I. Introduction
The refrigerator brand “chotuKool” was developed by Godrej & Boyce, an Indian appliance conglomerate, along with Innosight, a consulting firm (Dhillon, 2015; Tiwari & Herstatt, 2012; Williams, Omar, & Rajadhyaksha, 2012). It was commercially launched in India with a focus at bottom of the pyramid (BoP) market, in 2010 (Williams et al., 2012).
The project that brings “chotuKool” to the BOP market receives enormous praise scholarly because it addresses consumer need in an innovative way. First of all, its layout has been designed to suit target consumers’ living environment such as frequent power shortage, limited living space, and the need to move frequently (Tiwari & Herstatt, 2012; Williams et al., 2012). Secondly, it reduces product parts to minimizes maintenance obstacle, as child can easily take the lid where all the essential part sits in to a service center (Sameeullah Khan & Haldar; Williams et al., 2012). Thirdly, its design and marketing process involves the participation of local communities, notably women (Dhillon, 2015; Tiwari & Herstatt, 2012).
II. Comment
According to Simanis and Duke (2014) it is critical to examine the success of a BoP innovation by the substantial change it brings to the consumer behavior. In the case of “chotuKool” the answer remains unknown. Part of the reason was there’s no public figure about market share of the product. However, based on Google Picture search result, most of “chotuKool” owners are those who possess a shop, a car or a decent house, which are quite different from the described target consumers of the product. In addition, the features emphasized by “chotuKool” are irrelevant to their described target consumers. People live under limited finance are unlikely to have abundant food that left for storage. Furthermore, although the project successfully raise attention internationally, how the low-cost brand image appeals to the target market remains to be tested. Considering the case of Tata Nano, an India car which brands itself “cheapest in the world” shows, low-cost reputation receives negative market feedback (Buss, 2018). Last, but not least, it’s dubious that the project is profitable considering its investment in surveying consumer and cooperating with consulting firm; However, financial figure remains undisclosed. Without further investigation, it is too early to claim its success.
III. Reference
Buss, D. (2018, July 27). No To The Nano: Tata Phases Out ‘World’s Cheapest Car’ As It Failed To Attract Pretty Much Anyone. Retrieved April 12, 2020, from https://www.forbes.com/sites/dalebuss/2018/07/27/nano-nano-tata-phases-out-worlds-cheapest-car-as-it-failed-to-attract-pretty-much-anyone/#674ab57e6ffc
Dhillon, R. (2015). Capturing Indian rural market through a proactive tool: Reverse innovation. In Managing in Recovering Markets (pp. 167-182): Springer.
Sameeullah Khan, P., & Haldar, O. P. Frugal Innovation: How Meager Resources and Idealistic Goals Lead To Sustainable Development.
Simanis, E., & Duke, D. (2014). Profits at the bottom of the pyramid. Harvard Business Review, 92(10), 86-93.
Tiwari, R., & Herstatt, C. (2012). Frugal innovations for the’unserved’customer: An assessment of India’s attractiveness as a lead Market for cost-effective products. Technology and Innovation Management Working Paper(69).
Williams, R., Omar, M., & Rajadhyaksha, U. (2012). The Value Flame at the Base of the Pryamid (VFBOP): Indentifying and creating a valuable market. Advances in International Marketing, 23, 267-279.