Post on 14-Apr-2018
7/29/2019 0000006345-Case SRF Corporate Brand
1/19
Emerging Markets Case Studies CollectionEmerald Case Study: Corporate brand building at SRF: challenge ofselecting the brand consultant
Jaydeep Mukherjee, Mukund Trivedy
Article information:
To cite this document: Jaydeep Mukherjee, Mukund Trivedy, "Corporate brand building at SRF: challenge of selecting the brand
onsultant", Emerald Emerging Markets Case Studies, 2011
Permanent link to this document:
ttp://dx.doi.org/10.1108/20450621111201257
Downloaded on: 14-09-2012
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
This document has been downloaded 78 times since 2012. *
Users who downloaded this Case study also downloaded: *
Soo May Cheng, "Sinolink Fine Wines", Emerald Emerging Markets Case Studies, 2011
ttp://dx.doi.org/10.1108/20450621111202760
Denver D'Rozario, Keshav Shenoy, "Bharat Petroleum Company Limited's (BPCL), India one-stop truck shop (OSTS) retailing format"
Emerald Emerging Markets Case Studies, 2011
ttp://dx.doi.org/10.1108/20450621111180936
Sonal Sisodia, Nimit Chowdhary, "ABIL's dilemma: to brand or not to brand in India", Emerald Emerging Markets Case Studies, 2011
ttp://dx.doi.org/10.1108/20450621111128583
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE
For Authors:
f you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service.
nformation about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit
www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
With over forty years' experience, Emerald Group Publishing is a leading independent publisher of global research with impact in
usiness, society, public policy and education. In total, Emerald publishes over 275 journals and more than 130 book series, as
7/29/2019 0000006345-Case SRF Corporate Brand
2/19
Corporate brand building at SRF:
challenge of selecting the brand consultant
Jaydeep Mukherjee and Mukund Trivedy
It wasthe morning of 8 October 2008. SRFLtds corporate leadership team (CLT),led by Ashish
BharatRam, Managing Director, was to decide one of theshort-listed brand consultants for the
companys image makeover. Ashish had seen the corporate communication departments
internal survey and had realized that there was considerable divergence among the business
heads understanding of the companys branding needs and their expectations from the
prospective brand consultant. SRF being a multi-division, multi-location organization, Ashish
expected the meeting to be difficult as tradeoffs were to be made.
Ashish had taken over the reign of the family firm a couple of years ago and was getting
impatient with the lack of public appreciation of the companys accomplishments. Apart from
arriving at a decision in the meeting, he wanted to achieve consensus. This need for
consensus was driven by the need to ensure organizational cohesion in the implementation
of the strategy that would be devised by the consultant. So, Ashish felt the pressure of
having to not only select the most appropriate brand consultant for an under-the-radar SRF
but also to get everybody to back the initiative.
SRFs corporate communication department had been working on the project for the last six
months and had completed the background research for the decision. Though there were no
significant differences of opinion about the relevance of the brand building exercise for SRF,
there were divergences on whether it should be product branding (as was currently the case)
or a corporate brand, which Ashish was pushing for. The prime reasons for the divergenceswere emanating from two points; one, SRF was predominantly dealing with diverse set of
business customers and two, failure of corporate branding initiatives in the past.
Given the current position of the different members, which was in the document available to
all the CLT members (Exhibit 1, Figure E1), Ashish was quite worried about the prospect of
arriving at a consensus on the matter. The meeting had significance much beyond what
appeared to be a simple agenda of deciding the brand consultant from a set of choices. He
needed to develop a decision-making criteria and follow a decision-making process which
could overcome resistance and build the necessary company wide support for this project.
Company description
SRF Limited traced its origin to Sir Lala Shri Ram, one of the leading Indian businessvisionaries of his times. The groups existence spanned more than a century, starting way
back in 1889 when its parent company Delhi Cloth Mill, now known as DCM Group was
founded. In the ensuing period DCM turned into a large business house, manufacturing a
vast variety of goods like textiles, sugar, wines, chemicals, vanaspati (a form of edible
vegetable oil), pottery, fans, sewing machines, electric motors and capacitors.
SRF was originally incorporated in 1970 as Shri Ram Fibres. Beginning its life as a tyre cord
manufacturing company, the company over the years diversifies and grew to be a
DOI 10.1108/20450621111201257 VOL. 1 NO. 4 2011, pp. 1-18, Q Emerald Group Publishing Limited, ISSN 2045-0621 j EMERALD EMERGING MARKETS CASE STUDIES j PAGE 1
Jaydeep Mukherjee is an
Associate Professor at the
Management Development
Institute, Gurgaon, India.
Mukund Trivedy is an
Associate Vice President in
the Department of
Corporate Communication,
SRF Limited, Gurgaon,
India.
Disclaimer: This case is writtensolely for educational purposesand is not intended to representsuccessful or unsuccessfulmanagerial decision making.The author/s may havedisguised names; financial andother recognizable informationto protect confidentiality.
7/29/2019 0000006345-Case SRF Corporate Brand
3/19
multi-business entity manufacturing chemical-based industrial intermediates. The name of
the company thus changed to SRF in 1990. Head quartered in Gurgaon, near New Delhi
(capital of India), SRFs business portfolio covered Technical Textiles, Chemicals, Packaging
Films and Engineering Plastics. SRF was the market leaders in most of its businesses in India
and also enjoyed significant global presence in some of its businesses.
SRF products touched everyones lives in many ways. But the irony was that the end
consumers were blissfully ignorant about SRF products since they could never get to see,
touch or feel them. All SRF products were industrial intermediates, which were invisible to the
end-users, except for coated fabrics, which are largely used as awning, tarpaulins and
cricket pitch covers. Ashish would often draw an analogy between SRF products and Intel.
Inspired by the success of Intel Inside concept, in 2007, SRF tried asking its customers toreplicate the model and depict the SRF name clearly on the finished goods. However, it
failed as customers refused to cooperate by saying that their consumers did not see any
special value in the name SRF.
With seven production units in India and one in Dubai, the company exported its products to
over 60 countries. The product portfolio and business structure of SRF has been depicted in
Exhibit 2 (Figures E2-E3) and applications of different products are given in Exhibit 3
(Table EI). Some of the worlds leading companies like Michelin, Carrier, MRF, LG, etc.
