The Proactive / Reactive Dilemma

With so many brand products to choose from, the last thing shoppers want to worry about is if the brand product they’re buying is authentic and safe.

Coming from the corporate side, companies may question whether they really need to be concerned about their product(s) being counterfeited and, if and when they need to take action.

The truth of the matter is, if your brand is popular and widely distributed, it’s more than likely that your brand is being compromised or will be.

At the rapidly growing rate of seized counterfeit goods in the United States reaching $1.38 Trillion, brand owners should take a close hard look at their own product and packaging security status for a possible call to action.

So when should an organization begin this vital process? Should they take a proactive approach against counterfeiters attacking their goods? Or, should they take a reactive position and wait until the problem reveals its ugly head?

When companies begin contemplating a brand protection strategy, there are a number of factors that come into play. These may include: the negative ramifications of exposing the problem to the public, the cost and time to implement new brand protection technology into their current printing and distribution process and, creating a new department to monitor and support such a program. Also companies who choose to be reactive, may put themselves at greater risk for expensive lawsuits that can cause irreparable damage to the brand and organization.

Regardless of whether a company is being proactive or reactive, the above mentioned issues can be addressed in a positive manner. For example, companies can approach a seemingly negative situation by launching a positive marketing campaign that educates the public while informing them of additional measures being taken to protect their safety and well-being. This could instill consumer confidence and help attract new customers to their brand. Additionally, involving the consumer in the checking of goods with a smartphone brand protection App, allows the consumer to become part of the solution and the overall global network of field inspectors. This would provide the ability for organizations to check vast amounts of goods over a larger territory, as well as simultaneously gathering valuable consumer data.

However, it is not always necessary to mention anything to the public regarding a company’s anti-counterfeiting program. Some companies will keep their brand protection program totally covert where only limited personnel and inspectors have knowledge of the brand protection technology implemented and its methods of verification.

From a financial perspective, a firm’s marketing budget usually exceeds its product security budget. Knowing this, organizations can decide on ways to allocate funding from one department to another where both divisions (Marketing and Brand Integrity) can benefit and achieve their own respective objectives.

Lastly, depending on the brand protection solution chosen, certain technologies can be integrated into existing production processes without increasing production costs and/or altering existing operating procedures. This can be achieved by using brand protection technologies that can be produced using standard printing methods that aren’t reliant on specialty inks and/or other expensive consumables.

After considering all the pros and cons for being either proactive or reactive, it comes down to how confident you are that your brand is not vulnerable to an attack. And if it is compromised, what will the cost be to repair the damage?



If you would like to stay updated on more information about our brand protection technologies and how you can protect your brand from counterfeit, CONTACT GSSC to get started.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: