Cool, Fashion, Menswear, Women’s Office wear and Branding

The phenomenon of cool fascinates me. I have seen people in their conversations often spit out the word ‘cool’ to describe something that seems to enjoy  high resonance and liking. The word’s usage is preceded by anything that eludes categorisation. It appears to be free from the floating currency of language as if everybody knows it and understands it. Anything like a shot on the cricket ground or a clothing ensemble on someone or an act on a street or a statement or décor of a room or hair cut or a brand is pronounced as cool. The meaning it contains is instantly decoded and recognised among members of a group but it appears to be a puzzle for the others. In a study I sought to explore and understand this cool phenomenon (Leveraging ‘Cool’ for Branding: Is It Paradoxical Juxtaposition or Radicalism?). As the title of the study suggests, cool was found to be paradoxical juxtaposition.

The culture which stands in bi-polar opposition of nature is created. It is a kind of lens through which the phenomenal world is seen. It helps people make sense. The beauty of culture is that it doesn’t operate at conscious level, rather, its presence is sensed upon moving into a different culture, and you say ‘oh god why do they do this, it is not like this’. This is as simple as- do you make a drink with water and ice or only ice. Body weight and its attractiveness are purely culturally defined. Sex is nature but gender is culturally constructed. Two important principles that help us understand the world are categories (male/female, work/leisure, good/ bad, ruler/ruled, dark/fair, cooked/raw) and principles (concept governing classification e.g. raw and cooked is about ready to eat or male/ female is strength and role, upper and lower class is about status or refinement (McCraken, 1986), Lord Krishna in The Bhagwat Gita also mentions  categories or binaries (pleasure/pain, love/hate, happiness/distress). These divisions or categories and underlying idea are crucial to understanding and negotiating the phenomenal world. This is possible only when categories are perceived through lens of value or importance (fairness is good because of the belief  that  it confers advantage; vegetarianism is good because of the belief that  killing is not good).

The intersection between categories and values provide blueprint for action. It is here that stories, myths and narratives become instructional. Accordingly members make choices to side with one cultural category or the other. Movies and stories are mostly developed around categories like good/evil, innocent/corrupt. These categories draw people to take clear sides depending upon interplay between overarching collective framework and an individual’s autonomy. We found cool does not radiate from conforming and being on either side of these binaries. On the contrary, it is sparked when binaries are juxtaposed.

Sometime back I came across two pieces one about menswear at Milan Fashion Week and regular office wear for women (Manish Mishra, Mint Jan 20, Feb 5, 2024). The dressing is implicitly governed by codes for men/women, office/sports/ morning/evening, classic/modern. So at Florence the designers showcased blending or re-contextualising code in menswear category: juxtaposing classic with playful touches. Here Prada and Simmons added as dash of colour to office wear, Dhruv Kapoor intersected sportswear with office wear and what characterised the show as sexiness in what otherwise has been masculinity in what men wear.

The other setting is dressing for office for women. Office dressing typically conjures images of  a uniform which robs one off individuality, identity and uniqueness. Here binaries at play are uniform versus uniqueness. The “cool” strikes when the categories are skilfully juxtaposed. The prescription reported is that well fitted could be crossed with identity expressive colour or pattern or accessory. An office is a playground of masculinity/feminity, hard/soft side, sameness/difference, formal/informal. The idea behind uniform is about transformation of differences into sameness for efficiency and productivity gains. The idea of ‘me’ militates against ‘us’. It is here that cool is sparked when individuality is expressed as a subtle expression through textures, watch, socks, belt or scarf; not as sign of rebellion but reconciliation.

Brands can learn a great deal if their name is to be prefixed with Cool.

Which brand is cool to you?

Cutter, Tailor, Luxury and Simply High Price Products

“I’m not a tailor; I’m a cutter” 

Leonard Burling (Mark Raylance) takes offence upon being called a tailor. He is the owner of the  tailor’s shop in Chicago in the movie ‘The Outfit’.

The movie begins with a voice in the background and somebody entering into what looks like a tailor’s shop:

To the naked eye, a suit appears to consist of two parts’

A jacket and trousers

But those two seemingly solid parts are composed of four different parts

Cotton, silk, mohair and wool

And these four fabrics are cut into 38 separate pieces

The process of sizing, forming, conjoining those pieces requires no fewer than 228 steps

So the first step is measurement

But measurement doesn’t mean, uh, just reacting to your tape, 

You cannot make something good until you understand who you’re making it for.

All clothing says something,

I’ve bad gentlemen walk into my shop and boast, ‘Oh, I don’t care about what I wear.’

And assuming that’s true, doesn’t that say something too?

So, who is your customer? And what are you trying to say about him? 

What about him can you observe?

Leornard, is he timid, hunched over like a midday clock?

Or does he stand with confidence at 6.00 and 12.00?

Is this a man of springtime pastel, clamouring to be noticed?

Or is he a man of gray and brown blending into the hurried crowd?

Is this a man comfortable in his station?

Or does he pine for  grander things? And who would this man like to be? And who is underneath?

Luxury’s association with high price or sometimes exclusionary price is historical. This is rooted in rarity. At the surface level this rarity comes from rare materials like leather (Louis Vuitton) or stones (Tiffany) or innovation (Rolex or Omega) or idea (Chanel) or product (Burberry) or craft (Cartier). 

