shaped pad with elastic gathers. Luvs delivered superior fit, absorbency, and comfort for about a 30 percent price premium to Pampers. The decision to launch Luvs with a better product might have been the most unfortunate strategic miscalculation in P&G history. So why did P&G introduce a new brand rather than improving or extending the existing brand? First, company practice at the time dictated a multibrand strategyâa new brand for every new product in each categoryâand the approach seemed to be working well in laundry detergents and several other categories. Second, the new design would drive higher operating costs and required considerable investment in manufacturing capital;
projections suggested that a 20 percent retail price premium would be needed to hold margins, and the company worried that current users would reject a premium-priced line of Pampers. So, Pampers stayed the same and the advanced design was introduced at the premium price as Luvs.
Unfortunately, the company had miscalculated. While consumers virtually always say they wonât buy (or even try) an improved product if it is sold at a higher price, those same consumers often change their minds when the product and usage experience are clearly better and the price premium still represents value.