Lenovo Case Analysis

Alternative Courses of Action
The courses of action that can be taken by Lenovo include establishing a master brand, a house of 
brands, synergy approach, or the strategy referred commonly as Lexus/Toyota. First, the master 
brand strategy can be useful for creating a brand equity for Lenovo on a worldwide scale, but there 
are fears that the ThinkPad influence may be lost if this strategy is adopted. Second, the house of 
brands approach can enable the firm to establish many brands at once, but it is expensive to market 
the different brands. Third, the synergy approach will let the company have Lenovo as a master 
brand, while the ThinkPad shall be regarded as a superior sub-brand. Fourth, under the Toyota/Lexus 
strategy, a premium line of ThinkPad brands are established alongside basic Lenovo brands (Quelch 
& Knoop, 2006, p. 9).
Evaluation of the Alternative Courses of Action
The course of action that the company should choose has to address the global market conditions, 
while also upholding Lenovo’s desire to compete internationally. To gauge the conditions in this 
market environment, the company engages in extensive marketing research. The research comes in 
handy in helping the company to make well-informed decisions, to understand the marketplace, and 
most importantly, to learn about customer satisfaction and the value of goods on offer. In addition, the 
advantages of the primary data collected are that the respondents pinpoint their challenges 
concerning the use of personal computers in business, give voice to current concerns, and enable the 
firm to gauge the needs in different nations.
The master brand option is challenging to Lenovo since the market regards it as untrustworthy. The 
high level of dishonesty with which Chinese firms are regarded in the rest of the world is a major 
detractor to the success of this strategy (Quelch & Knoop, 2006, p. 8). If this approach is chosen, 
building favorable brand knowledge would not be an easy thing for Lenovo, in spite of having the 
reputable ThinkPad brand at its disposal. The ThinkPad acquisition doubtlessly makes Lenovo have a 
comparative advantage in the global scope. The ThinkPad has already won a lot of accolades for 
design and engineering innovations since it was introduced in 1992, with some of its superior qualities 
being power, portability, and wireless networking (Quelch & Knoop, 2006, p. 6).
The marketers in Lenovo must therefore create positive brand knowledge if they choose this option. 
Failure to achieve this means that even the premium ThinkPad brand shall be thought of as an 
inferior product by consumers. The house of brands option would make the company incur a lot of 
expenses in the marketing function, without necessarily achieving the desirable sales of any of the 
brands. The company’s CMO concedes that this strategy cannot succeed since the company had 
limited resources at the time (Quelch & Knoop, 2006, p. 9). House-of-brands has brands that are 
independent, which are somewhat endorsed by the organizational brand (Rajagopal & Sanchez, 

---

2004, p. 238). However, the reputation of the Lenovo as an organization in the international market is 
not favorable at this juncture hence it cannot promote brands effectively.
The synergy approach, which entails a master brand getting recognition partially due to a superior 
sub-brand, would require investments to jointly build the Lenovo and the ThinkPad brands (Quelch & 
Knoop, 2006, p. 9). The ThinkPad sub-brand would be expected to be a co-driver in the success of 
Lenovo. The shortcoming of this approach is that the association might taint the image of the 
prestigious brand if the brands do not have comparable qualities (Aaker & Joachimsthaler, 2000, p. 
15). Clearly, ruining of the ThinkPad brand will certainly end up undoing the entry of Lenovo into the 
global market. The Toyota/Lexus strategy will force Lenovo to establish luxury and mass market 
brands separately. This strategy will entail implementation of dissociated brands, with each expected 
to perform well within its segment. However, under the global environment into which the firm is 
entering, creation of a mass product is not feasible.
The use of PCs has become ubiquitous and consumers are looking for enhanced innovation, better 
quality and reliability, tighter security, and better design (Quelch & Knoop, 2006, p. 10). To offer 
customers the desired product, the firm was supposed to invest in enhancing computer products, 
rather than producing low quality cheap products. As a result, this strategy can make the company 
lose its core business. After considering all the branding strategy options, Lenovo managers should 
appropriately consider the category membership under competitive frame of reference. Category 
membership refers to the products with which a brand competes and which are close substitutes to it 
(Kotler, 2012, p. 130).
The managers should to establish points of differences that would make the company have a 
competitive edge. At the present, Lenovo pursues a legacy of customer focus, innovation, and 
dependability (Quelch & Knoop, 2006, p. 7). These aspects have a potential of making make the 
products it offers distinctive and superior in comparison to competitors in the global market. The focus 
of the company should be on long-term holistic performance of its products. A well established brand 
value drives brand loyalty among customers, making the company to enjoy security of demand, 
making it hard for new competitors to enter the market, and making the customers willing to pay a 
higher prices for the offering (Kotler, 2012, p. 114).