Artefact:
The Fortune at the Bottom of the Pyramid
By C.K. Prahalad

Between work and meandering in the many bazaars of Bangalore, I found solace reading Indian literature, however I never thought a narrative of case studies could show me snapshots of an India I did not know existed. India is a spectrum of colours, culture, and cinema. It is also a hub of enterprise, and C.K. Prahalad, a professor at University of Michigan’s Ross School of Business aptly puts the essence of the country’s success by focusing in on marginalized populations among urban slums.

These cases are a few examples that speak to reducing disparities and increasing a medley of social norms in this emerging market. Prahalad aims to eradicate poverty through profits, and emphasizes that multinational companies need to be more culturally competent irregardless of their selfish or selfless motives.

In class, we discussed how necessary the prevention of infectious diseases is both globally and locally. Infectious diseases can become pandemics if the correct measures are not taken. India is a country of over a billion citizens. It’s population density in urban centres exceeds 20,000 per square kilometre; that gives rise to an immense breeding ground for illness due to close quarters.

During lecture, our class had an in depth discussion on the efforts of Unilever (locally known as Hindustan Lever Limited) and its lucrative soap market. As a conscientious issue, many students had a different opinion on the matter — some questioned Unilever’s intentions thinking it was nothing more than a cash grab and a way of promoting its corporate social responsibility, while others believed that “their moral constructions should be consistent throughout their practices (Brennan Dedecker, personal communication, January 21, 2014).

After watching the TED Talk and hearing the opinions of my peers, I wanted to delve deeper into understanding the intricacies of this complex conundrum. Multinational companies (MNCs) are often criticized for the ethical (or lack thereof) practices. While my job is not to condemn or condone their intention, I can speak to their actions.

According to Prahalad, at any time 10% of Indians will be suffering from diarrheal disease (pg. 211). This stemmed from poor hygiene practices that could easily be prevented. These pathogens are easily transmitted through drinking water, from flies and other insects landing on food and surfaces used to prepare food, and from human hands and feet carrying in dirt. With 35% of the country living beneath the poverty line, access to modern sanitation facilities are only for the upper echelon of society.

What about the rest? What about the those at the bottom of the pyramid? Sixty-four percent of population uses bush or fields as toilets. Although, there are group’s such as Unicef’s Poo to Loo Campaign shows the work of NGOs to reduce the number of people defecating in the open and thereby reduce the number of infectious diseases and compromise water safety (Unicef, 2014). This health promotion plan suggests increasing sanitation since inadequate water supply and sanitation in schools are health hazards and affect school attendance, retention and educational performance (Unicef, 2014).

On the other hand, Unilever offers a very simple solution: soap. Unicef India’s mandate may be to increase the number of toilets, but the simplest way to mitigate diarrheal disease is through hand washing. According to the WHO, hand washing can reduce diarrheal attacks by 48% (Cairncross, Hunt, Boisson, Bostoen, Curtis, Fung., et al. (2010). Thinking about it who can facilitate this change: governmental officials, doctors, the public themselves? The best option would be enterprise. Unilever is one of India’s largest soap manufacturers, collecting over $2.1 billion in sales, of which 40% were from soaps and detergents (Prahalad, 211). Unilever has a huge stake in increasing adoption rates, and have the most to gain considering consumption increases it will directly impact the market.

Unilever has an opportunity to do social good while increasing its bottom line. Seems obvious that they would use their research & development, supply chain, marketing capabilities to deliver to the masses. There’s a sense of mutual benefit. By understanding the customer, Unilever built a business opportunity through health to meet a largely unmet need.

Unilever built its case around health promotion, and its necessary need to increase its reach. Unilever spearheaded initiatives to tailor their existing product line to those who do not have the disposable income to buy soap in bulk, and instead commoditized one-time, individual sized sachets of soap, shampoos, and detergents, thereby making it affordable and accessible for all. They influenced the change process using key strategies of health communication, by creating a sense of urgency and associating ‘health’ and ‘cleanliness’ to prevent diarrhea, eye infections, and infections caused by cuts and wounds (Prahalad, 223).

The population was receptive to the idea, with Unilever’s health promotion efforts, by funding and organizing events such as, health education programming in schools, The Lifebuoy Health Day, a diarrhoea management workshop, and launching the Lifebuoy Health Club (Prahalad, 226-229). Through these efforts, Unilever found success as the product was low-cost, scalable, and sustainable, and embedded a new norm into the social fabric at all levels of Indian society.