MAM
Culture should be used for market segmentation and not geographies: Chaudhuri
MUMBAI: Since the launch of International brands in the Indian market, there have been few successful stories and few unsuccessful stories too. But there has always been learning for all, and that is- “don‘t treat Indian customers like those of other parts of the world”.
Culture and people here are different and the market need to be targeted differently. It‘s same for the other markets of the world. Strategy of one market can not successfully work in the other; says IIPM dean (centre for graduate studies) and Planman Consulting director Rajita Chaudhuri, while speaking at the World Brand Congress 2011 that concluded here today.
She said, “Culture is the new tool for branding. As marketers, one should remember that standardising doesn‘t work. Cultural influences remain strong. The way a consumer decides to pick a brand is culture specific. In the west there are pragmatic consumers, in east there are critical consumers, in north there are consumers who can be influenced by entertaining campaigns while for the south the campaign has to be informative.”
Further explaining with examples, she mentioned, “When Coca Cola launched in India, they came up with the same western campaign and it failed drastically. Even Dove‘s ‘Real Beauty‘ campaign in China was unsuccessful because ‘Chinese don‘t believe in real beauty concept‘. KFC when launched in India served chicken wings but it didn‘t work very well and it eventually started serving vegetarian to Indians too. So, those brands who change survive. Coca-Cola changed its campaign theme to ‘thanda matlab Coca Cola‘ and it succeeded.”
“MTV offered only English music but then it changed to Hindi and survived. Pillsbury has come up with Punjabi flour. Samsung, Nike‘s, Pepsi who have associated with cricket have managed to break the clutter. Britannia came up with biscuits that can be dipped in tea and consumed. It became a hit as we Indians love to do that.”
Talking about homogeneity, she added, “India is not homogeneous, the markets are no longer homogenous. Culture should be used for market segmentation and not geographies. Customisation is essential. For Bengali market LG has attachments in microwave for cooking fish, for south they have attachment that can help them make Idli. Cavinkare (Fairever) has promoted that the cream is made with saffron and milk so it will not only keep the skin fair but also healthy. This is very impactful for target market like India.”
According to her packaging should also be influenced by culture. She said, “Shampoo sachets and combo packs for Punjabis are example of it. Those who understand the local market will rule.”
MAM
Brands push beyond compliance as trust takes centre stage
ASCI AdTrust Summit 2026 spotlights shift from legal checks to credibility.
MUMBAI: In a world where a disclaimer can be legally sound yet socially suspect, brands are learning that compliance may tick boxes but trust wins markets. At the inaugural ASCI AdTrust Summit 2026, a panel on “Beyond Compliance: The New Currency of Trust” unpacked a growing industry reality: the gap between what the law permits and what consumers accept is widening and fast.
Moderated by Meenakshi Ramkumar of National Law School of India University, the discussion brought together leaders across law, marketing and academia to examine how brands must evolve in a digital ecosystem increasingly shaped by scrutiny, scepticism and speed.
Ramkumar set the tone by highlighting a critical shift, advertising today operates in the same digital space that fuels misinformation, scams and fake news, making credibility harder to establish. “The challenge is not just about what brands do, but the broader context of low institutional trust,” she noted, adding that when violations go unchecked, trust erodes not just in brands but in the regulatory system itself.
This vacuum, she said, has given rise to consumer activism from boycotts to social media backlash as a parallel accountability mechanism.
For Amit Bhasin, Chief Legal Officer at Marico, the distinction was clear, legal compliance is non negotiable, but insufficient. “Compliance is the minimum threshold. The real challenge is staying aligned with changing consumer expectations,” he said.
He pointed to how advertising narratives have evolved from traditional depictions of gender roles to more shared responsibilities reflecting a broader societal shift. “Earlier, it was fine to show one person doing the household work. Today, that may not land well. Consumers expect brands to reflect reality,” Bhasin observed.
He also highlighted internal debates where campaigns that may be legally permissible are still rejected for being culturally insensitive, noting that responsible advertising often requires asking uncomfortable questions before the public does.
If compliance is the baseline, reputation is the battlefield.
Bhasin noted that reputational risk has become a far greater concern than legal exposure, particularly in an era where campaigns can be dissected within hours online. “Earlier, a controversial ad might invite a newspaper editorial. Today, within hours, you’re at the centre of a storm,” he said.
Brands, he added, now evaluate campaigns through a dual lens legal viability and reputational vulnerability with the latter often proving more decisive.
From a healthcare perspective, Satish Sahoo of Cipla Health underscored the complexity of operating within fragmented yet stringent regulatory frameworks, spanning drugs, food, cosmetics and Ayush. “Anything under a drug licence is the most tightly regulated,” he said, adding that this necessitates proactive, not reactive, compliance.
He shared an example from the oral rehydration salts (ORS) category, where Cipla resisted the temptation to position products aggressively despite competitive pressure. “Our product is WHO compliant, and our communication reflects that. We chose not to blur the lines, even if others did,” he noted.
The long term payoff, he suggested, lies in credibility built over consistency, not quick wins.
Yet, as Harsha N of National Law School of India University pointed out, even perfect compliance does not guarantee trust. Drawing from historical and modern examples from exaggerated product claims in the 1800s to contemporary environmental and health advertising, he argued that legal frameworks often lag behind consumer expectations. “A brand can be fully compliant and still be perceived as misleading,” he said, citing instances where fine print disclosures fail to reach or convince the average consumer. He added that larger companies carry a disproportionate responsibility to set ethical benchmarks, even in areas where the law remains silent.
The conversation also turned to digital advertising, where the challenge extends beyond content to how ads are experienced. From algorithmic targeting to personalised messaging, brands now operate in an environment where regulation struggles to keep pace with technology.
Sahoo noted that social media has amplified awareness, with influencers and consumers increasingly scrutinising product claims and calling out inconsistencies. “Awareness has gone up dramatically. People are questioning what goes into products and what brands are saying,” he said.
The role of self regulatory bodies such as Advertising Standards Council of India also came under the spotlight.
Harsha acknowledged that while SROs play a crucial role, they are not immune to criticism, particularly around perceived conflicts of interest and enforcement gaps. “SROs have a higher threshold of responsibility not just to interpret the law, but to anticipate societal expectations,” he said.
He added that failures in self regulation often push the burden back onto government intervention, underscoring the need for stronger, more proactive oversight.
One of the more nuanced debates centred on whether building trust comes at a cost. While Sahoo acknowledged that quality and compliance can increase costs, he argued that companies must absorb them as part of their long term strategy.
Bhasin, however, framed the challenge differently not as cost, but as competitiveness in a market where not all players play by the same rules. “The real tension is when others cut corners and you choose not to,” he said.
The panel concluded with a call to embed trust into business metrics.
Sahoo suggested that organisations must go beyond revenue targets to include consumer equity and trust based KPIs, ensuring that ethical considerations are not sidelined in the pursuit of growth. “Trust sounds abstract, but it can translate into measurable consumer equity,” he said.
As the discussion wrapped up, one message stood out: the rules of advertising are being rewritten not just by regulators, but by consumers themselves. In an ecosystem where attention is fleeting and scepticism is high, brands that merely comply may survive, but those that build trust are the ones that endure.