In the emerging markets like China or India luxury is most likely to be equated with price. The price is the most obvious sign of luxury. But mind, it is only a sign not the substance of luxury. 

But merely being able to buy a luxury brand is different from enjoying  luxury. Being able to buy tells more about your station on the economic or wealth spectrum. It is a declaration of arrival. As more and more people arrive, the value of price is robbed of its meaning and thereby significance. 

A piece of expensive jewel is merely a declaration about eligibility but is devoid of internal meaning. The same could be true for someone who drapes herself in a Chanel Black dress. It is just a piece of expensive clothing and nothing more. This leads to the question what is a customer  seeking. What is the intent? 

An expensive jacket is not the same as ‘the expensive jacket’. The protagonist in the movie Outfit, upon his arrival is seen to do a couple of things: brushes his table, oils the scissor, uses the ruler and pencil, intently marks on manila paper like an engineer,  rolls tailor chalk, develops a complex web of angular and circular lines, and  cuts the fabric with surgical precision. The voiceover informs the audience about his knowledge not only about clothes, cutting and conjoining but insight about potential customer: ‘who this man would like to be and who is underneath’. The visuals in the background show the process how cloth comes alive in dwelling appropriate for the dweller. 

The outer shell of a bespoke suit hides wizardry and craft mastered only by a few. It is this elevation of cutting and conjoining which operates in the realm of craft not art that render a piece of clothing luxury. The process is elaborate and painstaking: fusing of horse hair canvass to produce firm and crisp lapels, darts to create sharpness, basting stitches, placing pockets and button positioning. A lot of it is hard work. The most important here is cutting, sewing is for lesser mortals. It is a joint project between tailor and customer. The knowledge is the key: the fabrics, construction, shapes, purpose and terminology.

An absence of nuanced understanding can render an expensive piece of luxury, a means of signaling, a symbol devoid of essence. What one appears to others can be source of satisfaction. This may be more in societies or economies where wealth is being discovered. The orientation is towards money and spending it on expensive things.  True luxury is about taste. It is a nuanced ability to discriminate, implying who you are beyond being rich. Luxury is creating a story that people want to take refuge into to protect themselves from the psycho-social-cultural frictions and contradictions. So wearing a tartan check is different from tartan called Burberry. A trinity ring is a trinity ring but when it is a Cartier it is in a story.  A watch is a watch but a Rolex is a celebration achievement. 

What your brand stands for besides a good product is the question to find an answer for. Rarity is fine but rarity of what? 

So Leonard Burling says I am not a tailor who hems and fixes buttons ; his art is cutting , a craft which is rare. The question is: do people have taste for craft? 

If not, educate potential customers and then market luxury. Wade away from shallow waters ; anchors can only be lowered in deep waters. Isn’t it?

Red Bindi, Nalli, Protests and Brand Communication

The red dot or bindi became the cause of a storm of sorts on social media for the well- respected brand of South India, Nalli. Its ad exhibited celebratory moments in which women models donned traditional jewelry and attire. The focus of the camera rendered jewelry and outfit prominent. The facial expressions of the ladies showed happiness and joy. Everything appeared normal like any other piece of communication. The intent was to render clothing and other elements of celebratory ensemble as means to happiness. The ad appeared during the onset of the festival season starting with Navratri and Puja. The ad however left the foreheads of the women blank. This blank forehead drew attention of some people and unleashed an uproar on social media.

The blank or unmarked foreheads left the brand facing a major controversy. Many people were of the opinion that it was nothing short of violation of sense and sensibilities. However, for others, the absence of a bindi might have gone unnoticed. The interpretation of forehead without bindi explains that people look at reality in different ways and in very personal ways. The meaning received does not entirely rest in the hands of sender. The communication is all about meeting and congruence of minds. A mismatch between the two could cause anything from a minor misinterpretation to a major sense of outrage especially when it is perceived to violate norms and values. The blank forehead minus bindi of women in the ad exposed how vulnerable brands tend to be. The social media went abuzz with posts and reposts voicing sentiments ranging from minor indignation to outrage.

Is bindi  simply a red dot? The answer to this question is not as simple as it appears to be. Physically, yes, it is, in the same way that a car or cow is a car or a cow. The materiality of objects is only one layer of reality which operates in sensory realm. But this is not all. The layers invisible to eyes that envelop them render them symbolic. This transfers the site of meaning to the receiver’s end. Accordingly, objects acquire non- objective meanings that are culturally conditioned. The abstract ideas or shared meanings extend their boundaries to intersect with socio-cultural spaces. Bindi is an innocent material object nothing more than a round dot. It is believed to enhance the aesthetic appeal of a woman.  But the hoopla that ensued proves something else. A forehead with missing bindi has probably less to do with diminished attractiveness.  It is something else.

That is, the meaning conveyed by foreheads in a celebratory setting of women in the commercial meant something deeper which to some groups meant violation. But then the question is, violation of what?  At the root of all this was on the one hand the essential expected presence of bindi (not mandated by law but by norms or customs) and perceived undesirable transformation of meaning due to absence of bindi. What does an innocent decorative dot on woman’s forehand imply?

In a physical or material sense a bindi is nothing more than a red dot with differing circumference, but it is imbued with deeper meanings:

Forehead:  Considering foreground and background it is situated on the forehead. Anatomically it is the highest part of human body. This position is religiously and culturally also the site of other meanings including honor, third eye, enlightenment, vision, concentration and expression.

