Being humane is hot

A brand that puts out more stuff on itself in the public domain was found to be more relevant, and the likelihood of it entering the consideration set was much higher. This was in one of our earlier probes (mapping the aspirations, dispositions and attitude of people aged 14-34 years). As many as 41 per cent wanted a brand to be ‘transparent’.

Our latest Cool Hunt coerces us to tweak it all a little. So it is not just ‘I must know as much as I want to about the brand’; one also needs to add ‘and figure out if there is a human side to the brand/does it associate with any social cause that I advocate (or am sensitive to)’. Any act of the brand that is contrary gets them to drop the brand pronto.

An extremely high percentage of respondents (57 per cent) seeking out the brand’s view on contentious issues and its public conduct stirred us up a little. Now, these issues could be larger ones such as commitment to environment-friendliness or fiddly ones involving customer care. Intriguingly, stuff done by the brand-owning corporate under CSR came across split into two distinct responses. One was ‘any CSR activity’ and the other was, specifically, ‘CSR activity that is for a cause that I espouse’. While ‘any CSR activity’ was good enough for 11 per cent of our respondents, 22 per cent wanted to consider those brands that engaged only in ‘meaningful’ CSR (read: causes dear to the respondent).

The fact that most cool folk in urban India are connected and listening to others allows them access to a lot about the brands they are considering owning. Thanks to their constant updating of status messages on chats and social media, most of what they do is in the public domain. Perhaps that’s why they are actively seeking the same from brands, particularly from those targeting them.

Brands withholding information or even not putting out enough of it in the public domain will find it a crawl getting into the consideration set. We got many responses that were laced with the intent to reject brands on account of insufficient information being put out or information that is seen as an effort to cover up. Brands owning up publicly to minor follies or seen as offering apologies to consumers or correcting course after admittance appealed to almost 10 per cent of our respondents.

Says the renowned psychologist Dr Aruna Broota: “Our society has come of age and after all the babudom we have been exposed to, we are extremely appreciative of corporate entities that support causes that we value or when they display a humane side.” But she also warns that the same folks have it in them to differentiate between fake attempts or loud marketing stunts from genuine ones. So in the 5As of the evolved marketing mix (accessibility, affordability, acceptability, awareness and aspiration) – acceptability and awareness will have to be redefined to encompass a brand’s leaning to social causes, sensitivity to end-users and the humaneness index.

Giraj Sharma is an independent brand consultant who is also a compulsive cool hunter.

COMMENT NOW