The Hubristic
Brand:
Transgressing
Brand Values in
Consumer-Brand
Relationships
Katherine V. Alex
The Hubristic Brand
Presented to the
Second
International
Colloquium on
Consumer-Brand
Relationships
March 18, 2011
Hubris as a Cultural Concept
He who transgresses through overweening
pride
Or brings upon himself treasures unjustly
acquired,
For him there comes a time of retribution.
He, when he sets sail
upon the evil ocean
Is like a ship with the
yard-arm split asunder,
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”
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 performancedriven’”
•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 consumerrelationships 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!