Understanding the Brand Equity of Nestlé Crunch Bar (B): Data Analysis

Jill  Avery; Gerald  Zaltman

Supplement | HBS Case Collection | January 2019

Understanding the Brand Equity of Nestlé Crunch Bar (B): Data Analysis

Abstract

In early 2018, Nestlé announced the sale of its U.S. candy-making division and a select collection of twenty of its confectionery brands, including the Nestlé Crunch Bar, to Ferrero SpA for $2.8 billion. Under the terms of the Nestlé acquisition, each of the purchased confectionery brands was permitted to use the Nestlé parent brand name for one year after the close of the sale. After that time, the Nestlé Crunch Bar would be rebranded with the Ferrara parent brand (i.e., Ferrara Crunch Bar). As the Nestlé Crunch Bar brand transitioned to its new owners, it was time for some serious brand analysis to assess the brand equity of Nestlé Crunch Bar and plot a course for its future growth. How strong/weak was the brand? What were its sources of brand equity that could be leveraged in brand storytelling? Which types of messages might attract new consumers to the brand and what might work to cause infrequent users to purchase more often? Did the product itself need to be changed? Were there brand extension possibilities? Luckily, an old consumer research study on the Nestlé Crunch Bar conducted by Professor Gerald Zaltman was found on the shelves at Harvard Business School. The study used an innovative market research methodology developed by Professor Zaltman, the Zaltman Metaphor Elicitation Technique (ZMET), which had proven to be useful to brand managers hoping to better assess and understand their brands. The research methodology and raw data from Professor Zaltman’s ZMET study on the Nestlé Crunch Bar are presented in the original case as tools to help students assess and understand the brand equity of the Nestlé Crunch Bar and map its future strategic course.

In this (B) case, the data from the study is analyzed and an executive summary of the results is presented.

Keywords: brand management; Market research; brand positioning; value proposition; consumer products; Fast moving consumer goods; qualitative methods; Zaltman Metaphor Elicitation Technique; ZMET; data analysis; Marketing; Marketing Strategy; Brands and Branding; Consumer Behavior; Marketing Communications; Data and Data Sets; Analysis; Consumer Products Industry; Food and Beverage Industry; Advertising Industry; United States; North America; Italy;

Language: English

Format: Print

21 pages

Purchase

Citation:

Avery, Jill, and Gerald Zaltman. "Understanding the Brand Equity of Nestlé Crunch Bar (B): Data Analysis." Harvard Business School Supplement 519-062, January 2019.

Nike's selection of politically polarizing Colin Kaepernick as the spokesperson for the thirtieth anniversary of its iconic "Just Do It" campaign catapulted the brand into the media spotlight and made it a political flashpoint for consumers across America. Would the choice of Kaepernick positively or negatively affect Nike's business results or just generate a lot of social media chatter? As Nike's management team watched some people burn their sneakers in protest on YouTube and others applaud the company's behavior on Facebook, they wondered whether inserting Nike into the middle of a heated political debate was the right thing to do or the most reckless action Nike's brand stewards had ever taken, putting Nike's $30 billion brand asset at risk? After all, on social media, it was easy to say that one would boycott or buycott a brand due to one's political beliefs, but in the marketplace, other purchase criteria often reigned supreme.

The one day a year when consumers not only tolerate but actually eagerly anticipate ads is during the NFL's Super Bowl. In sharp contrast to their behavior on the other 364 days of the year, consumers watch an average of 89 commercials per Super Bowl game for an average of 46 minutes. Why are consumers willing to spend 3.5x more time watching commercials on the Super Bowl than on any other day of the year? Perhaps because they have come to expect the best, most creative, most engaging storytelling of the year from advertisers. With one out of every three Americans glued to the game, advertisers know they have a captive audience and they go to great lengths to stand out in what is somewhat akin to a battle of the brands. However, at a cost of more than $5 million for a 30-second spot, is Super Bowl advertising worth it? And, which types of Super Bowl stories are more and less likely to "win" on the Super Bowl?

Shiseido was in the midst of a six year corporate turnaround, trying to reverse the effects of decades of under-investment in R&D and marketing which had led to a cycle of declining customer support and brand value. Would the CEO’s VISION 2020 plan, centered on four strategies: 1.) increasing R&D spending from 1.8% to 3% of sales, 2.) investing an incremental ¥120 billion in brand-building marketing, 3.) moving to a “think global-act local” matrixed brand management structure, and 4.) rethinking brand portfolio strategy, be enough to achieve aggressive 8% per year sales goals while simultaneously increasing the company’s operating margin from 8% to 10% in the highly competitive and slow growing beauty industry?

Faculty & Research

Understanding the Brand Equity of Nestlé Crunch Bar (B): Data Analysis

Abstract

Citation:

About the Authors

More from these Authors