Figured on the companys customer list. SRF had recorded a Profit after Tax of $72 million on
net sales of $450 million during 2006-2007, and the company did not have any borrowing for
working capital. It had only long-term borrowings aggregating to $100 million. Some select
financial data are given in Exhibit 4 (Table EII).
Growth plans
SRF was growing in tune with its aspiration to achieve global leadership in its chosen field of
business by the year 2020. Recently, the company had announced its investment plan to
install additional industrial polyester yarn plant at its factory located in Gummidipoondi near
Chennai, India. With its maiden entry into the polyester yarn, SRF planned to become a
one-stop shop for reinforcement fabric to the tyre companies in India. Among other projects,
the company was also planning to set up a new Chemical Complex at Dahej in Gujarat,
India. In view of its healthy financial situation, the company was actively considering
expanding its business operations through the inorganic route in its core area of business
both in India and abroad. The growth plans are given in Exhibit 5.
The company had intermittently taken initiatives to manage its identity and image aspects inthe past. SRF had its logo redesigned by a reputed professional designer, based on its
aspiration and growth plans in 2005. The logo comprised a symbol of infinity and the name
SRF (Exhibit 6, Figure E4). The logo was meant to symbolize excellence, progression and
dynamism. The free flowing shape of infinity also epitomized the continuity which the
company wanted to stand for. However, the exercise was limited to a logo redesign and not
really extended to brand building initiative.
Realization of identity crisis
It was 15 December 2007, a cocktail reception was organized by a well known Industrial
body in New Delhi, capital of India. The venue was buzzing with whos who of the corporate
India. Moving around in the elite gathering, Ashish, who hadbecome MD of his family-ownedbusiness entity SRF in 2006, had felt honored to be in such an august company. But his
elation was short-lived for when he began mingling with the select group of corporate
chieftains who were attending the event, he was shocked to find that hardly anybody
seemed to know about his company, SRF.
Ashish initially struggled to help the audience understand the nature of SRFs business, its
product attributes and product applications. He attempted to introduce the company in a
manner which was easily understood by the common people:
PAGE 2 jEMERALD EMERGING MARKETS CASE STUDIES j VOL. 1 NO. 4 2011
7/29/2019 0000006345-Case SRF Corporate Brand
4/19
If you are sitting in your car, I would like to imagine that the tyres that your car is running on are
made stronger and safer with reinforcement material from SRF; the plastics used in your car are
made by SRF, the refrigerant being used to cool your car is made by SRF; if you are moving in
your Jeep then the soft top is made of SRF-coated fabrics, the potato chips or biscuits your
children may be eating while you drive are packed in material provided by SRF, and the plants
that you see all around are protected by the pesticides that are made of the fluorospeciality
molecules developed by SRF scientists.
Ashish reasoned that the lack of customer familiarity with SRF products was not only because
the products were essentially intermediate products and used by business customers. Part of
the problem also lay in low media coverage of the company. The company had never made a
conscious attempt to communicate to or through media. The company was quite happy at
approaching the business customers directly and making the sales based on productfeatures
its quality and support service. SRF did not advertise in the media.
Ashish in hindsight, also recollected his own previous experiences and interaction with
different business partners, journalists and job aspirants in SRF. He realized that the recall of
the specific attributes of the organization such as a rich legacy of more than hundred years
in business; promoted by one of the most respected business families in India; and founder
of iconic academic institutes of the country like The Lady Shri RamCollege and The Shri Ram
School was very high, but people generally could not relate them with SRF. It could be that
rebranding of the company as SRF, thus losing the prefix Shri Ram also contributed to the
disconnect with the legacy of the group.
Ashish was many a time confronted with different interpretations of the name SRF by users,
mostly erroneous. Many confidently referred to SRF as a fertilizer or a finance company,mistakenly identifying with some other similar sounding companies. Others would confuse it
with other group companies. And, still others would mistake it for SKF, the famous bearing
company.
Though Ashish was aware of SRFs low resonance with the general public, he knew that the
company was known to its customers as well as preferred by them, which was evident from
the business growth. However, the experience at the cocktail party acted like a wake-up call
for him from a different perspective. He realized that the fact that someone never really got
any recognition from the environment outside the organization for working in SRF. He
wondered about the impact of such a situation on the pride and bonding that employee
(existing or prospective) enjoyed with the organization. He concluded that there was
something amiss in the corporate branding of his company.
On his way back home from the party, he pondered about the impact of low brand
awareness in general public. Especially, the fact that a majority of job applicants applying
for various positions at SRF would write: No, I had not heard of SRF before. In almost
30 per cent cases, the candidates would either not appear for interviews or decline offers
despite getting a good position and salary. The absence of brand recognition by the genera
public had an impact on the quality of manpower that SRF was able to attract and retain.
The fact that it also affected the employee motivation and pride was not really apparent at all
levels of the organization. SRF was losing out on their ability to acquire high-quality
manpower which it desperately needed to support its global expansion plans.
By the time, Ashish reached home from the party, he had made his decision: he would act
quickly to rectify this gap. Next day, he was impatient to reach the corporate head office of
SRF, located in very premium locality in Gurgaon, a half an hour drive from his home inNew Delhi. He eagerly waited for the arrival of Kartik Bharat Ram, his younger brother and
Deputy Managing Director at SRF, to share his concern about the urgent need to work on
building awareness about a corporate identity for SRF. After the two had conferred, Head of
Corporate Communications, Mukund Trivedy was called. Ashishs brief to Mukund was:
We need to systematically work on building a corporate brand for SRF, which could be useful and
relevant for our diverse gamut of stakeholders. I dont want you to get into solution mode
immediately. Explore the options and follow a process which would help build an organization
VOL. 1 NO. 4 2011 jEMERALD EMERGING MARKETS CASE STUDIES j PAGE 3
7/29/2019 0000006345-Case SRF Corporate Brand
5/19
wide consensus for the initiative. More importantly, internal alignment with the desired brand
promises is critical.
