Undoubtedly childhood obesity is a massive issue and one that should concern policy makers, brand owners and parents. However there is a distinct danger that an over simplistic approach to the problem may result in the wrong forms of behavioural change.

A recent survey by ‘Lacors’ (the local government regulatory body) has shown that nurseries are giving children too ‘much’ fruit and vegetables, often as a result of the pressures being placed by over anxious parents. In light of the constant media coverage on high fat/sugar/salt food, some parents are putting their young children on strict diets of low fat and low calorie foods. This is of course extremely dangerous for the well being of the child as their core development and growth needs necessitates the inclusion of fat and sugar as essential parts of their diets. The low calorie, high fibre diets being adopted by adults are simply unsuitable for children under the age of 5.

In a similar vein the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has recently rejected claims that a recent Coco Pops advert ‘Ever Thought of Coco Pops after school?’ was irresponsible. Those groups that lodged the complaints believed that it would encourage children to eat excessive amounts of sugary cereal during the day. As any parent knows however, after school, children frequently arrive home tired, in a very grumpy mood and in much need of a sugar boost until their evening meal is ready for them. In these situations children have typically been given sweet snacks such as biscuits & cake bars, and in this context, I believe that the potential provision of a bowl of Coco Pops served with ‘full fat’ milk would be a welcome and legitimate addition to the after school snacking repertoire. 

It is crucial that parents are made aware of the issues of healthy lifestyles however the current information that parents receive often leads them to conclude that some foods are bad and some are good. There is no such thing as bad food; there are however bad ‘diets’ and we need to ensure that this message is more clearly conveyed. If we do not, we risk the under-nourishment of  toddlers and a misguided displacement of alternative food consumption of older children.

The levees have finally broken. After over a year spent dipping its toe in the water with regional trials in the North and South-East, M&S is starting to sell branded grocery products at all of its stores in the UK.

Normally branding consultants might be tearing their hair out at this news: why are they undermining a point of difference?

But M&S is actually doing the right thing here. The only brands being introduced are in what it calls brand-led categories, e.g., Pantene, Coca Cola, Gordon’s, Marmite, Persil, Kit Kat, Kellogg’s and Heinz. In other words, however hard M&S might try to fabricate a localised monopoly within its stores, these are the kind of destination brands which even regular M&S shoppers would be going elsewhere to pick up. Interestingly, M&S (or rather John Dixon, their Executive Director of Food) divides the brands it’s introducing into two categories:

1. ‘Products that we could simply never compete with, like Marmite and Kit Kat,’ i.e. brands like Guinness which are very closely tied to their product format/flavour/some other intrinsic. While this quality is normally a hindrance to the brands in question because consumers don’t give them ‘permission’ to innovate away from their core, in this case, it’s a quality that means any mimic M&S produce won’t ever be seen as comparable by consumers.

2. ‘Other areas where, whilst we have a great M&S equivalent, the leading brand dominates the market,’ i.e. brands which embody their category and offer the generic, mass-market proposition, e.g. Gordon’s ‘the G in G&T’ and Heinz ‘Heinz Meanz Beanz.’ These are the kind of brands who truly can claim market leader status; all of the marketing muscle they can heft over their central ground makes them basically impossible to unseat. So, as an aside, being selected by M&S as one of these brands is a real accolade, and it’s interesting to think that being chosen and endorsed by M&S may become something brands fight for. And if this is the start of a flood of brands to M&S’s shelves, it may be something that even non-market leading brands may fight for if they believe they have a motivating proposition against the core M&S range in their category.

In any case because the brands being introduced at this stage will only cover 7% of its product range and because they’re the kind of brands M&S simply can’t compete with, I think it’s a smart move. Being brand-free has been a distinct point of difference for M&S, but because that has been to the exclusion of these destination brands, that differentiation has been the wrong kind; it’s been differentiation for its own sake. It’s left consumers frustrated that they either have to put up with a compromised, own-brand alternative they don’t want, or make a second trip to a rival store to pick up what they do want. It’s why The M&S Principle may be a useful short-hand for an important point about differentiation: what matters is owning a compelling position in consumers’ minds. So when it comes to differentiation, motivate, don’t aggravate.

Today my eye fell on an online petition about bringing back Kellogg’s Corn Pops cereal to UK supermarket shelves. As a Corn Pops aficionado, I started to wonder about the fate of this cereal overseas. I realised that, while this product disappeared over here a few years ago, Kellogg’s successfully re-launched Corn Pops in Mexico a few months ago with a change of image, packaging and tone of voice.

The overall purpose of the re-launch has been to grow the cereal consumption amongst teenagers in Mexico. Its population is the eleventh largest in the world, and almost twice as big as that of the UK. A third of its population is under 16 years old and it is the country with third highest cereal consumption per capita in the world, after Australia and USA. This emphasises the size of the business opportunity.

The new Corn Pops product has also come with pop characters and avatars that are meant to engage closely with teenagers. Although it is too early to say anything about sales improvements, the revitalisation of this product has triggered a lot of buzz around the brand on the other side of the Atlantic. There are several forums and websites with very enthusiastic comments about the brand from both target consumers and marketers.

It seems that a key success factor has been Kellogg’s strategy based on text speak – speaking in the same language that youngsters use when sending text messages through mobile phones and online chat.

Text speak is used across Corn Pops’ communications, virtual community and packaging as can be seen in these pictures.

As I left Latin America before the text messaging boom, I have to admit I don’t fully understand what Corn Pops is saying on its new Mexican packages and online community. However I have to say that this is a very good example of brand revitalisation. I reckon that Kellogg’s with this strategy would not only see its sales figures soar within its target market but it would no longer have to remove this product from retail shelves again.

Should Kellogg’s share its practices from the other side of the Atlantic, then there is hope for the UK online petitioner.

Brand revitalisation has always been at heart of the Value Engineers because we know what it takes to build a successful brand over time. For more than 20 years we have been committed to helping brands – large, small, global and national – to regain their profitability, purpose and momentum, and we have identified the 8 most successful strategies for revitalising brands. If you would like to find out more about our brand revitalising strategies, why don’t you get in touch with us?