Proctor And Gamble Scope Case Analysis

1672 Words7 Pages
Procter & Gamble


Case Analysis:

Scope, a green mint tasting mouthwash, was positions as a great tasting mouth refreshing brand that provided bad breath protection. It is the first brand that offers both effective protection against bad breath and a better taste than other mouthwashes.

Scope was introduced in 1967 by Procter & gamble, which is one of the most successful companies in the world. P&G philosophy is to provide superior quality and value that best fills the needs of the consumers; it was recognized as a leader in the Canadian packaged good industry.

P&G Canada has five operating divisions, organized by product category. The divisions and some of their major brands are:

1- Paper products: Royale, Pampers

2- Food and beverage: Crisco, Pringles .

3- Beauty care: Head & Shoulders, Pantene .

4- Laundry and cleaning: Tide, Cheer

5- Health care: Crest, Scope .

Each division has its own brand management, sales, finance, product development and operations line management and was evaluated as a profit center.

Scope’s brand manager Gwen Hearst planned, developed, and directed the total marketing effort for Scope; she was responsible for maximizing the market share, volume, and profitability of the brand.

However, in 1970 Scope became the market leader in Canada, but it was not the only brand in the mouthwash market, it had many competitors, such as Listermint mouthwash that was launched by Warner Lambert in 1977 and it was a direct competitor to Scope, it had nearly the same characteristics as Scope with a 12% of the market share.

But the major competitor for Scope was Plax, a brand by Pfizer Inc, which was launched in Canada in 1988 on a platform quite different from the traditional mouthwashes. Plax deterge...

... middle of paper ...

...additional benefit that the scope consumer can benefit from and it may attract the potential users that scope aim at. Also P&G has to collect more information to see what the consumer needs and improve it within the same product; especially that it is based on a philosophy of satisfying the customer needs. Scope was positioned around two benefits that are refreshing breath and good tasting, and it should stick to this position with other additional claims or benefits if it can, so it should not launch a new product that confuses the customers but stick to this position that it has in the market place and that is considered to be its competitive advantage.

It’s better to protect the business that P&G is already in and just add a plaque claim, than launching a completely new entry that is not secured. As the quote says: "A bird in the hand rather than 10 on the tree."

More about Proctor And Gamble Scope Case Analysis

Open Document