The corporate brand building initiative
SRF being a total quality management (TQM) driven organization, adopted a systematic
approach for its activities. The way forward on corporate branding was discussed between
Kartik and Mukund. They realized that the visibility and mindshare of SRF among the general
public did not match its market share. This could be an impediment to achieving its
aspiration of achieving global leadership in most of its businesses by 2020. They also
realized that understanding the perspectives of key stakeholders was critical. It was,
therefore, important to understand the image of SRF in the minds of its targets as well as tounderstand how best to build relationships with them. The first step was to list the fallout of
low visibility of brand SRF as perceived by the employees across the entire set of
businesses and across different levels of the organization.
Brand audit internal
Preliminary background work conducted by Mukund in the first six months of 2008 revealed
that the SRF brand had following weaknesses:
B The SRF name did not evoke instant recognition or association while some of its products
were known.
B
The corporate brand was unable to emerge as a clear choice for customers while someproducts were very clear winners.
B SRF was unable to charge a premium for its products across categories by leveraging
some high selling and powerful product brands in its portfolio.
B The company had difficulty in attracting, motivating and retaining talent.
B Investors did not perceive it as an attractive proposition for investment.
B Media did not seem to be interested in the company.
The study also indicated that the employees were concerned about the need to improve the
companys image.One of thekey issuesthat emerged wasthe irrelevanceof the current tagline
Making our nation proud in light of SRFs plan to acquire companies abroad. The obvious
concern was:whether theforeignemployees of theacquiredentities would relate to theconcept
of nation as their own nation? Such ambiguity regarding the brand message did not augur wellfrom the perspective of integrating global workforce with that of the parent company.
On further examination and deliberations, it became clear that the company suffered from
low-brand image due to the following reasons:
B No sustained effort to reach out to the general public.
B Absence of product differentiators that could make the company stands out against
competition.
B Lack of strategic focus on creating and leveraging sustainable competitive advantage.
B Lack of attention to corporate and product branding.
B Absence of an effective corporate identity creation and image management program.
Need to bring in the specialists
These preliminary findings were presented to the CLT, which approved the proposal to hire a
professional brand consultant for the job (as it required specific expertise not available
within the organization). Now, the immediate challenge for Kartik was to get a proper brief
prepared for the consultant and identify competent consultants for the job. He formed a core
team consisting of himself, the MD and Roop Salotra, President and CEO (Chemicals
Business) for the project on branding. Mukund was assigned the operational responsibility
PAGE 4 jEMERALD EMERGING MARKETS CASE STUDIES j VOL. 1 NO. 4 2011
7/29/2019 0000006345-Case SRF Corporate Brand
6/19
of the project and to frame the scope of work and key deliverables for the consultant along
with the brief.
Mukund started off by trying to understand the specific expectations behind the branding
exercise across the organization. Intensive interviews with heads of sales and marketing of
each of the different SBUs helped him understand the branding challenge from
perspectives of the different business verticals and their specific market dynamics. He
followed it up with one-to-one interactions with CEOs and Presidents of the SBUs as well as
some important customers. The interviews were recorded and then transcribed.
Key insights
It was clear from the analysis of the statements recorded that though SRF would like to be a
place where employees felt at home, it was not a place where the younger people really felt like
they could be themselves. The SRF brand was thus internally diffused. People were proud of
SRFs credentials but theywere not excitedby, or engaged withthe brand. Senior management
of course wanted to see more passion and aggression in the employees for driving growth. Its
internal approaches were, however, seen as barriers to realizing the companys full potential
Though, SRF offered a caring, inclusive, systems-oriented work culture, people who did not
have the staying power to learn the system did not easily settle. The detailed findings of
Mukunds preliminary research have been consolidated in Exhibit 7 (Table EIII).
Purpose defined
It was a strange coincidence that each one of the CLT members independently seemed to
agree that SRF should preserve and protect its unique work culture which essentially
revolved around mutual respect, employee friendly approach and integrity. They also
concurred that SRFs field of competence lay in operational excellence.
Taking the process forward, the core team discussed and deliberated on the findings of the
preliminary study for finalizing the brief for the prospective brand consultants. The minutes of
the deliberations are summed up in Exhibit 8 (Table EIV).
Brief for the consultants
The salient points of the brief prepared for the brand consultants were as follows:
1. SRF plans to build and nurture a distinct corporate brand to grow in todays fiercelycompetitive business environment.
2. The purpose of the branding exercise is to create a distinct corporate brand of the
company so that the mere mention of the name SRF inspired trust, respectand admiration
of the people. The desired objective would be to reach a stage when:
B Customers perceived SRF as a trustworthy and quality producer.
B Employees felt proud to be working in the organization.
B Students/prospective employees aspired to make a career in SRF.
B General public looked upon the company with respect and admiration.
B Investors felt secure about their investment.
The branding exercise assumes urgency as SRF is poised to grow inorganically as well asorganically. A powerful brand would enable SRF to initiate new ventures and partnerships
with greater agility and speed. It would also improve the speed to access new markets
across its diverse product portfolio.
The scope of work
The objective is to build an overall corporate brand of the company. The work would include
the following:
VOL. 1 NO. 4 2011 jEMERALD EMERGING MARKETS CASE STUDIES j PAGE 5
7/29/2019 0000006345-Case SRF Corporate Brand
7/19
Analyzing what the company stood for
Defining the brand promises/offerings (like unique features of the companys products and
services, environment conducive to work, commitment to community development, etc.) that
the company is committed to deliver consistently.
Ensuring that the brand promises are in tune with the companys aspiration, corporate
culture and values.
Developing a clear roadmap with brand building strategies.
Search for consultants
Most of the agencies Mukund contacted appeared to offer only advertising led brand creationstrategies. This was possibly because most dealt with fast moving consumer goods (FMCG)
companies who needed to reach out directly to large number of consumers. A majority of the
agencies admittedthat they had never worked on assignments such as the one offeredby SRF
which had only business customers. A few individual brand strategy consultants refused to
pitch in saying they would work only on invitation. Budget was another constraint that inhibited
SRF from approachingthe really big agencies. However, since thiswas a verycriticalprojectfor
SRF, it was imperative to hire the best that their limited budget could afford. After an intensive
search of two months, Mukund finally short-listed five consultants including some of
international repute (Exhibit 9, TableEV, presents the key credentials of the agencies) who were
invited to make a presentation to his team, based on the brief.
