Towards stronger

differentiation of

portfolio brandsMake-up category

Cosmetics Study 1

Background and sample

In this example, we will demonstrate the insights that can be

delivered with the specific objectives of better managing an

existing brand portfolio

Sample size = 419 females aged 17+ who have used make-

up in the past month

Questionnaire scope:

Behavioural:

Experience of brands (32 brands)

Frequency of use of brands

Ranking of brands

Weight of use of brands

Attitudinal:

Reasons for choice of brands in repertoire

Image descriptors of brands in repertoire

Occasions of use of brands in repertoire

General attitudes and respondent descriptions

Cosmetics Study 1

Cosmetics Study 2

Objectives

The analysis in this case study focuses on the

L’Oreal portfolio of brands. These are:

L'Oreal Paris

Maybelline

Lancome

Body Shop

Biotherm

The analysis determines coverage of the

brands in the market and provides guidance

for developing increased differentiation

between the brands, particularly for the

L’Oreal Paris and Maybelline brands.

Within the study, we focused on the overall

brands and asked respondents to consider

any of lipstick, eye shade, mascara, blusher,

foundation, nail polish when assessing their

usage and attitudes. Visual prompts were

used to minimise brand confusion.

Cosmetics Study 2

Cosmetics Study 3

Firstly, we wish to assess usage and overlap

of the L’Oreal portfolio

We will investigate:

Usage behaviour –

awareness, incidence, frequency, weight

of use

Repertoire/competition levels

Brand profiles – demographic and

attitudinal

User profiles – demographic and

attitudinal

Cosmetics Study 3

Usage behaviour – awareness, incidence, frequency

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Pharmacy brand

Ricils

Biotherm

Clinique

Dior

YSL

Anytime

Joe Blasco

Rimmel

Body Shop

Revlon

Oriflame

Yves Rocher

Lancome

Max Factor

Kanebo

Nivea Beaute

L'Oreal Paris

Maybelline

Use nowadays Tried it, but don't use nowadays

Heard of but have never used Never heard of

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Pharmacy brand

Ricils

Biotherm

Revlon

Clinique

YSL

Dior

Anytime

Joe Blasco

Rimmel

Body Shop

Oriflame

Yves Rocher

Lancome

Max Factor

Kanebo

Nivea Beaute

L'Oreal Paris

Maybelline

Use daily A few times a week About once a week

A few times a month Use less often

For some brands, lower penetration but high frequency of use (e.g. Kanebo; YSL, Clinique)

For other brands, high penetration but lower frequency (e.g. Revlon, L’Oreal Paris, Max Factor)

Cosmetics Study 4

Cosmetics Study 5

Brand profiles – demographic and attitudinal

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Dior

Rimmel

Revlon

Oriflame

Yves Rocher

Max Factor

Kanebo

Nivea Beaute

Biotherm

Body Shop

Lancome

L'Oreal Paris

Maybelline

17 - 24 years 25 - 34 years 35 - 49 years 50+ years

Brand

Portfolio

Maybelline:

Make-up makes me feel self-confident;

I usually buy the cheapest make-up product

L’Oreal Paris:

I compare prices before I buy;

I alternate between different brands

Lancome:

I am not dressed if not wearing make-up;

Prepared to pay extra for the brand I want

Body Shop:

I am not very interested in make-up brands;

I like to have well-defined plans

Biotherm:

My aim is as natural a make-up as possible;

I like to exercise regularly

Cosmetics Study 8

Repertoire/competition levels

Three distinct groups of brands being used by the same people

May-

belline

L’Oréal

Paris Rimmel

Nivea

Beauté

Max

Factor

Any-

time Ricils

Body

Shop

Yves

Rocher

Ori-

flame Kanebo

Joe

Blasco

Lan-

côme

Bio-

therm Clinique Dior

Maybelline

L’Oréal Paris

Rimmel

Nivea Beauté

Max Factor

Anytime

Ricils

Body Shop

Yves Rocher

Oriflame

Kanebo

Joe Blasco

Lancôme

Biotherm

Clinique

Dior

YSL

Revlon

Pharmacy brands

Cosmetics Study 10

What have we learnt so far about the L’Oreal portfolio?

