Search results

The case traces the development of the Under Armour (UA) brand, product, and market growth under CEO and founder Kevin Plank from its inception in 1996 through 2016. UA provides a cohesive case study of how to launch and sustain a consumer brand even in the face of its third-party manufacturing approach, which gives its apparel no patentable design or fabric technologies. The case uses UA's brand and advertising development as a backdrop for the current pivotal issue of how to target women to sustain growth. UA's stated goal is to build a $1.9 billion women's business by 2019.

In laying out UA's growth and competitive moves, the case lets students analyze broadcast, social media, and other digital advertising campaigns in view of the company's brand development and strategic targeting. The case also highlights the importance of leveraging brand heritage and historical differentiation while respecting key nuances when extending into new markets (i.e., moving from a predominantly male-driven audience to female). It also allows an exploration of how to use consumer insight and broader cultural attitudes and trends to support extending a position into new markets.

The case traces the development of Lululemon Athletica (Lulu) from founder Chip Wilson's first post-yoga euphoria in 1997 through the sale of all his shares in 2015. Officially founded in 1998, Lulu was built on the foundation of its “miracle” figure-enhancing yoga pants made from a proprietary stretch fiber. The case outlines Wilson's early experience in technical performance wear, which gave him the expertise needed to launch the Lululemon brand with its premium-priced, fashion-designed product line targeted at upscale women. The case also highlights the retailing and promotion approach that drove Lulu's first decade of success. The snapshot of how the Lulu brand cult was born and diffused provides the backdrop for assessing whether the brand has already hit its peak or whether it can sustain the explosive growth that effectively created the athleisure category. To aid in this determination, the case presents two competitors as comparative foils (Under Armour and Athleta) to contextualize Lulu's growth prospects.

The Lululemon case highlights the importance of the competitive frame of reference when positioning a brand and describes how this may differ for the three competitors. The case also allows for a discussion of the challenges of maintaining the congruence of a retail brand with a diverse product line. This struggle is unique to retailers who must fit ever-varied product assortments (not just a single product line) under the umbrella of a single brand proposition, and is particularly relevant to vertically integrated brands such as Lululemon.