Red color: The color red has the highest wavelength hence attraction and visibility. Besides it conveys passion, love, energy, danger and sacrifice. Religion adds another layer of meaning to red making is sacred by its links with goddesses Durga and Lakshmi. Red finds place in ritualic practices including weddings, auspicious occasions, celebrations, henna ceremony, vermilion, swastika and thread around wrist.

Dot or bindi: The bindi has something to do with ‘bindu’ or point. The dot does not exist in a vacuum ; it belongs to fields including language, grammar, mathematics, art and religion. At the deeper level, dot’s meaning shifts from mundane to sacred whereby it is layered with connotations like full circle of life, liberation from beginning and end, eternity, singularity, void, transcendence, lord Shiva and Shakti, creation, convergence, meditation and enlightenment.  

In mathematics or arts, the position of a dot can change meaning in a very radical way. The bindiless foreheads of models in the ad altered the sense profoundly that some groups felt outraged. It tantamounted to violation of something sacred. But what was violated?

Viewed from the angle of culture the picture signified something obnoxious. If bindi is not simply an object of adornment rather is implicated with socio-cultural-religious significance, the meaning conveyed could be hurtful to sensibilities of some people. Using binaries and contrasts, the women without bindi signify a status devoid of what is valued, cherished and honored: married v unmarried/ window; goddess v goddess less; blessed v unblessed; celebration v mourning, unity v disunity; shakti v no shakti; fertility v infertility and complete v incomplete. Viewed from religious angle, bindi is an integral part of women’s identity in Hindu faith. Absence of bindi also subtly inches the protagonists closer to non-Hindu identity. The matter assumes bigger proportion in the context of beginning of Hindu festivals. This could be insignificant for some but it may be unacceptable to those who hold a purist view.

Sociologically, is it really important that women should wear signs to represent their status? Does conformance to prescriptive or proscriptive norm constitute infringement of personal liberty? But from marketing or brand communication perspective, is conformance to socio cultural norms essential?

Sound, Sensory Marketing, Power, control and EVs

Sounds fall on ears but they don’t remain there. They move upwards in mind in search of meaning. It is a sense making process. Sounds and their connections with thoughts/concepts are forged in early childhood. Through the process of socialization sounds are linked with concepts. The sound ‘ma’ is linked with ‘mommy’ and ‘no’ is memorized as ‘rejection’ and ‘ta-ta’ is related to bye. The process goes on in our repertoire of sounds and their corresponding thought makes up language. Sounds are rarely neutral. They never fall silently and fade away without ripples in our consciousness. Sounds drop in ears but stir ripples in brain for translation and meaning.

Sounds operate through vibrations of air. Imagine a soundless world. A major sense that alerts to dangers is gone as will be attraction toward something pleasant. Sounds act as source of information for receiver and sender. People find it difficult to feel fullness of Diwali without crackers. The same goes for celebrations which are felt sterile without sounds like decibel music and booms of crackers during marriages. It seems everything has a sound that is built into its identity which act as an identifier as well as signifier of  psycho-socio-cultural meaning. 

Sounds are implicated in meanings. Consider a sound like roar of a lion, it draws it meaning from jungle and hence signifies top station and power and hence carries psychological gravity that positions others as meek and is implicated in the cultural narrative of kingdoms, battles and victories. Take the sound of an electric guitar and sitar and discover the knowledge centers in your brain that start firing. These two sounds create bipolar perceptions including orthodox- contemporary, young-old, entertainment-prayer and culture-counterculture. Imagine how a joke would lose its punch minus the accompanying sound of laughter; horror in a sequence of Omen or Exorcist without background score would lose its punch. The sound creates a multiplier effect.   

Consider the following brands/ products for integration of sounds in their identity (audio identity):

• Crackle- those crackling sounds

• Kitkat- wafer finger breaking 

• Potato chips/ recall Bingo ad

• Harley Davidson 

• Enfield’ ‘phat-phat-phat’

• Intel- ‘bong’  

• Britannia-‘Ting Ting Tiding’

• Ferrari- revving engine sound

The connection of sound with emotions/ nostalgia/thinking is established. What is likely happen to if sound is removed from a product that essentialized its identity? For some it may create a sense of deprivation even when functionally it is enhanced. There are things that are known by their audio signature, especially in gadgets and automobiles. The noise production is byproduct of working parts but often it assumes equal or greater significance in its psycho-social interpretation. Noiselessness of cars or machines indicates engineering excellence but it can in equal measure may rob these of punch, thrill, energy, power or all that is considered masculine. 

Two trends are perceptible. There are people who throng to modification workshops to change their mufflers to become amplifiers. This is especially true for mobike riders. It is likely that they seek thundering/ roaring sound as a compensatory device to establish mental extension by sound amplification.  Socially it is aimed at getting the others to submit into compliance. Psychologically, the embedded energy gives boost to the self of man on the wheel creating a sense of power thrill of kill in a jungle. Sound also acts a ‘call out’ in the noisy and crowded world of anomie and identitylessness. It  serves as a bullet to shatter through the glass of indifference and ignorance to grab attention. Further, shock wave and boom or bang or blast of firing a gun is as much a pleasure to hear as to see the kill. The replication of these sounds by modified silencers are nothing less than a preventive warning ‘don’t mess around’. 

