We Consume To Stand Out While Fitting In

There was a Lee ad that ran in Australia about 5 years ago. It had the tag line 'Stand Out. Fit In.' I really liked it. This is a perennial internal debate people play in their minds when consuming brands. Whatever the category people are playing a balancing act of wanting to fit in, conform and ultimately gain peer acceptance. Whilst also, wanting to stand out, express themselves, and be recognised as an independent being.

This principle is easy to understand in fashion - and leads to tribes of people all looking different from everyone else, but very similar to one another. Goths, Skaters, and Fashionistas are all standing out, yet fitting in. However, the principle can be generalised to other categories and perhaps even applies when we choose meals in a restaurant. For some reason someone felt compelled to study this. At the Journal of Consumer Behaviour a study has found that when we order food in a restaurant in groups we do the following:

1. Tend to seek variety when making initial orders - that is we consider ordering things other people are not.
2. Then we gravitate toward similar choices as others - that is we begin to conform with everyone else.

3. And then, as the group consensus grows, we move away from popular choices and get our own thing anyway.

I love this study, and although sad to say reflects the way I go about choosing meals in a restaurant. The study goes into more detail about what % of people need to consider ordering the same thing before the need to stand out kicks in. However, to read more and ensure I have not misrepresented the original please visit it when published in full as these findings were taken from the press release.

Next time your ordering a meal, or putting on your favourite jeans be sure to ask yourself 'Is this choice going to help me conform, whilst expressing my individuality'.... or perhaps don't!

Lee photo

In Advertising Give Me Utility over Emotion Anytime

Here's my latest Adnews article. It's about Utility Marketing, trying to use every possible opportunity to give people what they want. It's an alternative to the 'emotional ádvertising' thing people talk about (see previous blog posts).

I'd be interested in peoples thoughts.

The Ministry of Muffins

Last year, George Weston Foods, along with Naked Communications, decided to completely transform the ‘Little Bites’ brand. After re-segmenting the market, a significantly larger opportunity for the brand was identified, and a new master brand (The Ministry of Muffins) was created to meet this opportunity. This work has resulted in reformulating the product and improving its nutritional profile, completely redesigning the packaging, and creating an integrated communications campaign.

The Power of Social Media

Over the last three months something interesting has happened to the Sydney radio scene, largely due to the power of social media. One radio station, 94.5 FBI, has been saved. Whereas another, the high profile Kyle and Jackie O show (2Day FM) has been severely wounded.

FBI asked Naked Communications to develop an idea that would encourage their loyal listeners to donate money to save the station. Previous donation drives had had only moderate success and we know from social influence theory that people don’t enjoy backing an ailing cause. Therefore, Naked had the idea to turn the listeners creative capital into financial capital. We encouraged listeners to creatively ‘Ask Richard’ Branson for $1,000,000 – whoever asked him in the most creative way also scored some dollars. Anyway, the creative peoples participation was enough to generate strong PR , Richard Branson called in to the station, people did silly stuff, and the campaign raised over $500,000. That was enough to save the station.

Kyle and Jackie O on the other hand acted in a deplorable, grubby manner. They angered many areas of the community and threw fuel on the fire by refusing to accept responsibility for their actions. Bloggers, and Twitterers demanded action, other media groups joined in, and advertisers listened. I personally participated in this action, and was pleased with the result; a 7 second delay, an investigation instigated, and a reduced public role for a very offensive man. Again, this result was at least partly due to the power of social media.

So what can we take from this?
1. Not all voices are equal: Brands need to find the influential few and invest more time with them .
2. Tap into your lovers passions: People got involved with FBI as we asked them to create inventive ways to release money from Branson, rather than just asking them for money. Don’t ask consumers to just name your product or write an ad (many people would find that boring / trivial) but look at ways they can get involved in ways they want to get involved.
3. Listen before responding: Kyle’s use of social media (The Punch) just inflamed the situation. He did not listen to the audience who was calling for action. His tone was as if he was speaking to his regular all forgiving audience.
4. Use social media: Social media, especially combined with other forms of communications is now even more powerful (through some fancy technological innovations). The FBI campaign cost $0.00, and raised $500,000 over the course of 6 weeks. The financial impact on Kyle was even more staggering.

It’s a neat case study. Two brands, same category, same media spend ($0.00) and with extremely different results. Social media is, as they say ‘hot right now’, and with good reason.