Author
The events of 2020 were an inflection point that led us to place greater attention on fundamental issues of economic, social and racial equality. This heightened focus created rising expectations for brands to use their influence to stand up for social issues. One year later, consumers’ expectation of social involvement from brands is not going away, in the sense that it’s becoming implicit.
For the longest time, back when consumers weren’t really expecting brands to take a stand on issues that were unrelated to their commercial proposition, not taking a position to sidestep controversy was a viable, if not the default, option for most brands. Few of them decided to step into an activist role, often being subjected to backlash for taking their stances, from Ben and Jerry’s Hubby Hubby campaign in support of gay marriage in 2009 [1] to Nike’s first campaign featuring Colin Kaepernick in 2018, which was responded to with a brand boycott on Twitter and a 3.2% drop for the company’s shares. [2]
In a departure from the past, consumers have now started penalizing brands more often for their silence. An early sign of this trend was the mass subscriber exodus from Uber to Lyft in 2017, when the former restrained from taking a position on Donald Trump’s anti-Muslim travel ban after its rival had donated a million dollars to the anti-travel ban lobby. [3] In a 2020 dentsu Recovery Navigator survey, as many as 50% of consumers stated that they had taken some type of action after a brand remained silent on key social and political issue and 24% stated the action they had taken was switching to another brand. [4] Similarly, in June 2020 54% of consumers stated they were less likely to support brands that stayed silent on the topic of racial equality. [5] Neutrality increasingly comes at a price for brands at a time when consumers feel that saying nothing is saying something after all.
Our research has shown that this sentiment should not be categorized as a passing reaction to the traumatic events of 2020 and 2021: over time, it’s growing, rather than fading - as evidenced by the fact that the number of Millennial consumers supporting brands taking a stand on pressing social issues has grown from 63% in June 2020 to 73% in February 2021. [6]
Furthermore, our surveys show that as many as 65% consumers regularly stop purchasing brands based on their perception of a business’ behavior and values. This trend is especially evident in younger consumers (74% among Millennials and Gen X, versus 45% among Boomers) and is therefore likely to become more prevalent over time. [7]
Since consumers will inevitably assign meaning to brand behaviors, whether they manifest in actions and statements or in the lack thereof, let’s reframe the question ‘in addition to doing business, what should my brand stand up for?’ and instead ask ourselves ‘how are my business behaviors living up to what I believe in?’
The wealth of information now available in the public domain is broadening the constituency brands have to respond to, from shareholders and the boardroom to employees and now to the entire consumer base. Therefore, understanding the audience or, as P&G’s Chief Brand Officer Marc Pritchard recently put it, “being clear on whom you serve” [8] is more critical than ever before for marketers.
Ultimately, consumers believe that actions speak louder than words. While a significant 56% of consumers interviewed in a dentsu Recovery Navigator stated that speaking up or participating in social issues is a critical or important attribute being considered before purchasing a brand, the number grew to 65% for committing to sustainability, to 66% for committing to diversity and inclusion and to 73% for acting and communicating with transparency about business practices. [9]
This focus on values and actions is reframing brands into platforms that are expected to use their reach to effect change. As a result, Marketing is no longer just a department but a mission. Marketing’s role is evolving from a campaign mechanism mostly concerned with communicating the commercial proposition of products and services to an ethical compass that defines a brand’s beliefs and shapes a brand’s behavior - and is expected to keep the rest of the business accountable for how it operates: how employees are treated, how supply chain and distribution practices impact the environment and the availability of equal opportunities, or how the legislation the business lobbies for correlates to its economic interest.
Lack of trust in traditional institutions and a polarized social and political discourse are contributing to the growing unaffordability of brand neutrality. At the same time, by expanding the sphere of influence of their platforms outside of the business, brands have an opportunity to meet the implicit expectations of the audience that identifies with their values and to take an active role, in several ways:
In the past, for a brand to have a POV on the world was a choice - now it's quickly becoming an inevitability. Focusing on the issues where your brand's platform can provide a meaningful contribution and demonstrating your commitment to live up to your values will be the key to gaining credibility with consumers.
[10] For instance, brands like Lego and Clorox recently boycotted advertising on Facebook to take a stance against the tech giant’s lax policing of hate speech and violence on its service: https://fortune.com/2020/11/07/facebook-ad-boycott-big-brands-lego-clorox-verizon-microsoft-hp/.
[11] An example of this is Salesforce’s recent announcement that it will help its employees leave Texas after the state passed the nation's most restrictive abortion law: https://edition.cnn.com/2021/09/11/business/salesforce-texas-abortion-law/index.html.
Dirk Herbert, Chief Strategy Officer, dentsu Americas
Charlie Almond, Chief Strategy Officer, dentsu Canada