Now what do you do with vehicles where engines don’t rev, pistons don’t move, exhausts don’t smoke, grills don’t heat, crankshafts don’t rotate and there’s no combustion (literally). Where’s all that fury gone? The motors have silenced the vehicle. The EV is a miracle, probably God’s grace to protect planet from toxic and glacier melting gases. The diffusion of a new product (Rogers) depends upon five factors: relative advantage, complexity, trialability, observability and compatibility. The EVs run in difficulty with compatibility issues, especially on the psychological plane. With rev and thunder gone the perception of thrill, excitement and power may take the kick out of drive which may not be adequately compensated by the value of eco-consistency. The trade off is real and question is which segment sides with what. The pull of efficiency (relative advantage) can draw the value seekers but the conceptual inconsistency for the experiencers may take the punch out of driving of an EV. Just like green crackers are not the same as conventional firecrackers with all of their toxic emissions, EVs for some may not be authentic cars. 

So, some of the EV manufacturers are seeking to compensate the natural silence with artificially engineered sounds. But the question is would the artificial sounds adequately compensate for the vanishing effect of your presence and extended self- view? 

Coffee, Cup, Marketing, Competing Narratives of Ego and Soul

This morning I received a video from my friend Prof JK Mitra titled ‘God’s Coffee’.The following is the transcription of the same:

A group of alumni, highly established in their careers, got together to visit their old university professor.

Conversation soon turned into complaints about stress in work and life.

Offering his guests coffee, the professor went to the kitchen and returned with a large pot of coffee and an assortment of cups.

Porcelain, plastic, glass, crystal, some plain looking, some expensive, some exquisite

Telling them to help themselves to coffee

When all the students had a cup of coffee in hand, the professor said:

“If you noticed, all the nice looking expensive cups were taken up, leaving the plain and cheap ones. While it is normal for you to want only the best for yourselves, that is the source of your problems and stress.

Be assured that the cup itself adds no quality to the coffee. In most cases it is just more expensive and in some cases even hides what we drink.

What all of you really wanted was coffee not the cup. But you consciously went for the best cups…And then you began eyeing each other’s cups.

“Now consider this, he continued. Life is the coffee. The jobs, money and position in society are the cups.”

I see this story sitting at an intersection of competing narratives,

They are just tools to hold and contain life, and the type of cup we have does not define, nor change the quality of life we live.

Sometimes, by concentrating only on the cup, we fail to enjoy the coffee God has provided us.

God brews the coffee, not the cups…Enjoy your coffee.

The happiest people don’t have the best of everything.

Live simply, live generously, care deeply, and speak kindly

And leave the rest to God.

This, it seems to me, is sitting at an intersection of two competing narratives: that of capital, market and consumer on one hand and  happiness, joy and  inner self on the other. It is about contestation between two ideas, the one propagated by the marketing forces and the other that belongs to religion and spirituality. The two opposite forces are in the form of:

• Image and substance
• Container and content
• Letter and envelope
• Use value and exchange value
• Journey and destination
• Body and soul

The resolution of the dialectic between coffee and cup is not as simple as it appears. The choice here rests on an intersection of world view and self- view.

World view: World view shapes the perception of reality including personal, social, physical reality and attends to deeper questions like what is life and where we are headed. This is determined by beliefs and assumption of an individual. Essentially thoughts are the bedrock on which our world view is constructed.  In the Buddhist tradition it is observed that:  We are what we think and with thoughts we make our world (Byrom 1976). In Critique of Pure Reason Kant seems to use the term ‘Weltanschauung’ in this context. The view of reality is not direct, rather it is mediated by world view and hence makes it subjective. It acts like a lens through which reality is viewed which colors the perception of what we see. But how does our world view get formed? It is through cultural imprints, through stories, rituals, songs, and interactions. World view is not entirely about bigger questions, even smallest of experiences are influenced by it including the mundane cup and coffee.

 It is not unfair to suppose  that Western and Eastern worldviews are unlikely to be similar. These differences may impinge upon choices that are made. For instance, a house could mean place of individual indulgences or institution of togetherness. A piece of apparel could be about modesty or attraction. Food could be benign gift and godly or pleasure and market transaction. A mountain could be high rock to be climbed and conquered or house of God and grace.

The question is what is the lens through which a cup of coffee is perceived. Which space does it dwell in:  internal or external, personal or social, consumption or exchange?

Self- view: It is how one views oneself or totality of perception on different aspects. The idea of self is in terms of physical, social, psychological, geographic, nationality and religion. The question of self- view is likely to differ based on whether the lens is superficial and based on attachment or deeper understanding based on attachment less perspective. At the heart of self- view is the question: ‘Who am I’. In the Hindu philosophy the ‘I’ has two layers: soul (jiva or spirit) and body (dwelling). The body is physical manifestation of consciousness and it belongs to the physical world and is subjectto lifecycle. The soul however is eternal beyond the cycle of birth and death. It is beyond measure. The Buddhist idea of self is that of ‘no self’, something un-definable. The attachments on ‘no self’ are meaningless. The self is reason of suffering and attachments are the roots and therefore we must let go. It is illusion.

The Western notions are  different. The self is construed as things or attachments connected to body (hence mind). The mind creates connections with objects, beings, land, property, etc. These create the notion ‘I am what I have’. For instance, Peter, the CEO of XYX company, owner of an island and ten luxury cars married to a gorgeous miss something. All this is very comforting because they are measurables and put Peter on a scale of relativity with respect to others.  Happiness is sought through these attachments. A sense of superiority, the ego, assumes the driving position. Greed becomes the fuel and destination sought is envy of others. The Gita, the Indian notion however is opposite. It propagates renunciation which is gateway to joy or ultimate bliss. The ego or body consciousness (with all its attachments) are obstacles to true happiness.

Coming back to the question of coffee and cups is that choice is both easy and difficult. It sits at an intersection of individual’s world view and self- view. The situation (friends, coffee, cups and teacher) for someone could be pure play, an egoless moment of joy filled with love, generosity, empathy, selflessness and sense of unity. Here the choice would be to reach out for the least attractive cup, giving precedence to others as an act in nourishment of soul. It is a kind of relinquishment, surrender, detachment and renunciation, for the cup does not matter.

On the other hand, for another person this situation (friends, coffee, cups and teacher) is an avenue of contestation governed by greed, self- aggrandizement, gain, power, positioning. For him or her the choice is likely to be for the cup for it would play same role as a Lamborghini or a mansion plays. The axis here shifts from absolutism to relativism,from measure-less to measurement.  Here the cup is seen as an instrument and raw material for self- construction and signification to build superiority. The content in this perspective is rendered useless but cup assumes value  not for the coffee but the meaning that it contains. Body is the playground with all its attachments rather than the soul. The extension of the self is sought by reaching out for the best cup (leaving the inferior ones for others) to secure momentary superiority in service of the ego- greed, grabbing, gain, selfishness and superiority instead of joy of togetherness, connection and conversation. The pleasure is not coffee but cup for it creates differences (inferior and superior, higher and lower, rich and poor) and reinforces notions of and ‘me’ and ‘others’ (envy, jealousy) .

Choices are critical. In marketing choice and choice heuristics sit at the center. The ideology is that markets are places through which path to happiness goes. The self has to be identified with the body and it is playground of happiness through senses and attachments.  The promoted narrative is you are what you have. You are the cup, you are the body, you are the ego.

As a result, the seeker is killed by the sought! It is a complete reversal. Take a pause and reflect: are you the empowered chooser of products and brands? It may be the reverse. The products and brands choose you. A famous apparel brand exhibited a young woman in contemplative pose looking at a dress and the headline went as follows:

‘I can’t fit in this dress’

Rarity, Product Differentiation, Species and Brands

When you read or hear,

• The waitlist for Rolex Daytona is minimum five years and may go up to ten years
• Almost a similar thing went on for Hermes Birkin. You couldn’t simply go to the store, walk up to payment counter and walk home with a Birkin. It was even difficult to get on to their wait list.
• Ferrari shipped only 7200 cars in 2011 which stood at about 12000 cars in 2021. Ferrari Purosangue’s waiting is two years.
• Even a mundane sneaker like Nike Dunk SB Low Staple NYC Pigeon and Nike Air Force 1 Low Kith are traded on Stock X simply because they are not available
• The Montblanc Taj Mahal is retailed at about $2 m as it’s a work of artistry, exquisite material and limited edition
• Watchmaker H Moser & Cie’s produces about 2000 timepieces in a year and price ranges between Rs 14, 34, 000- 2, 77, 20, 000

It is easy to spot the commonality across these brands. First, they command astronomical prices. The dictionary explanation of the word command is connected with authority and control stemming from higher position. It is about giving order or getting someone into subservience or devotional surrender. The brands in question get their customers into parting with something precious akin to sacrifices made in religious orders. Second, these brands or products are highly restricted in availability and are in short supply and restricted to a chosen few. The lesser beings shall never be able to commune with the higher order.

So, what’s going on? These are instances where economics and psychology intersect to create an extraordinary value.

Economics: Simply put, shortages or scarcity create price increases. The scarcity could be natural (something that’s not available) or artificial (by controlling supply). Consider diamonds.  Are they scarce naturally or is their supply  artificially restricted. Rare earth materials are short in supply but have wide applications in electronics. How about aged whiskeys or wines? Long period of storage renders them scarce andthat results in high  prices. The Macallan 1926 sixty-year-old rare Scotch was sold at an auction for $ 1.9 m. Let us look at the working of rarity principle in the following cases:

•  Monalisa by Leonardo da Vinci
• A watch made of steel obtained from Titanic wreck
• A visit to depths of ocean on Ocean Gate

Scarcity or rarity is the price pusher. Abundance is a desire killer. Owning something rare is not purely about possession. It is about transformation. In a world where DNA of any two individuals on this planet is identical to the extent of 99.6 percent imagine the forces that would be at work for people to express themselves as different species than the one they are surrounded by. The rarity of things psychologically seems to create this sensealbeit in imagination. Uniforms are disgusting. So, students typically use other means to set themselves apart- bags, pens, hair styles and tiffin boxes.  Variety in supermarkets is nothing but gateway to differentiation at the base level.