The comparison of the offers revealed that the proposed costs were similar and the timelines
were also matching. However, none of the agencies/consultants had earlier handled such aproject for a company with predominantly business customers. Finally, based on the team
composition and the methodology proposed, three were short-listed. The finalization of the
brand consultant was left to the CLT. The summary of the key differentiators of the three
short-listed consultants are presented in Exhibit 10 (Table EVI).
To help the CLT to take a more informed decision, the three short-listed agencies, A, C and D
were once again asked to present their revised proposals along with the details of the
process to be followed, project timelines, key milestones and deliverables to the CLT.
Short listing consultants
Advertising agency A, which was of international repute, created quite an impact given their
background of creative solutions for national and international clients. They also offered to
engage another brand consulting agency from Bangalore to work on the project to bring indomain expertise relevant to SRF. The CEOs of both the entities, located in Bangalore and
Mumbai, were not only personally present at the meeting to pitch their case but also offered
to get involved in the strategy formulation exercise for SRF. The chairman of the agency, who
was an advertising professional, had been involved with many prize winning advertising
campaigns. He had also produced some television documentaries. The agency proposed to
use their tried and tested standard framework of brand building strategy in the SRF case.
The agency A had grown from a start-up advertising agency in the UK to a global creative
communications company headquartered in the USA with close to 150 offices in around 75
countries. The agency was part of one of the worlds largest communications groups. The
global advertising agency was a full service, integrated communications network. Through
their creative ideas across all media and all disciplines, they claimed to turn brands into
something people fell in love with, which generate loyalty beyond reason. They believepassionately in the power of ideas to differentiate and motivate.
Agency C, which was also of international repute, gave a very detailed proposal, especially
developed for SRFwithwell defined processes,milestones and deliverables. Another featureof
this agency was that its core team that was supposed to work on SRF account was situated in
Delhi, 45 minutes drive from SRF head quarters. They claimed to have a large number of their
clients located in Gurgaon. However, this team which looked knowledgeable and impressive
during the presentation was much younger and had considerably less experience.
PAGE 6 jEMERALD EMERGING MARKETS CASE STUDIES j VOL. 1 NO. 4 2011
7/29/2019 0000006345-Case SRF Corporate Brand
8/19
The agency had helped build many of the worlds most valuable brands and successful
marketers. Together with its patterns, they claimed to have the capability to put together a
meaningful human purpose at the centre of their clients brand to transform the way people
thought, felt and ultimately behaved. They further claimed that everything they did for brand
was designed with human purpose in mind. They also presented a framework for defining
the brand charter, i.e. defining what the company did, what it stood for and what made its
unique. This exercise was based on (a) detailed one-on-one interaction with the companys
senior leadership team and qualitative and quantitative brand survey among different
stakeholders including employees, (b) developing organizational capability to deliver
relevant brand experience, i.e. ensuring people are trained in demonstrating the right
experience at every touch point and (c) external activation of the brand at an appropriate
time in future when the organization was ready to defend its promises. The agency also
presented a framework for measuring the effectiveness of their brand building initiatives.
Agency D claimed to have experienced people on board and also made an impact with their
suggested methodology. Most of their work shown in their credentials seemed to revolve
around advertisements only. This agency was a start up, set up by two very experienced
professionals, one from the advertising world and the other from academics, they claimed
that their overhead cost was significantly lower and hence they offered to reduce the cost
even further. In fact, the chairman of the agency was the founder of a well-known consulting
firm that specialized in branding, marketing and brand audits. He had also written two books
on communications and branding. A graduate engineer and an MBA from Indias premiere
academic institute, the chairman, had over 25 years of experience in the brand management
at Indians top advertising agencies. He had developed a proprietary brand building
process, which he called the Brand Culturalization process that had already worked for
many Indian and multi-national companies. Someone who conducted brand workshops
even for the advertising fraternity had a unique brand mantra: start Thinking Customers,
Thinking Emotions. He strongly projected his belief that building brand and organizationa
strategies around consumers could help companies transform their business.
Decision dilemma
It was obvious that it was critical for SRF to keep the momentum of its business growth going
in order to fuel its global expansion plan. Ashish was confident that a corporate branding
exercise would be a step in the right direction. However, which was the more appropriate
agency for SRF, as there were disagreements in the CLT.
There were also reservations in sections of the CLT about the quality of the short-listed
agencies leading to considerable doubt about the value they could deliver. Some of the CLT
members had also expressed their concern about the near absence of requisite experience
of the brand consultants in similar kind of industrial set ups. Ashish, however, did not
consider lack of experience to be a major handicap in doing a good job for SRF.
Besides, there were differences of opinion in the choice of consultants as well; whether to go
for experienced individuals or work with a reputed agency. In the recent past, SRF did not
have a good experience with a consulting firm where the team members kept changing at
regular intervals. Another general perception that existed among the CLT members was that
the reputed agencies would charge exorbitant fee for any additional work beyond the
pre-specified scope of work, and they recommend expensive solutions including
advertising which were not the best solutions for SRF. There were also concerns about theability of individual consultants to tie up with other agencies when required. Moreover,
working with an individual in a long-term project seemed to be a risky proposition.
Desirable vs available
Ashish knew that many of the questions raised were valid but he felt that the decision in this
case had to be based on what was available, and not what was ideal. The problem was
compounded by the fact that all of the agencies which were short-listed had some or the
VOL. 1 NO. 4 2011 jEMERALD EMERGING MARKETS CASE STUDIES j PAGE 7
7/29/2019 0000006345-Case SRF Corporate Brand
9/19
other limitations. None of the agencies was likely to get the wholehearted approval of the
entire CLT.
Consensus building
Ashish was keen on achieving a consensus among CLT members about the selection of a
brand consultant. He was, however, more concerned about zeroing in on the right consultant
who would understand SRF way of doing business and thus provides tailor-made strategies.