In terms of the brands being used:

Maybelline and L’Oreal Paris are the two largest brands in the market, with over 30% nowadays

usage

Maybelline is used more frequently than L’Oreal Paris

Both brands have the same age profile and there is overlap in terms of the likelihood of these

two brands being used by the same respondents

A ‘premium’ sector also appears to exist in terms of similar brands being likely to be used.

These brands tends to have lower penetration but higher frequency of use.

The age profile of the two L’Oreal portfolio brands (Lancome, Biotherm) is older

What is needed now is further investigation of the occasions and reasons for using the brands to

understand current brand strengths and opportunities for growth

Cosmetics Study 10

Cosmetics Study 11

L’Oreal Paris and Maybelline are being used by the same people.

Are they being used for the same reasons?

To uncover this, we investigate:

Brand strengths and weaknesses, and

differentiation

Attributes to increase differentiation

Main drivers of choice in the market

Position of brands against these drivers

Opportunities for strengthening brands

Cosmetics Study 12

Brand strength and weaknesses and differentiation

…highlight brand strengths and weaknesses against the market

-11

-6

-6

-4

-1

-1

-1

2

4

6

10

11

14

Non-allergenic

No vivisection

High quality brand

Natural ingredients

Fun to use

Luxury brand

Stylish brand

No unnecessary packaging

Reliable brand

Value for money

Often on offer

Well-known brand

Fashionable shades

L’Oreal Paris

-3

-6

-14

-3

8

-5

-5

1

-10

11

9

3

10

Maybelline

-8

9

-5

10

8

-6

-4

-16

-15

18

-6

0

0

Lancome

17

7

32

0

-5

-9

27

0

-10

-13

7

-5

54

Body Shop

Little differentiation between L’Oreal Paris

and Maybelline

Deviations above and below the market average reported

… whereas Body Shop and Lancome have

very clearly defined positioning

L’Oreal Paris – strengths and opportunities

Distribution and ‘visibility’

key for the brand to

maintain position

Potential benefit in

promoting product features

Well-known brandGood value for money

Reliable brandHigh quality brand

Colours that suit me/ my styleSuitable for everyday use/ everyday brandPractical to use

Nice consistencyPractical packaging/ easy to use

Natural make-upEasy to spread

Not stickyGood make-up result

Quick dryingAvailable at the store I use

Good selection of shadesOld brand/ has been in market for a long time

Fun to useSpecific appearance-enhancing feature of the product

Does not cause damage for skin/ does not age the skinYou get enough colour in the applicator (brush etc.)

Promises of the brand are credibleNice coloured pot/ stick/ bottle

Make-up is easy to removeNice scent

I like the advertising of the brand

Matt/ not glossy make-upInternational brand

Non-allergenicMake-up does not come off or smudge

Stylish pot/ stick/ bottleLasting make-up

Gives me self-confidenceMakes my eyes look bigger

Leaves a pleasant feeling on the skinBrings out the best in my appearance

Gives nice colour to the skinFashionable/ trendy shades

Recommended by friends and familyAdvertises a lot

Low priceFor party/ glamour

StylishMoisturing/ does not dry the skin

Skin protecting

Strength (relative to other brands)Weakness

Significant strengths

Significant

Weaknesses

Imp

ort

an

ce

(%

of

sa

mp

le w

ith

a p

os

itiv

e a

ttit

ud

e)

100%

L’Oréal Paris MarketAverage

Key Brand DriversNiche Brand DriversOpportunitiesThreatsWeaknessesNot important to market

Cosmetics Study 16

While for Maybelline, a

focus on fun, variety and

appearance enhancing

communication could

increase differentiation

between these two brands

from the same portfolio

Maybelline – strengths and opportunities

Well-known brandGood value for money

Reliable brandHigh quality brand

Colours that suit me/ my styleSuitable for everyday use/ everyday brand

Practical to useNice consistency

Practical packaging/ easy to useNatural make-up

Easy to spreadNot sticky

Good make-up resultQuick drying

Available at the store I useGood selection of shades

Old brand/ has been in market for a long timeFun to use

Specific appearance-enhancing feature of the productDoes not cause damage for skin/ does not age the skin

You get enough colour in the applicator (brush etc.)Promises of the brand are credible