Psychology: Why do people want to obtain what is rare? There is a definite pull of what can’t be had or is very hard to get. The desire is inversely related to availability. Owning something rare (gem, design, antique, craft)  gives a route to break away from what everyone has fueled by a desire to set oneself apart from the pack. The strategies could be many:

• Power and status: Expensiveness of an artifact may confer power and status. Consider a pen hand crafted and made of precious materials. A Montegrappa or Van Cleef& Arpels pen can cost upwards of $500000. Only a few can afford luxury yachts because of their prohibitive prices (JP Morgan had a yacht, ‘The Corsair’) and it is this association of the vessel with wealth that shifts its meaning from a motor boat to a class marker.
• Taste: Uniqueness stemming out of rare workmanship may act as signifier of tastethat sets you apart. It is a nuanced way of creating distinction. Not everybody is educated or encultured to have an evolved sense for appreciation of finer aspects such as the music of Mozart or the melting clock by Dali or intricate craftsmanship of Harry Winston. The connection between craftsmanship and exquisite master creations in fields like painting, jewelry, furniture, watch, saddle is chronicled in histories of kings and nobles. Taste is a class or social construct and is a powerful driver of distinction. It signifies higher aesthetic sense found in a few with the right cultural antecedents. So if you have taste you may settle for a Breguet for its history and craftsmanship.
• Pride:Rarity is exclusionary. Only a few chosen ones can own rare pieces. This sense created by limited editions has a catapulting effect by which an object is transformed into reward or prize ortrophy. One experiences pleasure and deep satisfaction upon winning or achieving something that’s out of bounds. The nation feels pride when an athlete wins gold medal at the Olympics. It is deeply gratifying. It confers honor, satisfaction, respectability. Brands thus become resources in identity construction and signification. A medal on the chest of a soldier is not only signifier of rank and achievement but also a boost to his idea of self. A brand of televisions promoted itself on the proposition, ‘neighbor’s envy owner’s pride’. The idea was its technology produced better picture quality consequently fanned envy amongst other TV brand owners.

• Self reward: Consider brands calling out to their customers: ‘You come a long way baby’ (Virgina Slims) , ‘Have a break, have a Kitkat’, ‘ Because you’re worth it’ (L’Oreal). Common to these slogans is the inducement of underlying motivation of self reward. A Reward is acknowledgement of achievement but by others . School rewards you when you get the best score. Self rewardinginvolves self to self gifting upon achieving a milestone. It may be humble coffee or a chocolate. The Cadbury Bournville said, ‘Eat it if you have earned it’. It is an important means of self care, self encouragement and fuels motivation. Will the nature of reward change from humble chocolate to something rare if the achievement is remarkable and exceptional? The reward shall correspondingly need to be correspondingly rare in equal measure. So if you have won an Oscar, the wrist shall adorn a watch as rare as the trophy.

Product differentiation or unique selling proposition is a tried and tested tool that brands use to create inequality in order to stand out from the pack of competitors. Rarity is not about product differentiation. It is about creating differentiated customers or shall we say a different species.

Sunroof, Artificiality, Luxury and Differentiation

Last week a prominent newspaper broke the news, ‘1 in 4 cars sold in India today has a sunroof’.  It also mentioned that in India neither the climate (hot, humid and pollution) is conducive to enjoyment through sunroof nor is itsafe (people have died due to kite strings and low hanging signages). However, in the world of consumers, things that are irrelevant, fictitious, superficial and obvious often make sense, that too phenomenal sense. Marketers know it and enjoy it. Consider the following claims:

• ‘we put silk in our shampoo’

• ‘our refrigerator has PUF’

• ‘made from sun kissed barley and tendered by fresh breeze’

• ‘put a tiger in tank’ 

Read again, you can’t put a tiger in a tank and silk can not be an ingredient in a shampoo. PUF (Polyurethane foam) is commonly used insulation material and if you grow barley it will be kissed by sun and tendered by breeze. What is so great about these claims? Nothing. But marketers know how human mind works and how it can be exploited. 

Anything that is  picked and transmitted by sensory organs to the brain, the mind automatically begins to assign meaning to. The stimulus may be sound, color, texture or smell. The operation of brain creating meaning out of these stimuli is perception. Perception is subjective because  everyone’s mind contains different set of memories,  emotions and learning. So, if a brand names itself as ‘Hexit’, we probably are likely to interpret it as something killing. When the dial of a wrist watch is given big proportions the mind reads it as masculine. You color a shoe pink and it becomes girly. 

Marketers are good at leveraging this phenomenon of preexisting amalgam of cognitions, emotions, images and memories. By careful orchestration of brand elements favorable image transformations are achievable.  

It’s not all about logic. So why value something which is not of use? The air exposure on Indian roads could lead to serious respiratory problems and sticking your neck out of the sunroof is fraught with risks to life. On top of this the view of the skyline through the top of a car is  hardly inspiring. DRL or daytime running lights on cars were invented as a safety measure in countries which experience daytime darkness. This was unique to north American countries to create visibility. But in a country like India with abundant and bright day light there’s hardly a justification for cars to sport DRL. 

The meaning resides in the mind : the question is why do customers dole out extra bucks for superfluous and useless

features? It resides in tendency of mind to make sense or look for meaning in everything that it comes in contact with. Neutrality of mind is the highest virtue attainable only by sages. Meaning making works by the process of stimulus generalization and discrimination. Commonality creates assimilation and contrasts create differentiation. Twitter with its new X sign aims to create disassociation with whatever Twitter has been able to create in mind as memory constellation. On the other hand, Maggi with its original yellow and red packaging seeks to tap into its equity and rub it off with other products like Sauce and Masala. 

Psycho-social meaning:  L’Oréal and other hair color brands have gained tremendously by tapping into the desire of women to be like Western women whose hair color is naturally blonde. The hair color, this way, assumes a meaning beyond chemistry or electromagnetic radiation coated in psychology and sociology. So, hair color ceases to be a means of giving hair a particular shade; instead it becomes a  device for psychological transformation and social expression. 

