Hoover, Play-Doh and the danger of putting strategy in a box By Fiona van Iersel Minerva Empowerment Marketing Strategy and Planning 23 March 2025 Hoover’s free-flight promotion and Play-Doh’s reinvention make a wonderfully odd pair: a vacuum cleaner reaching for the skies and a cleaning material finding a new life in children’s hands. Both stories invite a question about what a business does when its familiar route to growth becomes difficult. In the early 1990s, Hoover’s UK promotion offered flights with qualifying purchases and became a costly lesson in the gap between an attractive offer and the ability to fulfil it (Nicholson-Lord, 1993). The marketing looked exciting. The economics and operational commitments deserved at least as much attention. A sales spike is not much comfort if each additional customer brings a promise the business cannot afford to keep. It is tempting to drop Hoover straight into the “dog” box of the BCG matrix and declare the answer obvious. But that classification needs evidence about market growth and relative market share for the business being assessed (Boston Consulting Group, n.d.). A notorious promotion does not, on its own, provide either measure. The GE/McKinsey portfolio approach poses a broader set of questions about market attractiveness and business strength (McKinsey & Company, 2008). Brand recognition, competitive pressure, capabilities and economics could all matter. The point is to investigate the position, not give a story a coloured square and pretend the square made the decision. Play-Doh offers a different kind of lesson. I have spent a small fortune on it, and I was delighted to learn about its earlier life as a wallpaper-cleaning material. Changes in the way homes were heated and decorated reduced the appeal of that original job. The material found another use as modelling compound for children (The Strong National Museum of Play, n.d.). That is a much more interesting pivot than simply selling the same thing harder. The business reconsidered who could value the product and what they could do with it. What had cleaned a wall became something capable of decorating my white couch in entirely unwanted ways. Here too, “dog to star” is an attractive shorthand rather than a demonstrated portfolio diagnosis. Entering a new category changes the relevant market, competitors and growth assumptions. It does not automatically establish a high relative share. The useful strategic insight is the search for a new job the existing capability could perform. A portfolio tool can help structure choices about investment, maintenance and withdrawal. It should not replace customer understanding or the arithmetic of a particular proposal. Hoover’s promotion raises the fulfilment-and-economics question; Play-Doh’s repositioning raises the possibility of a different market altogether. One business attached an expensive promise to a familiar purchase. The other found a new purpose for what it already had. The contrast is memorable—and so is the Play-Doh still stuck on my sofa. The serious lesson is to test the strategic story before putting the business, and its money, inside the box. References Nicholson-Lord, D. (1993). Hoover to meet flights deal. The Independent, 27 April. https://www.the-independent.com/news/uk/hoover-to-meet-flights-deal-david-nicholsonlord-reports-on-plans-to-rescue-a-promotion-for-free-aircraft-travel-1457832.html The Strong National Museum of Play. The History of Play-Doh: Good, Clean Fun! https://www.museumofplay.org/blog/the-history-of-play-doh-good-clean-fun/ Boston Consulting Group. What Is the Growth Share Matrix? https://www.bcg.com/about/overview/our-history/growth-share-matrix McKinsey & Company (2008). Enduring Ideas: The GE–McKinsey nine-box matrix. 1 September. https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/strategy-and-corporate-finance/our-insights/enduring-ideas-the-ge-and-mckinsey-nine-box-matrix