Implicit in the consensus was the buy-in of all the CLT members, so essential for successful
implementation of any company wide initiative. He combed through the interviews of the CLT
members, which was part of the file given to him. He started looking for the relevant parts
and underlined what he felt were significant for different members (Exhibit 11 gives the
underlined part of the report).
Ashish finally agreed on the following set of selection criteria:
B well defined milestones for the project in order to avoid any cost and time overrun;
B brand consultants ability to comprehend SRFs unique culture and values;
B value-match with the consultant; and
B ease of working relationship.
Keywords:
Selecting brand consultant,
Corporate branding,
Brand building,
Consultants
Exhibit 1. Composition and profile of CLT of SRF
Arun Bharat Ram (Chairman)
Arun Bharat Ram, Chairman of SRF Limited is an alumnus of the University of Michigan, USA.A mid-handicap golfer and a keen musician, having learnt under the renowned maestro Pt.Ravi Shankar, he plays the sitar whenever possible. Arun Bharat Ram belongs to a renownedindustrialist family of Delhi, well known for its contribution in the field of education, art, cultureand sports.
Ashish Bharat Ram (Managing Director)
Ashish Bharat Ram took over as managing Director of SRF Ltd in 2006. He has assumedvarious responsibilities across different verticals since he joined SRF in 1994. Under hisleadership SRF has grown into a multi-location global entity with operations in four countries.
Kartik Bharat Ram (Deputy Managing Director)
Kartik Bharat Ram took over as Deputy Managing Director of SRF Limited in February 2007.In his current role, Kartik is largely involved in creation and strengthening of a culture of totalexcellence across the organization with studied focus on TQM as SRF way of management.He is passionately involved in driving aspirations of the company through value-based
Figure E1
Chairman
MD
Deputy MD
President(HR)
President &CEO (TTB)
President& CEO
(CB)
President& CEO
(Proj
R & D)
President(C.F.O)
PAGE 8 jEMERALD EMERGING MARKETS CASE STUDIES j VOL. 1 NO. 4 2011
7/29/2019 0000006345-Case SRF Corporate Brand
10/19
leadership. Kartik is also striving to build SRF into a trusted corporate brand one that isrespected for its commitment to deliver sustainable growth through total excellence. He hasalso been associated with designing business processes with Coopers & Lybrand for settingup a new factory under SRFs business in UAE.
Rajendra Prasad (President and CFO)
Prior to joining SRF as CFO in March 2006, Rajendra Prasad worked with American Expressfor 17 years summing up his tenure as the Lead Controller for the entities in India andadjoining countries. Earlier, he also had a brief stint in the civil services of the Government ofIndia, the hospitality and the manufacturing sectors. With over 29 years of diverseexperience Rajendra Prasad is currently responsible for designing, defining andimplementing policies and process improvements in finance. He has also been
spearheading a task of putting into place a company wide risk control mechanism.Roop Salotra (President and CEO Chemicals Business and Packaging Films Business)
Roop Salotra is actively involved in Montreal and Kyoto Protocol initiatives on behalf of theIndian industry and has acted as support for the Indian Government in the negotiations ofthe protocols. Under his leadership SRF acquired a unique distinction of being one of thefirst industries in India to invest in clean development mechanism (CDM) under Kyotoprotocol to reduce carbon emissions. He has also been instrumental in ensuring successfulphase out of the production of ozone depleting refrigerant gases at SRF as per the MontrealProtocol.
Suresh Tripathi (President Human Resources)
With over 27 years of experience in the field of Human Resource, Suresh Dutt Tripathi hasbeen spearheading his passion of Institution Building through value-based leadership atSRF. Currently, he is deeply involved in integration of the companys recently acquired unitsin Thailand and South Africa. Recently, Suresh has also taken over additional responsibilityas CEO of Shri Educare Ltd, a new venture of promoters of SRF in the field of education.
Sushil Kapoor (President and CEO Technical Textiles Business)
Sushil Kapoor is at the helm of the largest business segment of the company, the TechnicalTextiles Business. With over 28 years of diversified experience, he assumed many rolesspanning purchase, projects, operations, sales and marketing across engineeringchemicals and technical textiles industries. His authority on technical matters, hands-onapproach to leadership and inter-personal skills have enabled him to turnaround many of theoperational units in SRF, a feat that has earned him a title of turnaround expert. He alsoplayed a key role in two successful overseas acquisitions for SRF during 2008, the one inThailand and the other one in South Africa in addition to commissioning projects for SRFsmaiden entry into the arena of Polyester Industrial Yarn and Laminated Fabrics.
Rajdeep Anand (President Projects and R&D)
Rajdeep Anand drives the companys vision of creating value through innovation inrefrigerants and life science products. He has been involved in building the companysin-house R&D capability in high end of technology in new generation refrigerants andspeciality chemicals that is recognized and respected by the leading global players in thesespaces.
Source: The report given to CLT members.
VOL. 1 NO. 4 2011 jEMERALD EMERGING MARKETS CASE STUDIES j PAGE 9
7/29/2019 0000006345-Case SRF Corporate Brand
11/19
Exhibit 2. The product range and business structure of SRF
Figure E3
Notes: TTB, technical textiles business; CB, chemical business;
PFB, packaging film business; EPB: engineering plastic business;
IYB, industrial yarn business
Source: Companys Office Diary (2010)
Figure E2
PAGE 10 jEMERALD EMERGING MARKETS CASE STUDIESj VOL. 1 NO. 4 2011
7/29/2019 0000006345-Case SRF Corporate Brand
12/19
Exhibit 3. The product applications
Table
EI
Business
Product
Applications
Technicaltextilesbusines
s
Nylontyrecord
Reinforcementsfor
allkindsoftyresrangingfrom
bicycletocartoheavycommercial
vehicles
Beltingfabrics
Reinforcementforc
onveyorbeltsusedinminingandutilityc
ompanies
Coatedfabrics
Fabricatedintoawn
ings,tarpaulinsandcanopiesthatareus
edontrucksandjeeps,
coversthatkeepcricketpitches,tenniscourtsandsportsfieldsdrywhentheraingods
spoiltheshow,sma
rtsportskitsandevenmakeshifttentsus
edforweddingparties
IndustrialYarns(bothtwinesandyarn
s)
Usedasfishnets,ro
pes,
industrialsewingthread,chaferfabr
icsusedincycletyresand
narrowindustrialtapes
Chemicalsbusiness
Refrigerants
Usedforrefrigeratio
nandair-conditioninginavarietyofindu
strial,commercialand
householdapplications.