Case of DRL and Sunroof: What happens when a car gives feature of sunroof or DRL? The mind rushes to its storehouse to locate something similar. It discovers these features are seen on luxury cars and begins projection of luxury car imagery on to a mid segment car and the magic begins. The selectivity of perception creates partial blindness and car is seen through a select feature. It is a common practice whereby blinders are put on consumer perception. For

instance,  the urban non-sporting young expect others to view them through the lens of their Nikes’ and Reeboks’ in line with their perception. BJP as political party expects you to look at the politics through the narrow lens of Hindutva. 

It’s about differentiation: in a contested market where competitors inch closer, creating differentiation is essential. Rosser Reeves decades ago coined the term USP or unique selling proposition. Creation of unique feature may be easy but it is useless if not valued by customer. There are two case of differentiation: horizontal (similar products but preference differentiated as is the case with Coke and Pepsi) and vertical (different price points based on quality markers like Columbus and Nike athletic shoes). In this case the feature added is aimed to create differentiated offering from low price versions and charge premium. 

Discussion apart, we as human beings are emotional animals. The key to marketing success lies in activating positive emotions though features which can elicit a click and whirr response. Does it happen with you?

Luxury, Price and Brand Narrative

If you ask somebody in emerging luxury market the following questions.:

• What is  Rolex?

• What is  Louis Vuitton?

• What is Chanel?

• What is Hermes? 

• What is Goyard?

The answers fetched are likely to be different but many would be able to connect these with the brand’s most prototypical product category. One common running theme is likely to center around price or expensiveness. High price and luxury have gone together forever and it is what sits at the core idea of luxury. Semantically, it is opposite to ‘necessary’.  Necessaries are indispensable as these are essential for survival. Luxury has been associated with excess, abundance and opulence. One of the examples of ‘excess’ as the defining aspect of luxury is a watch.  Brands like Breguet make ultra-complicated watches by adding features which push designing and manufacturing to breach the limits of possibility and confer the status of luxury on the product.  Luxury can be viewed from several angles: 

Price: Most probably it is going to be  high price, very expensive, exorbitant, beyond reach. High price is the most overt sign of luxury brands.  The price is a relative indicator and it positions the product towards the top end of the spectrum. Consequent upon the high price two things happen. This superior position links them to high perceived quality. Quality is often  difficult to decipher especially by non-experts. So, price becomes a powerful surrogate for quality. Often, price itself serves as a signifier of a nebulous amalgam of physical reality and invisible undefinable. For instance, Patek Philippe Nautilus costs about 150000 dollars. 

Aspiration and expression:  The people on top of the social hierarchy become aspirational because of emulation in consumption practices. Luxury in this realm operates as visible markers for emulators who seek connections through consumption parity with people on higher pecking order. The essence of this aspect of luxury was articulated by Veblen as conspicuous consumption where brands are used as status markers. Luxury  is evocative of a lifestyle, typically associated with the elite. Luxury brands enable the aspirants to achieve parity with higher classes through commonality of consumption. Through this practice the customers gain a feeling of elevation by being able to buy products related with higher classes. Mercedes cars sport bigger and bolder three-pointed star on their hood to cater to this market.  A bag with big ‘LV’ sign is commissioned by the owner to shout out loud. This ,however, is not done by Birkin which does the same but silently. 

Uniqueness: The high price of luxury may stem from objective reasons traceable to unique ingredients or processes (rare fur or skin or metal or intricate craft). Louis Vuitton uses Vachetta leather known for

high quality or Rolls Royce is hand crafted machine or intricate Argyle pattern introduced by Pringle. The high price that draws from objective considerations adds differentiating dimension or  uncommonness pushing the product into the realm of uniqueness. Every Hermes bag is the outcome of ‘painstaking work of the craftsman’ where leather is still  pieced together by saddle stitch. 

Self-esteem: This uniqueness operates to serve luxury buyer in two ways: first as a device of signaling system of differentiation to the external world and second, as something of self reward or adding sheen to self-concept. A Rolex is not just a time keeping device or ‘certified chronometer’ but a symbol of achievement. The brand is credited for remarkable achievements in the domain of horology including waterproof and dust proof watch (Oyster), date display (Datejust) and Helium escape valve (Sea- Dweller).  Mercedes is credited with innovation including multi-valve engine, four- wheel suspension and ABS and many more. 

Spirit: A painstakingly crafted porcelain or intricately woven fabric or fine piece of jewel carries an invisible but perceptible aura of the maker. The intimate bond between the creator and created embeds the soul of craftsperson. Therefore, many luxury pieces are called ‘one of its kind’. The creation liberates itself from the narrow confines of utility into the realm of  art. It is artistic authentic expression of the spirit into physical form. Many luxury brands imprint their unique spirit or soul on to whatever products they carry. 

In a world of mass production and spread of prosperity, markets have been democratizing consumption. The descending economic entitlement is both boon and bane for the luxury marketers. The pursuit of ‘more’ is likely to negate the very essence of luxury. And luxury bought simply because of high price is unlikely to touch customer at deeper level without which it may tantamount to shallow or superficial consumption. Luxury without an appropriate brand narrative (its myth and mystique) is devoid of psycho-socio-cultural meaning rendering luxury consumption hollow. Suppose you can afford an expensive watch (not too expensive) which one would you buy?

Would it be a Rolex, Omega or Tag Heuer? 

Depends upon whether you choose to buy a time keeping instrument or a narrative that runs below visibility of assembled components.

Product, Brands and Axes of Differentiation and Integration

Most consumer behavior including buying behavior for products and brands operates on an interplay of psychology and sociology. An individual’s self plays on these two axes in pursuit of goals of integration and differentiation. Armed with the knowledge of this pursuit, marketers devise strategies and position their offerings as means or aids in facilitating achievement of these goals.

The self is the site of contestation of materialistically oriented marketing of the West on one hand and the spiritual world of Eastern philosophy on the other.  At the core rests the question: Who am I ? The spiritual understanding of this question takes the answer to ‘nothingness’ or ‘absence of ego’ and stresses on shunning attachments with which the self is defined. On the contrary, marketing succeeds by achieving the opposite by which the consumers are made to believe they are what they have. The idea of the self is constructed around objects and experiences. The self is seen through the prism of attached materials or objects. The objects or products or brands play an instrumental role in constructing an image for others and for the self (self- perception – Who am I) though others’ eyes.

Marketers subtly put customers into the cockpit, making them the pilot. The self becomes something to be negotiated on the axes of integration and differentiation. According to Dictionary.com, integration is an ‘act of combining into an integral whole’ or ‘act of integrating a racial or religious or ethnic group’. Integration, socially, is about access, harmonization, cohesion, harmony, social and emotional

wellbeing. It’s about identification, communality and relationship. It serves the need to belong that stems from very social nature of humans. So how do marketers exploit this tendency to belong? Consider the following brands:

·       Do sports shoe brands like Adidas, Nike or Reebok create a sense of belongingness to sporting community?

·       Does Patagonia let people belong to the community of sustainability warriors?

·       How about Harley Davidson? Does the brand help forge a symbolic connection with rebel free-spirited group?

The other side of existence and hence consumption is reverse of integration. It is differentiation. It stems from discontentment arising out of sameness. Perceived similarity fuels an urge to break away and become different. It is propelled by a desire to be not be like others. Sameness robs one of identity and throws one in the pond of identity lessness. Expression of individuality is an important drive therefore the market for expression devices of uniqueness  emerges. The need for uniqueness or ‘setting oneself apart from others’ or distinction holds key to some attractive rewards like winning a sexy partner or recognition. Marketers sell illusions of uniqueness even in marketing of mass-produced brands (Maruti Suzuki Ignis was launched by the promise ‘None of a Kind’) .   

It is very discomforting for many people to be a part of

crowd. They seek ways and means to stand out. This can be observed when going to a party involves intense discussion about what one wore to same gathering last time. Mainstream brands which sell in volumes in reality are at loss in catering to this market for selling distinction or uniqueness. But nonetheless they thrive by selling illusions of uniqueness through mass produced goods by offering variety. So coffee types in a coffee chain like Starbucks or Café Coffee Day or burger range at McDonald’s though being mass or commodities allow customers to enjoy fictitious sense of ‘my burger type’.  The uniqueness is expressed by exclusion of the others (“I don’t have that”).  Consider the following:

·       The body tattooing exemplifies how body markings are used to differentiate human bodies.

·       High end designers produce uniquely crafted dresses for each client.

·       Car brands like Aston Martin and Bugatti make custom cars for customers seeking uniqueness.

·       In high end jewelry business, the pieces are created like ‘none other’.

·       Expensive pen and watch brands launch limited editions primarily to cater to the need for differentiation.

In the end, it is appropriate to remember Mark Twain who wrote,

‘Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect’.

Identity, Role, Altercasting: Voting and Selling

What if you want people to behave in a particular way? A teacher would want students to study, a shirt seller would want people to buy shirts and a political party would want people to vote for it. 

So, what should you do?

Use the subtle technique of persuasion called altercasting. Activate an identity or cast people into an identity which has a clearly defined role. People of that identity are expected to behave in a certain manner. Teachers are expected to teach and parents are expected to take care of their families.

Have you encountered a situation when your teacher told you, ‘You are a good student , you must do assignments on time’ or a colleague telling you, ‘Now that you have become a Vice President, get a car that fits your status’.

In these examples, an identity has been activated like that of a ‘good student’ and ‘person of position’. The actor (teacher and colleague) also called ‘Ego’ casts the ‘other’ into an identity (student and person with position) to elicit an intended response or task (do assignment and buy a car). These identities come with defined social roles or expectations. The result of this altercasting is that this process creates expectations to not violate the role or conform for two reasons:

First  is the need for validation. The role is validated  when behaviour conforms with the expectations.

Second, the violation activates the process of cognitive dissonance. Altercastng serves as a reminder of a role and expectations. The inconsistency between behavior and beliefs results in friction.

• 

People enter in the political market with multiple identities including gender, age, state, religion, caste. Which identity should a party bring to the fore or make salient that is consistent with the task (eliciting favorable response) or intended response.

BJP’s long-standing campaign seeks to make nationalist identity salient. This nationalist identity clearly casts people into a role that sets expectations to favour a party that is seen as legitimate custodian of the nation (by default the other parties are positioned as non-nationalistic) through a carefully crafted narrative. Once this identity is brought to the fore, the other identities are rendered less meaningful during the elections.

Conforming imperative imposed by this process aims to seek a common denominator across differences.

But the nationalistic narrative has power only when an enemy is perceived, real or imaginary. Will this evocation of nationalist identity work this time?