How consumers perceive quality in an era where branding dominates

‘Recalibrating Quality Regime’, said an editorial in Business Standard on November 10, 2025. It went on to say that a high-level committee has reportedly suggested scrapping or deferring more than 200 quality control orders issued under the Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) Act. While the editorial spoke about importers and exporters, I could not but think of the implications of BIS Standards (what used to be ISI standards) on consumers and their buying behaviour. 

There was a time when brands used to proudly display quality marks like ‘Agmark’ and ‘ISI’ mark in their advertising and on their packaging. This was all the more true in products that were prone to adulteration, such as butter, ghee, cooking oil, milk powder, etc. 

What is product quality and how do consumers look at quality? Quality has many dimensions: functionality/performance, durability/reliability, value for money, aesthetics/design, brand reputation, after sales support and, now, customer reviews. Among all these different indicators of quality, it is branding that is today seen as the most visible mark of quality. 

In a recent study done by a consulting firm, Vitral, covering 250 homemakers in North India — buyers of packaged snacks/food products – it was found that consumers don’t spend time reading pack labels (and hence don’t look for quality marks or symbols). While brands provide nutritional information, what was more often read and noticed was the expiry date. It is possible that the current format of nutritional tables is not consumer-friendly, but even if they are made simpler, I doubt if consumers will spend time reading them. 

The same could be said of the ISI Mark or Agmark. Most leading brands have dispensed with the habit of displaying these marks for obvious reasons. The argument is, ‘If my brand is strong enough, why do I need these quality marks?’ As a marketing expert once said, ‘if you have brand recognition, adding an ISI mark or an Agmark will in fact be deleterious for the brand. It is almost as if you are admitting that I need the crutch of the ISI Mark to signal quality’. 

There are some exceptions where a quality mark may actually signal higher quality; one such example that comes to mind is the ‘Woolmark’ which was once issued by the International Wool Secretariat. Now the mark is owned by the Australian-owned ‘The Woolmark Company’ and certifies brands that use high-quality Australian Merino wool. 

A Harvard Business Review (HBR) article, ‘Quality is more than making a good product’ (July-August 1983), has some pointers on how consumers perceive quality. For one, consumer requirements change every few years. The US car buyers rated ‘styling’ as the most important criteria while selecting a car in 1970; but in 1980 it was ‘quality’. 

From my work in the automobile sector, Indian consumers, who used to look for value for money and fuel efficiency in the 2000s, are now looking for style and power in their cars (no wonder mini-SUVs are selling well). The article also speaks about how perception of quality changes, from ‘before purchase’ to ‘during purchase’ to ‘post purchase’. While company reputation ranks on top before purchase, after purchase, it is ease of use and handling of complaints. 

Consumer perceptions of quality will also be influenced by their lifestyle and demographics. A consumer who is exposed to international labels will set their expectations at a higher level compared with a consumer who has not had such exposure. 

Consumers’ quality yardstick is therefore not frozen but is evolving all the time. Two or three decades ago, a brand could get away with shoddy packaging and poor labelling. But today’s consumers will not accept that level of shoddiness. We see that happening around us across all product categories. 

I remember in the late 1990s, a premium cooking oil brand we worked on resisted launching their brand in a plastic pouch fearing that the packs would not fit the premium quality imagery of the brand. The fear was not about their packs being leaky, but that the selling/storage conditions in shops would be less than ideal. The market was in pouch packs, and we pushed back. An analysis was undertaken of premium food brands to see who was moving to cheaper pouch packs. At the end of the presentation, it was clear that the brand was going to lose a big opportunity if they didn’t embrace the pouch pack revolution. Did it damage the quality perception of the brand? Not really, since it went on to top the charts after the launch of the pouch pack. 

Indian consumers don’t equate packaging type to product quality. Today the most premium food brands are sold in pouch packs. We also know that quality perceptions are not shaped by Agmark or ISI marks. In the end it is the ‘Brand’ that determines quality perceptions of consumers. If a marketer is investing enough in building the brand image, they can get away without any other certification. They can also economize on packaging costs, up to a point at least. They can also expand distribution without the brand getting any negative feedback. 

As the HBR article says “…responsibility of quality cannot rest exclusively with the production department. Marketers must also be active in contributing to perceptions of quality… Successful businesses today will use marketing techniques to plan, design and implement quality strategies that stretch beyond the factory floor”. These words are all the more true in today’s world of AI and digital media. 

The writer is an independent brand coach and founder, brand-building.com. He is the author of Marketing Mixology, four essential ingredients for marketing success