HCFC-22isthecoolingagentindom
esticair-conditioners,and
isarawmaterialformakingTeflon,thecoatingthataddsnon-sticktokitchenware.
HFC
134aisanewgenerationozone-friendlyrefrigerant,usedinre
frigeratorsandincarsand
aspropellantsinph
armaceuticalapplicationssuchasinhale
rs
Chloromethanes
Usedassolventsandfoam-blowingagents
Fluorospecialities
Usedasorganicbu
ildingblocks/intermediatesinpharmaceuticalandagrochemical
industries
Engineeringplastics
business
Engineeringplastics
Usedincarsand2-
wheelers,switchgear,MCBhousings,
CFLbulbholders,
bulbholder
housings,pulleysandindustrialgearboxes
Packagingfilmsbusiness
Polyesterfilms/biaxiallyorientedpolyethylene
terephthalatefilms
Predominantlyused
inflexiblepackagingapplications.
Also
usedbyconvertersfor
makingpackagingmaterialforawidevarietyofFMCGproductssuchassoapsand
detergents,tea,sha
mpoosachets,packagedwheatflour,etc.
Source:Companydocum
ents
VOL. 1 NO. 4 2011 jEMERALD EMERGING MARKETS CASE STUDIES j PAGE 11
7/29/2019 0000006345-Case SRF Corporate Brand
13/19
Exhibit 4. Consolidated financial figures of SRF Ltd, all figures in Rs million
Exhibit 5. Growth plans of SRF
Recent acquisitions. As part of its growth strategy SRF has recently acquired two foreignentities, one in Thailand, and the other one in South Africa.
Thai Baroda Industries Ltd, Thailand. SRF acquired this plant, a manufacturer of tyre cord in2008. After acquisition the unit has been renamed SRF Technical Textiles (Thailand) Ltd Withthis acquisition, SRFs world ranking improved from 3rd to 2nd in the production of Nylon 6tyre cord.
Industex Technical Textiles (Pty) Ltd, South Africa. SRF acquired this unit, a manufacturer ofbelting fabrics, in 2008. After acquisition he unit has been renamed SRF Industex Belting
(Pty) Ltd. With this acquisition, SRFs world ranking improved from 3rd to 2nd in theproduction of Nylon 6 tyre cord.
Planned projects in immediate future. Expansion of coated fabrics the board hasapproved a capex proposal to enhance the capacity of Coated Fabrics by 170 lakh m2 perannum at SRFs existing plant location in Gummidipoondi at a total investment ofapproximately Rs 143 crore. The new facility when completed will enable SRF to offer newproducts such as lacquered tarpaulins and fabrics for tensile structures and awnings as wellas polyurethane coated fabrics which are emerging applications in India.
Table EII
Particulars Year ended 31 March 2008 Year ended 31 March 2007
Net sales/income from operations 16,835.3 18,865.2
Other income 187.9 132.5
Total income 17,023.2 18,997.7
Total expenditure 14,458.2 14,039.1
(Increase)/decrease in stock 87.0 (207.0)
Consumption of raw materials 9,456.0 9,267.7Purchase of traded goods 20.8 14.7
Power and fuel 1,470.5 1,504.0
Employee cost 869.6 778.2
Depreciation 997.0 846.0
Additional depreciation 48.5
Other expenditure 1,508.8 1,835.5
Interest and finance charges (net) 357.2 366.1
Exchange currency fluctuation loss/(gain) 210.0 166.8
Exceptional items 13.3
Profit/(loss) from ordinary activities before tax 1,984.5 4,425.7
Provision for tax current 430.6 1,318.2
Provision for tax deferred 212.1 191.7
Provision for tax earlier years (4.8) 32.3
Net profit/(loss) from ordinary activities after tax 1,346.6 2,883.4Segment wise revenue, results and capital employed
Segment revenue
Technical textiles business (TTB) 9,088.0 8,699.9
Chemicals business (CB) 4,789.4 7,294.4
Packaging film business (PFB) 2,275.7 2,031.0
Segment results (PBIT)
TTB 199.1 466.8
CB 2,552.8 4,834.2
Packaging film business (PFB) 213.6 (53.4)
Capital employed (segment assets in production less-segment liabilities)
TTB 9,103.7 8,863.2CB 2,905.2 1,580.1
PFB 1,815.4 1,891.7
Source:Published company records
PAGE 12 jEMERALD EMERGING MARKETS CASE STUDIESj VOL. 1 NO. 4 2011
7/29/2019 0000006345-Case SRF Corporate Brand
14/19
Multi-purpose chemical complex SRF is currently in the midst of planning a chemicacomplex at Dahej in Gujarat. The plant that is driven by R&D on commissioning will producearound 20,000 tonnes of a chemical product. The project is scheduled to be completed bythe first quarter of 2012.
Source: web site of SRF Ltd.
Exhibit 6. The SRF logo
Exhibit 7. Summary of the preliminary research report
Purpose statement of SRF
Make our nation proud by being the best at what we do.
Desired public perception about SRF
B An Indian company that is expanding in a big way beyond the shores of India throughlarge international acquisitions.
B An employee friendly organization.
B An Indian multi-national business group.B A professional organization with ethical management.
B Professionals are valued.
Something that should never change about SRF
B care and respect for people;
B trustworthiness;
Figure E4
Source: Website of SRF Ltd
Table EIII
Target audience Their perception of SRF Desired perception
Employees An employee friendly company
Not very sure of the future plans
A proud workplace
Clarity on companys future plans
Future employees Do not know much Aware of the company, its future plans and
potential
Investors Making money through CDM only A blue chip company
Customers A reliable supplier A reliable supplier
The only supplier for their requirements of bothproducts and services
Community Not many know about its CSR activities A good corporate citizen
VOL. 1 NO. 4 2011 jEMERALD EMERGING MARKETS CASE STUDIES j PAGE 13
7/29/2019 0000006345-Case SRF Corporate Brand
15/19
B its business practices dependability and reliability;
B ethical management; and
B equal opportunity.
