CleanSpritz's (document anglais)

Beaton knew as well as anyone that CleanSpritz’s future was uncertain. For five consecutive years, the company’s annual sales had declined at an average rate of 7.5% as some long-loyal customers tried environmentally friendlier substitutes, while others sought cheaper options. Under pressure to refresh a stale brand image, CleanSpritz altered its existing all-purpose spray formula in 2009; the new formula reduced chemical content by 15% and was more biodegradable than the original formula. Relative to “greener” competitors, though, CleanSpritz’s formula and packaging fared poorly.

Also in 2009, CleanSpritz launched without much fanfare a 3:1 concentrated version of its all- purpose spray. Consumer demand for cleaning concentrates was climbing, and CleanSpritz hoped to gain first-mover advantage in what they believed was an emerging market of consumers seeking to minimize both packaging waste and carbon footprints. Despite these changes, CleanSpritz revenues continued to drop. MJ Brenner’s household products executives questioned the brand’s relevance. Was the CleanSpritz brand, widely recognized for decades, becoming a liability precisely because it was associated with a time when environmental issues were not a priority?

In February 2012, MJ Brenner and CleanSpritz managers had gathered to discuss the product’s future. The meeting was heated; MJ Brenner executives felt that CleanSpritz was draining financial resources that could be used to fuel other growing branches of the large consumer products company and suggested reducing CleanSpritz distribution. CleanSpritz managers disagreed; they felt their concentrate was a worthy competitor in a market ready to take off. What they needed, they said, was six months to test marketing concepts. Heavy promotion of the concentrate, or perhaps a stronger

...