Recently, glanced over Hindustan Unilever (HUL’s ) full page chairman’s annual statement; I wondered why HUL and ITC unlike other companies need to publish a full page chairman’s AGM speech/annual statement. This year, HUL’s chairman talked about HUL’s contribution in grooming managers and producing leaders out of them. As a Bschooler, it was enough to attract my attention and write this post which is highly critical perhaps one sided but definitely food for thought.
I somehow think days for HUL as a supreme brand which commands awe in all respects are over. Here is why I think so.
Poor financial performance: HUL’s topline and bottomline are stagnant since last few years. In recent past, There has not been any innovation in an emerging country like India which is full of innovation for masses. There have not been any revolutionary product launches in recent years which would have enhanced lives of consumers.
HUL has become a reactive competitor. Which products/brands have they brought and sustained after the success of Wheel? Does it not seem that they are consciously ignoring bottom of pyramid markets?
Has Power brands strategy worked? HUL management seems to be driven by what bosses say in Unilever. Do HUL board and executive have mind of their own? Why do they follow strategy of premium brand, high margin business in a country which is full of opportunities in low margin, mass market? In fact it seems in implementing this strategy; HUL managers have killed many promising brands.
Shareholder returns: Why HUL doesn’t talk about Shareholder returns? Shareholders have not gained much in terms of stock appreciation. With average financial performance, the stock has languished for past 10-12 years. Why does the board not wake up and think seriously for creating wealth for stockholders as many other companies consciously do?
Poor Top of mind recall- Think of Tea, you think of Tata tea, Think of milk, you think of Amul, Nestle or Britannia, Salt – you think of Tata salt and list goes on. Despite huge spending on advertisements, many brands of HUL don’t even figure in the consideration set of consumers.
Overpaid management: It is said that HLL managers are paid through nose and yet such conventional and poor performance?? Performance to payment ratio seems to be definitely better for companies such as Dabur, Future group, Tata group etc.
CSR: HUL never shies away from bragging about Shakti amma project. But are they really serious? If yes, then why is it restricted primarily in South India? India has 600,000 villages. Why don’t they become aggressive through out India in such well meaning project as they are in fighting Pantene over billboards?
HUL gives impression of an arrogant MNC which has lost its way. Serious rethinking is needed to mend old ways of doing business. HUL is full of excellent professionals who just need to take control of situation and put pressure on their top leadership to act sensibly and do things out of box.
image http://www.hul.co.in/
1 comment:
The title of your Blog on HUL took me back to the early 70s when Shobha De was not a brash old woman but a brash young woman known as Shobha Kilachand and was helping Nari Hira establish Stardust as a different film magazine with some in the face journalism. The very first or one of the first headline cover story read "IS Rajesh Khanna's Charishma Wearing Off". This was just when Rajesh Khanna had peaked as a star.
By the way Wheel was a late reaction from HLL to counter Nirma when their surf started loosing share to Nirma. They also killed all the Tomco brands they acquired with the company.
Yes HUL needs to reinvent itself. But then HUL is no Rajesh Khanna and they still have a grip on the channel.
All the best.
Shubhangam Sinha
Post a Comment