Insights on why did employees leave SRF?
B SRF was not among the top quartile of employers in terms of salary and growthopportunities within the organization.
B People usually left within the first six months of joining because of the obsession with theTQM way of doing things at SRF.
Critical insights (verbatim representation) of CLT members of SRF
B We are very good at what we do. We are innovative, reliable, quality oriented andenvironmentally sensitive. This was the image we need to build because it was inherent inwhat we are trying to do. No other company in India does all that.
B All of our products are intermediates and are in the commodity segment.
B R&D holds the key to the companys success. It strives to create niche products out ofcommodity products. Innovation and technological breakthroughs are extremely criticalfor the future. We do not recognize this enough. Growth will be both through acquisitionsand innovation.
B Now the company was actively considering its choices in diversifying its product portfolioas well as exploring the international markets, and a full-fledged corporate brand buildingexercise was required.
B Each business has its own set of competitors but what makes SRF stand out is that itsbusiness partners can trust SRFs word. Commitment is something that SRF stands byeven if there are fluctuations in the market.
B The group SRF was running on trust and that was the strongest pillar!
B The customers of SRF know that SRF will never resort to any unfair means.
B In terms of Fluoro-specialities verticals, we have become the leader but overall as acompany, we are far from being the leader in research.
B In the tyre cord and refrigerant business there should be no one in the industry whodoesnt know of SRF. But the end consumer does not know SRF. To be a leader, thebusiness space ought to know of us.
B We are the trustworthy solution providers, who are working towards solving customer
needs versus just giving a product.
B SRF was known for the quality of its products among its customers. Customers preferbuying from SRF for ease of dealing, quality of products, and tradition of honoringcommitments.
Source: Company records.
PAGE 14 jEMERALD EMERGING MARKETS CASE STUDIESj VOL. 1 NO. 4 2011
7/29/2019 0000006345-Case SRF Corporate Brand
16/19
Exhibit 8. Product vs corporate brand deliberations
Table
EIV
Advantagesofproductb
randingforSRF
Advantagesofco
rporatebrandingforSRF
Theproductshadveryd
istinctanddifferentcustomerbaseswith
diverseneeds
Thecompanywasdiversifiedandastrongcorporatebrand
waseasiertoleverage
acrosscategories
Technologydrivenprodu
ctsandsoldessentiallytoaselectsetof
customers
TheB2Bcompaniesdependedonreferencingandtheproductspecificreferences
weredifficulttole
verageacrosscategories
Allthebusinesseswereprofitcentersandhencetheyweremore
likelytosupport
thebrandbuildingspendastheyreapeddirectbenefit
Theamountofmo
neyrequiredtosupportmanysmallbrand
swaslikelytoaddupto
averybigamoun
t
Themanpowerwasmostlyinthefactory.
Theskilledmanpowerw
aslikelytobe
awareabouttheproductandproductbrandwaslikelytobemore
helpfulIn
attractingtherighttalent.
Forunskilledmanpower,brandmightno
tbecritical
Corporatebrandwaslikelytoprovidesynergiesandcouldbeleveragedwithlarger
numberofstakeh
olderslikefinancialinstitutionandglobal
audience
DisadvantagesofproductbrandingforSRF
DisadvantagesofcorporatebrandingforSRF
Successfulproductcouldnotbeleveragedacrosscategories
Itmaybeatimeconsumingandcostlywhichmaynotgen
eratethedesired
businessspecific
impact
Moremoneywouldbere
quiredintotalaswellastheentiresynergycouldnotbe
utilized
Theeffectiveness
isdifficulttomeasureandhenceresourc
eutilizationmaynotbe
mostefficient
ThecontrolonbrandbuildinglayintheSBUsandhencethebran
dasaresource
wouldnotbedeveloped
andhenceharnessedtoitsfullpotential
Thebusinessesarediverseandhencecreatingacorporate
brandwhichintegrates
allofthem
aswellastakeadvantageofthesynergyisquiteachallengeand
resourceintensive
Source:CLTfile
VOL. 1 NO. 4 2011 jEMERALD EMERGING MARKETS CASE STUDIES j PAGE 15
7/29/2019 0000006345-Case SRF Corporate Brand
17/19
Exhibit 9. Agency credentials
Table
EV
Brandconsultant
C
redentials
Rema
rksbyMukund
A
A
ninternationalagency,with138officesin
82countries
Theyhavetheirownmodelforcreatingab
randwhichenjoyed
high-brandloyalty
C
lientprofile:nearlyhalfofthetop100mo
stvaluableglobalbrands,
in
cludingfiveofthetopten
They
areoneofthebestinthebusiness
Their
participationwillgiveusanewperspectiveontheproject
They
arefavorablylocatedinGurgaon
They
arekeentotakeuptheSRFprojectandhencemayevenquotea
comp
etitiveprice
B
A
partofaninternationalagencythatoperatesoutofover150countries
In
India,theyarefiveyearsold,withofficesinDelhiandMumbai
A
mongthelargestagenciesinDelhiwithc
loseto100committed
p
rofessionalsworkingunderoneroof
C
lientcrofile:someofthemulti-nationalsincludingbiggestadvertisersin
In
dia
U
niqueness:offeredanarrayofservicesfrom
brandcommunicationto
d
igitalandmobilemarketingtoonground
activationsolutionsthrougha
singleentity
They
areoneofthebestinthebusiness
Thed
igitalmediawasanupcomingfieldwhichSRFcouldleveragein
future
They
didnothaveanysmallbudgetclients
C
W
asoneoftheworldsmostreputedadvertisingagencies
Theirmajorclientsincludedmulti-nationals
andtheyheldmostofthe
accountsacrosstheworld
They
areoneofthebestinthebusinessandm
ostoftheirclientswerein
Gurgaon,socoordinationwouldnotbeaprob
lem
D
Thetwoownerswereexperiencedinthefieldofadvertisingwithexcellent
academicandprofessionalcredentials
O
ver25yearsofcorporateexperiencewithtopadvertisingagencies
S
trategicmarketing,salespromotionandCRM
consultant
Lastassignmentasexecutivevice-presidentofaninternational
advertisingagency
A
ctivelyinvolvedinacademicfrontcurre
ntlyteachingbrandbuilding
andCRM
atsomeofthetopmanagement
institutionsinthecountry
B
randbuildingassociationswithsixtosev
enbigadvertisers
Owne
rswerewellknownprofessionals,
havingareputationofdeveloping
sever
alsuccessfulbrands
Their
ratesarelikelytobecompetitive
E
O
wnerhad39yearsofexperienceinthec
ommunicationsindustry
H
ebeganhiscareerwithaninternationala
gency(waspostedinLondon
andIndia)wherehespent22years
H
ewaspastPresidentandCEOofanotherin
ternationaladvertisingagency
w
hichexitedIndia
Heha
sexperienceandreputationtodevelops
uccessfulbrandbuilding
strate
gies
Heco
uldnotprovidealltheservices,
butwouldberesourcefulin
arrangingdifferentservicesrequiredinbrandbuildingexercise
PAGE 16 jEMERALD EMERGING MARKETS CASE STUDIESj VOL. 1 NO. 4 2011
7/29/2019 0000006345-Case SRF Corporate Brand
18/19
Exhibit 10. Key differentiators of the three short-listed consultants
Exhibit 11. Relevant excerpts from the interviews as in the transcripts, underlined byAshish
Arun Bharat Ram
All our products are products which are converted by others to end products. SRF in manyways is as good as DCM and theres no reason why we should not be recognized for it. Weare a significant player in the world yet we get no visibility.
