Coming Clean on Saas-bahu Non-reality

How does one promote a new entrant in an over-advertised category and still manage to break through the clutter? That was the question that dogged Procter and Gamble and its agency Chaitra Leo Burnett, when the former sought to launch its star detergent brand Ariel Microsystem into the Indian market in 1990.

There was nothing wrong with the product; in fact, it possessed a product superiority that sufficiently differentiated it from the rest of the field. But as with any new entrant, the challenge lay in getting the target audience to take notice and be willing to give it a try.

Saturated Category

Easier said than done. The detergent segment was one of the most flogged categories on the Indian advertising landscape at the time. Print, television or outdoor, one detergent brand or the other hit you with unfailing regularity almost every single day. As an advertised category, it was over-saturated. Advertisers had tried every trick in the book and you could well replace the logo on any ad or commercial with another and nobody would have noticed the difference.

But something had to be done. Here was a great brand with a veritable breakthrough formula. It was the result of sophisticated laundry technology of the time, boasted enhanced performance properties and completely eliminated the need for blues or detergent bars to enhance whiteness. In short, it ticked all the boxes – the challenge lay in cutting through to the target audience and then clearly conveying the benefits of this winning product.

Innovative and sophisticated, the higher pricing reflected that reality. Yet the client was convinced it was a mass product that anybody and everybody would, and should, use. In a sense, that added to the creative burden. As mass-appeal products went, everything that has to be said, was already said. Every creative route that could be explored, was already explored.

Say it Differently

Nevertheless, the creative process chugged on in real earnest. Ideas flowed but were almost immediately nixed. In the end, the tried-and-tested mother-in-law, daughter-in-law formula was shortlisted and finalised.

Not that it wasn’t done to death as a concept. At a time when the country thrived on saas-bahu fodder, this was a formula that worked, but ran the immediate risk of being dismissed as me-too. And, in advertising, me-too almost never worked. The trick lay in saying the same thing differently. Very differently! If one could achieve that, it would align with the brand persona too – a unique, different product in an ocean of sameness.

The creative team at Chaitra Leo Burnett dug deeper – lacing their research with a dosage of psychology. Problems between mothers-in-law and daughters-in-law weren’t unique to India. It was a universal issue. It was real… larger than life! However, in the India of the day, those issues were only accentuated further, because of the joint family system.

Breaking the Stereotype

In all that research and analysis, one singular point cut right through… Real! The saas-bahu formula flogged silly in serials, films and ads of the day veered off the reality course. Typically, they cast the mother-in-law in the filmi stereotype: Bossy, critical, overbearing. They made her the domineering villain and the daughter-in-law the cowering supplicant. That wasn’t really true of the fast ‘nuclearing’ Indian household, where the daughter-in-law enjoyed her own space, and the mother-in-law wasn’t necessarily the arch-enemy. Some of the stereotype still existed, however it was watered down by changing societal patterns.

Sticking with the Hitlerian mom-in-law stereotype in fact ran the risk of alienating the homemaker on both sides of the divide. Neither would be able to identify with the characters in the plot – and the critical advantage of emotional empathy that this product so clearly needed would be lost. Such an ad would only become a blind spot, the thinking boiling down to: ‘Oh, that’s not me… it’s somebody else’.

And so, the revised challenge was this: Say it differently, but say it with reality. Use a common idea, but deliver it uncommonly. A matter-of-fact portrayal of reality was the key to success.  

Plain Vanilla Reality

Based on the new brief and key market research inputs, a script and storyline were developed. However, a new challenge cropped up. Advertising people being advertising people and writers being writers, it was difficult to shake off years and decades of habit. As a norm, advertising (especially TV commercials) based its delivery on the more dramatic and filmi. It was necessary to lure attention. Unfortunately, not in this case! The need of the moment was to sidestep all the drama and come across as plain vanilla real. But whatever the experienced creative hotshots came up with, lacked that genuineness of reality that the homemaker would immediately identify with.

That’s when the agency detoured into an unconventional pathway. They took the assignment away from the experienced guys and brought in a rank outsider. One who wasn’t influenced and set in his ways by the rough and tumble of daily advertising. One who thought like the consumer… who literally was the consumer!

Not being a copywriter had its advantages and disadvantages. The task took a lot longer – all of 25 long days. But it was worth the wait. Every line in the script was crafted from consumer insights validated by research. The non-writer then used this to write the script straight from the heart. It all came out as honest and very real, with no attempt at glib construction or pretense. The script did not reflect any copywriting artistry, rather the perfect sense of what was real.

Nailed it!

The agency had nailed it. Part of it, actually. There was still the shoot and production to go though, and these would have to align with the simplicity too. Chaitra laboured through the casting process with equal scruple. Finally, carefully shortlisting a Marathi stage actress who carried with her a natural and refreshing domestic earthiness.

From there things moved quickly… the film was shot and produced in four languages; additionally dubbed into more; and then let loose on the TV-viewing public. It went down like a storm. Housewives – young and old – loved it. Simply because, from both sides of the in-law divide, they could identify with it.

The ad campaign was matter-of-fact and educative. The three ads focused on addressing the real issues that sufficiently differentiated the brand from the rest – namely redundancy of detergent cake and blues; both of which were conveyed by the daughter-in-law to her mother-in-law in an atmosphere of mutual trust and respect. In the third ad, the mother-in-law camp also got their moment, as the now convinced and converted mom-in-law character triumphantly introduced her own sister to the wonders of Ariel Microsystem.

The campaign took six months in the making, but it was worth the delay. The commercials ran on for months and were quite the homemaker favourite. And why not, they were feel-good and real – everyone concerned could identify with them.

The Ariel case-study is a good and solid lesson on honesty and reality. Drama and sensationalism doesn’t always sell. In fact, in a world steeped in drama and sensationalism, a stiff dose of reality will make everybody sit up and take notice… happily!