The Hubristic Brand:Transgressing Brand Values in Consumer-Brand Relationships

Katherine V. Alex

Presented to the Second International Colloquium on Consumer-Brand Relationships

March 18, 2011

The Hubristic Brand

Hubris as a Cultural Concept

Though he cries out his voice will not be heard.He shall struggle in the wild waves.And the gods shall laugh, seeing him.Having boasted of enduring fortune, all is taken from him.Riding the wave-crest he is tossed like a weak thing,To perish unwept and unseen. – Aeschylus, “Oresteia”

He who transgresses through overweening prideOr brings upon himself treasures unjustly acquired,For him there comes a time of retribution.

He, when he sets sail upon the evil oceanIs like a ship with the yard-arm split asunder,

Modeling Hubris: A Literary Approach

Modern-Day Hubristic Brands: Case Study Selection Criteria

Effectively project brand values to public acclaim

Experience an initial key challenge to those values

Experience a true pivotal or crisis moment in which their commitment to these values, and relationships with consumers, are tested

Research Objective: Understanding Hubris’ Role in Consumer-Brand Relationships

Hypothesis:Hubris, humility and sincerity will moderate aspects of brand behavior vis-à-vis brand values, and the consumer will spark the key moments that encourage the brand to confront these values.

To be Analyzed:•Sincerity of adopted and espoused brand values•Nature of brand behavior toward consumers’ challenges (downplaying vs. embracing of concerns), and by extension, consumer agency•The role of brand hubris and humility from brand’s rise to fall (or risk of falling)

Case 1: Toyota Establishes its Values

Andon manufacturing system affords legitimacy to quality as a point of difference

•1988: “Toyota quality: Who could ask for anything more?”•1993: 8 awards from JD Power and Associates; “Toyota quality: it’s the most powerful statement we can make.”

Quality is used to ladder up to the benefit of safety

•1993: “When it comes to the safety of your loved ones, Toyota cares”; “Toyota knows how protective you are of your babies.”

Case 1: Toyota Ignores Challenge

IIHS and Consumer Reports sound warnings•1997-2008: Various models receive “marginal” or “poor” IIHS safety reviews•2007: Consumer Reports no longer automatically recommends new or redesigned models: quality had “slipped so much”

Toyota does not address concerns•1993-2008: Ignores warnings; Touts record-setting sales and revenue statistics

Case 1: Toyota in Crisis

Toyota faces a “watershed” moment•2009: Public airing of late family’s 911 call as their Lexus accelerated uncontrollably through an intersection

Press and government step in and apply pressure

•2010: NYTimes: “[Toyota] went from discounting early reports of problems to overconfidently announcing diagnoses and insufficient fixes” •2010: Transportation Secretary LaHood: “Toyota only halted production of recalled vehicles because we asked them to”

Case 2: BP’s Malleable Identity

“Hundreds of millions” of dollars spent on post-Amoco-merger (1998) repositioning

•Brandmark: Inspired by sun god Helios, who “symbolizes the values of ‘progressive, responsible, innovative and performance-driven’”•Aspirational logo “was designed as a dramatic break with tradition”

American Marketing Association lauds BP’s 2007 advertising campaign; Landor finds that consumers ranked BP “more green” than competitors

Case 2: BP’s Unheeded Warnings

BP faces post-repositioning challenges•2005: Refinery blast in Texas•2006: Oil spill at trans-Alaska pipeline

The press urges caution•2006: BusinessWeek: “You are what you do and what you make, not what good advertising makes you out to be. BP has had years to get its practice aligned with its image”•2006: Adweek: “For every one [journalistic] piece on BP not living up to the standard they're reaching tens of millions every day with worldwide advertising”

Case 2: BP in Crisis

BP faces a moment of reckoning•2010: Deepwater Horizon oil rig explosion; CEO Hayward’s initial reaction is to deflect blame (“responsibility for safety is with Transocean”)

A dubious claim of responsibility•2010 (days after spill): Hayward to “honor people’s legitimate claims for damages”; A judge and attorney general soon find BP coercing residents into giving up rights to sue

Case 3: Ben and Jerry’s: A Foil with Humility

Since 1978, values grounded in authenticity•Hormone-free products•“Disenfranchised” people staff factory

In 1999, Economic challenges make company an acquisition target

•Suitors include multinational conglomerates Unilever, Nestle, Diageo, and Roncadin

Consumers launch grassroots campaigns, Vermont governor expresses worry

•Ben drives “tough bargain on conditions of sale” with Unilever; core values upheld. Sale called “a victory for social responsibility”

Findings: Hubris at Play in the Lifecycle of the Modern Brand

Limitations and Further Research

•Develop an experimental study to quantify effects

•Follow Toyota and BP longitudinally: Can their relationships with consumers be repaired? How do the dynamics of their consumer-relationships change, given their sincerity has been called into question? For example, how does Toyota’s offering of incentives affect its evolving relationship with consumers if it had created a friend relationship (cf. Heide and Wathne, 2006)?

•Extend research to human celebrity brands who have established distinct brand values and personalities and then violated them by transgressing as individuals (e.g., Martha Stewart and her insider trading, or Britney Spears and her erratic episodes, and the effects on their array of licensed products; or Tiger Woods and his adultery as it affects his array of endorsed products).

Thank you!