Kotler's fifth P: Can it work for brands?

Time of India

15-05-2025

HighlightsPhilip Kotler's four P's of marketing—Product, Price, Place, and Promotion—have long been foundational, but he recently introduced a fifth P: Purpose. Purpose-driven branding can backfire if not aligned with a brand's core values, as demonstrated by Unilever's struggles and Procter & Gamble's Gillette campaign failures. Research indicates that consumer loyalty based on stated social purpose is low, with only 18% of consumers consistently buying from brands for their social initiatives. Successful purpose-driven campaigns, like those by Patagonia and Nike, are rooted in the brand's authentic mission rather than being retrofitted for marketing appeal. Cultural and market-specific sensitivities are crucial; what resonates in one region may fail in another, highlighting the need for careful consideration in purpose-driven messaging.
The foundation for all
marketing
strategies has been the four P's of
Philip Kotler
: Product, Price, Place, and Promotion. For decades marketers are sworn by his bible,
Principles of Marketing Management.
Just recently,
Kotler
has started promoting a fifth P: Purpose.
A
purpose-driven branding
may appeal as noble, is it practical? Brands that had force-fitted purpose into their identity have seen setbacks on bottom-line, probably due to consumer scepticism or brand dilution.
Unilever
CEO had publicly admitted this as a major issue for under-performance and moved away from the practice. Experience of Gillette and many other brands also paint a picture that purpose cannot find universal application like the other P's.
In Kotler's opinion, purpose is about aligning a brand with a higher societal goal such as
sustainability
, gender equality, or social justice. He argues that today's consumers, especially the Millennials and Gen-Z, prefer brands that stand for something beyond profits. But, purpose cannot be an afterthought or an artificial construct – Consumers can see through that and will quit buying from such brands.
Unilever's is a classic example of backfired purpose. Its proclaimed purpose-driven
branding
under the then-CEO Alan Jope has not delivered results for many of its brands. Seems over-emphasising purpose above business goals is a bad idea. There have been some successes like the Dove's 'Real Beauty' campaign, but this was built organically over time. When the other brands tried to force-fit purpose, confusion and declining profits ensued.
Take the example of Hellmann's mayonnaise, which attempted to justify its existence with sustainability messaging. Consumers rightly questioned: 'Do we buy mayonnaise for sustainability?' Unilever's overemphasis on purpose led to investor backlash, with activist investor Terry Smith famously accusing the company for 'losing the plot.' Consequently, they had to scale back the purpose-centric approach after profit margins fell short of expectation.
P&G's Gillette experienced the mishap by over-moralising, when it launched its 'The Best Men Can Be' campaign, addressing toxic masculinity. The ad was aimed to redefine masculinity positively. But it alienated a large segment of core consumer base because they saw it as virtue signalling rather than genuine advocacy. When the sales plummeted, they brand quickly recalibrated the messaging. Costly lesson? The purpose must align with core brand values and consumer expectations. Simply put, brands cannot afford to lecture their customers.
Similarly, many Indian brands has struggled with purpose-driven messaging.
FabIndia
faced severe backlash when it tried to market its Diwali collection under the name 'Jashn-e-Riwaaz.' It was trying to be inclusive, but was perceived as an unnecessary deviation from tradition. Tanishq faced controversy when it showcased interfaith marriage – a blasphemy in the New India in the time of Love Jihad rhetoric. The company was forced to withdraw the campaign, of course, causing substantial dilemma for many other brands.
Purpose may attract diminishing returns in India. The Western society has evolved into social activism over many years, and deeply ingrained into the social fabric. Indian consumers are more price- and quality-conscious. While ethical business practices matter, over-emphasising purpose can alienate many Indians who look at affordability and reliability first.
Is consumer loyalty through purpose a myth? Many marketers, perhaps inspired by Kotler, believe that purpose imbibes deeper consumer loyalty, but research suggests otherwise. A 2021 Forrester survey found that only 18% of consumers consistently buy from brands due to their stated social purpose. Most consumers still evaluate quality, price, and convenience. Purpose-driven messaging might appear inauthentic, and lead to consumer scepticism. Brands like Pepsi (with its failed Kendall Jenner protest ad) have learned this the hard way.
Does purpose work for any brand? While purpose has failed for many brands, there are cases where it has worked – but with crucial distinctions. Patagonia, for one, has successfully integrated environmental activism into its brand DNA. The key difference is that sustainability was part of Patagonia's mission from the beginning; it was not retrofitted onto the brand for marketing appeal. Similarly, Nike's advocacy for racial justice has worked because it aligns with the brand's long history of supporting athlete activism.
That brings up the question of when Kotler's fifth P works and when it doesn't. Here are four scenarios:
Purpose should be organic, not force-fitted: If a brand's core identity doesn't align with a purpose-driven cause, force-fitting it can be detrimental. Hellmann's attempt at sustainability messaging failed because consumers don't associate mayonnaise with ethical consumption, or Vim's #NazariyaBadlo campaign backfired because most Indians culturally don't accept men washing dishes.
Purpose should not replace product and profitability: Unilever's experience demonstrates that a brand cannot afford to put purpose over financial performance. Companies exist to generate profits, and consumers buy products primarily for their utility, not their moral stance.
Avoid over-moralising and alienating consumers: Gillette's failure shows that if a purpose-driven campaign comes across as judgmental or preachy, it can backfire. Marketers must strike a balance between advocacy and engagement.
Market-specific sensitivity matters: As the examples of FabIndia and Tanishq show, cultural and political sensitivities can heavily impact how purpose-driven campaigns are received. What works in one market may fail in another.
Kotler's fifth P of Purpose is not inherently flawed, but its indiscriminate application is problematic. If purpose is aligned authentically with a brand's identity, it could work. When purpose is force-fitted, it risks alienating customers. Marketers must remember that consumers buy products for their intrinsic value, not because of a brand's promoted ideology. In the end, the Four P's remain more than sufficient to drive successful marketing strategies; purpose is best left for brands that can genuinely integrate it into their DNA.