Labor productivity and brand value (Part 2)

Brand marketing clarifies value more than productivity

The selling price is basically determined by the seller or the business, but the value is determined by the buyer. People talk a lot about buyer power but that’s just when you are the center of the world, you have a strong brand that dominates the supply-chain.

When saying value is a concept belonging to the buyer, this is different from the selling price and the final purchase price of the exchange process. Often the buyer agrees to buy at a price that he negotiates, but the value of the product is rarely stated. But value is a complex concept.

Among the common moves is the value of an enterprise, which is “valued” when converting the purchase and sale (M&A) or the value of a piece of land when converting the uses of agricultural land to urban land. There are new products priced like cars, there are products like antiques, the opposite, the older the more valuable. The same product, item, it is valuable to person A but may not have “value” to person B. It is possible to see hundreds of such examples happening in life.

When approaching the “value”, the brand’s approach (brand approach) should be used rather than the product approach. Therefore, we are more familiar with “brand value” than “product value” rather than “product benefit” or as the constant definition of marketing that is “a product is a collection of benefits” same “brand is a set of values”.

In that marketing process helps us turn a product into a brand. Therefore, we can trace back the concept of “productivity” whereby the higher the value content in a (branded) product, the higher the “value productivity” rather than the “yield productivity”.

In brand definition, people call the value that the brand brings is Premiumness. It is acquired by brand equity (Brand Equity). When we understand here we have reached the economic models of Apple, Samsung or Louis Vuitton, etc rather than growing high-yield rice, or processing garments with increasingly cheaper unit prices with starving salaries like present.

Brand investment, not just productivity

The essence of a market economy is actually a vicious circle of “chicken and egg”. So the strategic nature of a market economy is to create the “right” pushes at the right time. There is no principle of right and wrong and there is absolutely no dogma.

To create a breakthrough, the first thing is to overcome the psychological barrier. For Vietnamese people, the common disease is clustered thinking, not daring to go beyond the “S-shaped” border of the market; did not dare to bring bells to beat people of origin, afraid to speak English; like citing existing dogmas, from Confucian thought to the thinking habits of small farmers (Northern and Central small farmers).

For example, Vietnamese people all like brands and foreign brands, but entrepreneurs are afraid to not build brands and change their brand origin – “branded in USA” for example, thereby accepting the status of the processor and waiting for orders…

Try looking at the famous lingerie brand from France, Corèle V, to see how to make an international brand of a Vietnamese-born businessman, Mr. Tran Van Phu, overseas Vietnamese French; or like VERA brand of 100% Vietnamese corporation is Son Kim.

Many leaders know that it is the state-owned enterprise accounting mechanism that binds large enterprises (e.g. Vinatex Textile and Garment Group) to invest in branding so they can hope to become ZARA, H&M or even LV, etc but at the same time slowing down the equitization process on its own. With hundreds of such businesses wasting assets and market opportunities, with the opportunity to change the lives of millions of workers.

Productivity and Quality Office