Humanizing Brands Creates Human Problems

Humanizing your brand is critical for connecting with your audience, but it means you also need to be prepared to deal with human problems.

Customer engagement comes from delivering meaningful experiences that build desire in long-term relationships.  Like any relationship, customer loyalty grows from a strong sense of connection and belief in a brand’s character.  Marketing and advertising today are no longer just about pushing your product or highlighting the need you solve.  To make the sale (and repeat sales) brands must build trust.  This requires brands to show their human side, by being relatable and culturally relevant. 

It’s a lot to manage when you think about brand building efforts.  Beyond raising awareness and generating interest in core offerings, what cultural issues should a brand weigh in on?  What cultural conversations should a brand avoid?  If a brand is taking a stand, is it standing with or against their core customers?  Navigating these tensions create a constant balancing act for brands.  However, understanding how we got to such a precarious place can help you build your brand and strategy in a way to avoid common pitfalls.

Culture wars have been the norm.

Recent years have been dominated by social and political polarization as government, society and companies confront a variety of urgent issues that have been amplified including the consequences of the Covid-19 pandemic, widening gaps in the distribution of wealth, the climate crisis, racial discrimination, LGBTQ+ rights, the legal status of abortion, gun control, conflicts over religious beliefs and practices, etc.  Facing into each of these issues has revealed that large portions of our population hold beliefs that entrench them on opposite sides.  Instead of calm conversation to explore differences in opinion, debate rage often devolves into judgement, criticism and name calling (especially online). 

Younger generations of consumers are demanding more from brands.

Against this backdrop, consumers have come to expect brands to use their platforms and influence take a stand around significant cultural events or be engaged in social movements.  Younger generations are particularly looking for brands that are purpose driven and preferentially choosing brands that live their values.  Some marketers contend that emotions generated by knowing a brand’s beliefs and seeing it demonstrate a genuine commitment to having a positive impact on the world may be even more compelling than features and benefits of its products or services.

Social media has reduced barriers for brands and raised expectation from consumers.

Because we’re now in a hyperconnected world, we can constantly consume or instantaneously share information or ideas.  Social media is all about what’s happening right now and real-time engagement.  Anyone can share their opinions on a social issue or something that is trending culturally on any app…and sometimes it seems like very few are holding back.  So naturally younger generations of consumers are looking around at what brands are posting on social channels an expecting them to get in on the act.  It’s easy for an individual to push out a post, so why can’t a brand do the same?   The challenge is how a brand engages in cultural conversations can help or hurt a business, foster or fracture the consumer-brand relationship and, ultimately, drive or decimate financial performance. 

Reluctant brands haven’t been able to play it safe by staying quiet on social.

No matter how sensible it might seem to management, rising consumer expectations has meant brands can’t sit on the sidelines and remain silent about societal stuff because it’s viewed as compliancy.  And the list of consumer demands for brands (like those featured below) continues to grow.   The playbook heavily influenced by younger generations of modern consumers says brands must be: 

• Authentic:  Brands can’t make superficial statements that create skepticism or waver around commitments they make, or they won’t be seen as genuine and credible

• Transparent:  Brands are expected to share information and conduct business openly

• Accountable:  Brands can’t side-step taking responsibility for business practices, sourcing, production or distribution processes, or policies that negatively impact the environment, employees or end-users.

• Foster Community:  Brands are expected to create space, communication pathways and intentional interactions where consumers can be seen, heard and feel as sense of belonging.

• Be Willing to Act:  Brands must back up what they say with what they do and be consistent with their actions.

• Engaged in Activism:  Social media channels have become a critical for driving consumer engagement and sit at the epicenter of idea exchange.  Because it’s so easy for anyone to express their opinions these days, the expectation of getting involved and taking a stance on significant social and political issues has migrated to brands. 

• Demonstrate cultural appreciation and avoid appropriation:  Brands must listen, learn, consider context and demonstrate consideration and appreciation for other cultures while avoiding misunderstandings or misrepresentation of cultural norms, symbols, customs and traditions.

Getting involved in polarizing conversations always comes with risk.

Oaky, a new bar has been set by consumers so brands know they can’t sit quietly on the sidelines.  Check.  But there are risks if a brand feels compelled to comment on everything.  Trying to participate in every cultural moment can result in dilution of focus that consumes precious resources and may be perceived as inauthentic.  Brands need to be choiceful.  But they also need to choose wisely.

If a brand that has significant market share is compelled to wade into a contentious conversation and chose a side, it’s likely to create tension or conflict because its wide customer base will have varying social and political views.  Some studies contend consumer churn created by losing customers who don’t agree with a brand taking activist position is more significant that customers gained.  But how do you quantify the value of customers retained?

So, is middle ground the solution?  Not exactly.  Even brands who try to navigate to the middle may make themselves vulnerable because you’re sure to upset at least part of your customer base, and potentially those on both sides of an issue by not being clear and decisive.  In a no-win situation so what’s a brand to do?

Shareholders are speaking up to counter what they’ve perceived as a destructive trend.

Executives have recognized the perils of taking a stance. Larry Fink, the CEO of Blackrock, and a proponent of stakeholder capitalism, has said, “Stakeholder capitalism is not about politics.  It is not a social or ideological agenda. The stakeholders of your company rely upon [management] to deliver profits for shareholders.  People don’t want to hear [CEOs] opine on every issue of the day, but they do need to know where we stand on the societal issues intrinsic to our companies’ long-term success.”

 

Sure enough, shareholder/stakeholder activism is becoming a more prevalent force that is being used to counter consumers demanding brands take activist stances by establishing clear guidelines and placing restrictions on what’s in and out of scope when it comes to content and communication a brand publishes.  And you can see tangible example beginning to pop up with big consumer brands.  For example, PepsiCo has published a policy emphasizing its commitment to political and religious impartiality, “PepsiCo’s media-buying and content policies are audience-centric, aiming to reach all consumers authentically, and are viewpoint neutral with respect to political or religious status or views.” 

 

It will be interesting so see how this countertrend proliferates and if it has staying power as the buying power of younger generations grow over time.

What to do if you’re a startup or SMB?

If you’re not a big brand what rules apply?  It is believed that “smaller share” brands are more likely to benefit from taking what is perceived to be as an authentic stand on important issues.  But strategy should still be used to set expectations around the type of cultural moments or social issues a brand will lean into.  Trying to determine what cultural conversation even a small brand should or should not engage in, especially when it may not know where its core consumers stand on an issue is operating without a strategy.  Thus, brands need to narrow their lens and focus on movements and moments that align with their DNA as determined by the Brand Foundational Elements.  

Beyond the strategic sandbox provided by your Brand Foundational Elements, here are some helpful reminders about how to engage in cultural movements and moments that we use to navigate and nurture the delicate consumer-brand relationship:

• Start small, don’t get ahead of yourself.

• Begin by focusing on issues that are meaningful to your customers and tangential to your service or offering.

• Fight for things you can fight for given the size of your platform - which limits influence and reach. 

• You can build to bigger issues over time as your platform grows.

• Scenario plan - if you can’t “stick to your guns” when taking a stand don’t draw weapons.

• And lastly, never forget to be a good human. Show your humanity.