W.Legutko

In continuation of the branding work done for the W.Legutko brand – the leader in the production of seeds for horticulture in Poland, we were asked to carry out a process of rebuilding the product portfolio. The aim of the process was to reduce the number of SKUs and create a coherent model for building a portfolio.

The W.Legutko product portfolio included over 4,000 SKUs, but due to the lack of strategic ordering, some products were duplicated in different product lines, there was no visual consistency of the brand message and no unification of information labelling on products.

Our conclusions from the analysis:

• The portfolio was complicated – at the time of the start of work it was currently divided into several dozen series, according to different criteria. The same product appeared in different series (sometimes it is difficult to explain why)
• The portfolio was uneven – traditional products were mixed with modern ones (similar concepts and messages), short and “digestible” series existed next to those with several hundred SKUs and it is difficult to briefly summarize what type of products they contain
• The portfolio was inconsistent – some series looked like products of different brands next to each other, and it was difficult to identify graphic elements (apart from the logo) in the entire portfolio that combined them into one whole
• The portfolio had potential – the W.Legutko brand portfolio included many products with added value that make the customer’s work easier, save their time or stand out from the products of other brands

After a thorough analysis of the Client’s portfolio, we conducted a storecheck and audited the portfolios of two key competitors of the brand. The results of the work were maps presenting the structure of the competitors’ portfolio, indicating good and bad practices and price segmentation of the categories on the market.

Our audit conclusions:

• The W.Legutko brand portfolio is the most complex among those analyzed – it is difficult to assess the actual number of products offered by individual brands, but W.Legutko offers the largest number of product lines
• The portfolios of the two main competitors are very organized and visually consistent – as shown by the developed maps
• W.Legutko has the widest range of accessories sold under its own brand – this category requires some sorting out, but it can be an interesting differentiator on the market

We started the process of organizing the portfolio by analyzing the Client’s thinking at the moment of making a purchase decision. We conducted research in target groups and as a result, we developed 3 scenarios.

Scenario 1. Based on the construction of a monolithic portfolio:

• All products sold under one brand, with possibly similar brand exposure on the packaging (the W.Legutko brand should dominate other messages)

Scenario 2. Based on the use of sub-brands

• Basic products sold under the W.LEGUTKO brand, the rest under sub-brands: W.LEGUTKO premium, W.LEGUTKO bio, W.LEGUTKO kids, W.LEGUTKO home&garden

Scenario 3. Mixed model

• Most products sold under the W.Legutko brand (solutions very similar to the assumptions of the monolithic portfolio) – introduced color code identifying the type of plants (VEGETABLES, HERBS, ORNAMENTAL PLANTS, GRASSES, MYCELLULIA + MIXES + COVER CROP – as a complementary assortment, for special purposes), special type of product communicated by marking on the packaging (<mix of species>, <seeds on tape> etc.)
• Creation of sub-brands for products meeting specific needs: W.LEGUTKO all year round (growing plants at home), W.LEGUTKO bio (seeds with a certificate of organic origin), W.LEGUTKO kids (products for children)

The next stage of work was to design conceptual packaging for selected categories. At this stage, we focused on building the general layout of packaging and creating assumptions for product groups.

After the concept was approved, we moved on to creating the designs. We asked the Client to select key packaging designs from all 29 categories and designed 3 full grids for each category. At the same time, we created a library of icons and graphics that were to facilitate the work of developing new products in the future.

The final stage of the work was to create an extensive and detailed Packaging Guide, which included guidelines on how to build subsequent packaging and how to develop new categories.

The Client’s graphic team underwent training with us, received a set of open files and independently began work on designing the rest of the over 2,500 SKUs that remained after the portfolio was sorted out. Once a month, in the initial phase, we conducted consultations to verify the correctness of the Guide’s guidelines. And this brought the expected results.

The final stage of the work was to create an extensive and detailed Packaging Guide, which included guidelines on how to build subsequent packaging and how to develop new categories.

The Client’s graphic team underwent training with us, received a set of open files and independently began work on designing the rest of the over 2,500 SKUs that remained after the portfolio was sorted out. Once a month, in the initial phase, we conducted consultations to verify the correctness of the Guide’s guidelines. And this brought the expected results.