Marketing

In many social niches in the US, there has been an effort to become more "green".  Given our population, and the vast amount of resources we consume, this is a good thing.  It's not always an easy path though.  For example, a recent article in the New York Times suggests that couples are spending more time fighting over green issues.  We are loathe to give up our cars, and continue to buy, and dispose of, large amounts of consumer goods.  We like our air conditioners and our heaters and eat far more meat than we really should.

In response to issues such as these, information is now out there to help us make decisions about what products might be a more sustainable choice.  The economic choices we make in terms of what we purchase can have larger consequences in that some companies are better than others at preserving our world's resources.  Smart companies take note of this consumer preference, and have started to respond.

But the best laid plans can sometimes fail.  A recent product roll-out by Proctor & Gamble shows that when companies fail to appreciate the power of the informational exchange afforded by the internet, things can go terribly wrong.  Proctor & Gamble has recently developed a new, greener diaper which test marketing prior to its introduction suggested would be met with positive responses from parents.

Pampers' breakthrough new Dry Max diaper is 20% thinner and way more absorbent than its predecessor or the competition in tests, leading Procter & Gamble Co. executives to hail it as the iPod of baby care.

 The key to the Dry Max diaper is a revamped, more permeable "absorbent gel material," which P&G claims absorbs more fluid faster than an unnamed competitor, i.e. Kimberly-Clark Corp.'s Huggies. Using more of the petrochemical absorbent gel allowed P&G to do away with the mesh liner in Pampers and a considerable amount of wood-based fiber, said Kerri Hailey, section head of global baby care research and development at P&G, who has been testing the diapers with her own children since 2005. The net result was considerably less environmental impact; Ms. Hailey also cited substantial reductions in packaging, trucks needed to haul diapers and energy required to harvest and process wood pulp, among other things.

Sounds great, right?  Works well, more environmentally sustainable, and more absorbent.  What could go wrong?  Well the problem was that Proctor & Gamble started releasing the diapers in certain areas of the US, without any marketing campaign.  They wanted to wait until more parents had access to the product before rolling out their advertising.  And nature abhors a vacuum. In the absence of any explanation or discussion, a few, rather angry consumers quickly inundated parents' message boards and chat rooms with unfavorable reviews of the new product. Online reviews of the new diapers are predominantly negative, and despite the fact that they appear to represent a relatively low proportion of consumers (one parent, for example, has posted over 75 reviews on 50 different websites), this groundswell of criticism threatens the success of the diaper.

While certainly companies are aware of the value of research into how products will be responded to (in fact, Proctor & Gamble did extensive testing of the product before releasing it at all) the rapid informational exchange of the internet means that sometimes companies will just not be able to easily keep up with the changing landscape.  We humans are smart, very smart, but we have a habit of doing things - particularly within the realm of technological advances - without really considering the consequences.  Proctor & Gamble, by ignoring the ways in which the internet has exponentially changed the nature of word-of-mouth, potentially cost itself the success of its newest product, ironically designed in response to consumer preferences.  Advertising is littered with the detritus of such decisions, but now more than ever, companies need to take note of the ways in which information is transmitted.