Why visibility is important? Share price is not as important to drive up. But the fair price of theshare should be there. It is extremely important to be known as a strong ethical player toattract talent. We want everyone in the organization to feel pride in SRF.
Investors are less of a concern. That will come. Maximum recognition should be with peoplewho are current and prospective employees. Customers are less of an issue. This is basedon customer relationships. The public at large is of secondary importance. Internationalcustomers are important, because in future, we hope to build many relationships.
SRF would be a humane person who respects people, recognises competence, does notnecessarily reward adequately. Reasonably risk averse, and lives by its integrity codes. Anopen person who gives opportunities to others to say what they want.
Kartik Bharat Ram
As one of its objectives, SRF aims to achieve a certain level of familiarity among the generalpublic, especially potential recruits (employable people). SRF now recruits from tier 2 townsbut aims to get the cream from those institutes. To these potential employees, SRF aspires tobe sought as a caring company, not overtly aggressive but not too conservative either, acompany which aims for financially prudent growth.
Each business has its own set of competitors but what makes SRF stand out is that it thebusiness partners can take SRFs word. Commitment is something that SRF stands by even ifthere are fluctuations in the market.
Rajendra Prasad
By the end of 2009, the goal is to get stake holders know that there is a multi-nationalmulti-business group. At this moment, there is a muddled up issue of the identity of SRF andthe objective is to make them understand this group better. For the employees, SRF shouldcreate an identity so that they are recognized as employees of a multi-national business
Table EVI
Agency Individual/agency Team
Comments of the Corporate Communication
Team
A Advertising agency The agency proposed to hire another agency as
brand expert for the SRF project. The CEOs of
both the organizations were present in the
meeting. The two CEOs seemed to be very keen
and claimed to be personally involved in theproject
They seemed to have a single model for
developing brand strategies for all organizations
They, however, did not present the details of their
methodology and project milestones
C Advertising agency It was a two member team headed by an expert
who had worked in the USA on brand strategies.
Both the members had around six to eight years
of work experience
They seemed to have done a preliminary
research on SRF brand. They not only presented
a detailed outline of the process with clear
milestones but also presented a possible solution
based on their limited research, which impressed
everyone present in the meeting. The focus was
on creating a brand charter before launching
brand activation plans
D Individual consultant It was largely a two-member team, both having
more than 25 years of experience. They were
also running a small advertising agency
They presented a model for corporate brand
identity building framework with a strong
emphasis on creating a culture of brand
internally
Source: Internal report of SRF
VOL. 1 NO. 4 2011 jEMERALD EMERGING MARKETS CASE STUDIES j PAGE 17
7/29/2019 0000006345-Case SRF Corporate Brand
19/19
group. Experience of handling multi-national brands across multiple locations would beuseful for SRF.
Roop Salotra
I would like SRF to be recognized as a good company to work with. People should know whatSRF stands for. SRF is a strong, promoter-driven yet professionally managed company. It is aplace where you can get the best of both worlds. It is a brand that believes in corporategovernance, a professional environment. It is compassionate, has long-term vision and doesnot get bogged down by rules and regulations. SRFs strategy is to expand in a big waybeyond the shores of India. We are actively pursuing large, international acquisitions.
Internal employees should understand SRF well as it can get more challenging because ouracquisitions are adding a larger number of employees who are unfamiliar with what SRFstands for. Communication to these new employees is especially important and that has tovery innovative and interesting for them to register.
Floron is the only product with a clear, recognized branding. The goal of brand building is toreach mechanics as reaching end-users is too costly.
Rajdeep Anand
SRF should be seen by people around as a professional organization with ethicalmanagement, and growth oriented (not seen as one today). Not just a brand for products buta strong corporate brand.
In refrigerants, we should be big and this is where we require a string product brand butwhen it comes to other business verticals, we need a strong corporate brand. The brandstrategy should be appealing, workable and it should just not be just about creativeexcellence or good presentation.
S.D. Tripathi
SRF, being in the commodity market, should not be degraded down to the level of anunethical and a hardcore business oriented company. The perception of a commoditymanufacturer is that in the market mainly due to the smaller manufacturers who usually sellout of places like Chandni Chowk (an important wholesale market in Delhi). The brand canonly be understood and delivered by people who are going to put adequate time and effortin understanding the nuances of the market.
Corresponding author
Jaydeep Mukherjee can be contacted at: jmukherjee@mdi.ac.in
PAGE 18 jEMERALD EMERGING MARKETS CASE STUDIESj VOL. 1 NO. 4 2011