Nice coloured pot/ stick/ bottleMake-up is easy to remove

Nice scentI like the advertising of the brand

Matt/ not glossy make-upInternational brand

Non-allergenicMake-up does not come off or smudge

Stylish pot/ stick/ bottleLasting make-up

Gives me self-confidenceMakes my eyes look bigger

Leaves a pleasant feeling on the skinBrings out the best in my appearance

Gives nice colour to the skinFashionable/ trendy shades

Recommended by friends and familyAdvertises a lot

Low priceFor party/ glamour

StylishMoisturing/ does not dry the skin

Skin protecting

Strength (relative to other brands)Weakness

Significant strengthsSignificant

Weaknesses

Imp

ort

an

ce

(%

of

sa

mp

le w

ith

a p

os

itiv

e a

ttit

ud

e)

100%

Maybelline MarketAverage

Key Brand DriversNiche Brand DriversOpportunitiesThreatsWeaknessesNot important to market

Cosmetics Study 17

Cosmetics Study 20

L’Oreal Paris and Maybelline have similar perceptions, supporting usage overlap

We also wish to understand the drivers of choice in this category overall and determine if these two

brands evidence some differentiation, or highlight aspects in which they can increase their

distinctiveness and positioning

Cosmetics Study 20

Cosmetics Study 21

Main drivers of choice in the market

Caresfor skin

Skin protecting

Moisturising/does not dry skin

Gives nice colour to the skin

Does not damage/age the skin

Leaves pleasant feeling on skin

Nice consistency

Easy to spread

Matt/ not glossy make-up

Natural make-up

Recommended by cosmetician

Not sticky

Quick drying

Nice scent

Sexy/ fun,

12%

Natural/

pure,

8%

Colours/

shades, 13%

Value for

money,

21%

Cares for skin,

14%

Good results,

15%

Brand

credentials,

17%

Cosmetics Study 25

How are the L’Oreal brands positioned?

Biotherm

Body Shop

Lancome

L’Oreal Paris

MaybellineBrand

credentials,

17%

Good results,

15%

Cares for skin,

14%

Value for

money,

21%

Colours/

shades, 13%

Natural/

pure,

8%Sexy/ fun,

12%

Considerable overlap of

L’Oreal Paris and

Maybelline in 3 sectors

– Value, Shades and

Sexy sectors. This

latter sector could be a

further opportunity.

Body Shop, Lancome

and Biotherm clearly

distinct from each other

Cosmetics Study 28

On which attributes could Maybelline strengthen in “Sexy/fun”?

For the Maybelline brand, promoting on

appearance enhancing benefits, as well as

functional aspects, would strengthen

association

.

Measure of association = 0.25 Sexy/fun Maybelline

Delivers on …

Fashionable/ trendy shades 18 10

Fun to use 12 8

Brings out best in my appearance 11 5

Specific appearance-enhancing features 11 6

You get enough colour in the applicator 13 6

Makes my eyes look bigger 10 14

I like the advertising of the brand 6 4

Could do better on …

Sexy brand 16 3

Glossy/ glittery make-up 15 2

Quick drying 23 5

Gives me self-confidence 16 3

Good taste 8 1

Practical to use 21 3

Easy to spread 16 1

Good selection of shades 11 3

Can identify with the advertising 4 1

Shades that suit my colouring 5 3

Cosmetics Study 32

What could L’Oreal do next?

We have now understood the drivers of choice in the market

overall, how the brands deliver to those drivers and the specific

strengths, weaknesses and opportunities for promotion for the

L’Oreal brands

The challenge for L’Oreal appears to be differentiating L’Oreal

Paris and Maybelline to ensure they clearly deliver to the

market drivers and promote distinctive and relavant strengths:

While there is significant overlap between these two brands

in terms of repertoires and brand perception, we

recommend that Maybelline emphasises appearance

enhancing and ‘results’ aspects of the brand to strengthen

differentiation. Communication should be in a confident

and fun style

L’Oreal Paris should maintain market leader/ mainstream

credentials and ensure it is accessible, top of mind and

delivers relevant, up-to-date shades/ colours and products

Lancome, Biotherm and Body Shop are clearly positioned in

the market and deliver strongly to different market drivers

Any U &A study needs to be able to understand the

present and provide direction for the future

Optima approach does that by delivering:

a rigorous in-depth understanding of current

brands and competitors

insight into strengthening positioning within a

portfolio