The pitfalls of purpose and profit

23 January 2023
 
Dan Hojnik.

Dan Hojnik, General Manager, Involved Media

The past few years have seen a surge in companies talking about profit with purpose. It can be a great idea, but one that comes with significant watchouts. It’s a fine line to walk when you're a brand that is focusing on purpose, but it's an even finer line to walk when you're putting purpose and profit in the same sentence.

The ongoing focus on purpose is reflective of a trend among consumers wanting the brands they engage with to be an extension of themselves, that is, an extension of their own views and values. 

The biggest, best and most recent example of a brand walking the purpose talk is Patagonia, with company founder, Yvon Chouinard, deciding to give all of the company’s profits to a specially designed trust and a non-profit organisation whose sole purpose is to fight climate change. It’s anticipated that Patagonia – which was built on the mission to be “in business to save our home planet” – will give away about $US100 million a year to protect nature, promote biodiversity and fight the environmental crisis.

This is powerful stuff. It's not just about a company going out there and saying that it’s going to do something and, in some cases, trying to justify what it’s doing elsewhere. In Patagonia’s case, it did it first and explained why later. Cause out. It really comes down to being authentic and understanding the value of real authenticity to consumers.

Authenticity is a word that gets thrown around a bit. In terms of brands being an extension of “self”, authenticity is all about behaviour. It's about what you do far more so than what you say. It's not just about creating an advertising campaign that supports a particular cause or purpose. It's about actually creating change through behaviour.

While Patagonia is an extreme example of authentic behaviour, we’ve seen less extreme (and less authentic) examples with the likes of TAB, Maccas and Telstra. In the wake of COVID-19, it became popular to be seen to be doing good. TAB released its JAB logo and campaign promoting getting vaccinated, Maccas changed its iconic logo to encourage social distancing and Telstra released some content making light of the baseless claims that a vaccine turns its recipients into a 5G transmitter. Did they come from a place of wanting to positively influence the masses? Probably. Were these campaigns really necessary for the good of a higher purpose? Probably not. While I doubt these marketing teams had the intention of exploiting topical conversation and fear-based claims, they certainly didn’t have any follow through regarding a greater cause or purpose. They were just adverts.  

A few years ago, PepsiCo went way too far with a TV commercial for Pepsi-Cola that featured Kendall Jenner and made the extraordinary claim that systemic racism could be solved with a can of soft drink. Not only was this full-blown offensive to those supporting the Black Lives Matter movement, but Pepsi’s audience also called out the brand’s BS. Pepsi hadn’t done anything to authentically support or help the victims of racism, yet it referenced it in a self-indulgent ad featuring the latest in its long line of celebrity endorsements. Ultimately Pepsi pulled the ad and apologised, but lasting damage was done to the brand globally.

A key lesson here is that purpose-based marketing can be an effective tool to use, when done right and supported with actual behaviour. A while ago, the IPA in the UK released a study which showed that purpose, done well, is exceptionally good at driving brand building effects and strengthens overall marketing effectiveness compared to “regular” marketing campaigns. But if a brand gets it wrong, the data suggests that inauthentic purpose-based marketing has a negative effect.

With the wealth of information at our fingertips and conversations enabled by social media, it’s become easier for people to see through misleading claims, “wokewashing” or by calling out virtue signalling. Now the risk is more severe for those who talk the talk but cannot commit to walking the walk. It all comes back to authenticity.

If you are considering purpose-based ad campaign in 2023 because it seems like a great thing to do to increase sales, you are coming from the wrong place and people will see through your brand’s BS. If you put a social issue or injustice at the heart of your organisation and put real steps to further a cause, maybe you should consider telling people about it. But it must always be cause out, not brand in.

Effective brand purpose marketing is not something you can buy with airtime; it is something you must earn with action.

comments powered by Disqus