tag:theconversation.com,2011:/id/topics/brand-trust-832/articlesbrand trust – The Conversation2024-03-15T04:03:41Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2255782024-03-15T04:03:41Z2024-03-15T04:03:41ZBunnings has toppled Woolworths as Australia’s most ‘trusted’ brand – what makes us trust a brand in the first place?<p>Think of some of the world’s biggest brands: Nike, McDonald’s, Coca-Cola, Apple. With what do you associate them? Are they positive associations? Now consider, do you trust them? </p>
<p>Brand trust is a measure of how customers <em>feel</em> about a brand in terms of how well the brand delivers on its promises. Trust is an important measure for any organisation, large or small. </p>
<p>Whether or not customers trust a brand can be the difference between choosing that brand’s products or services over another. </p>
<p>In Australia, Woolworths <a href="https://www.roymorgan.com/findings/9472-risk-monitor-quartely-update-december-2023">held the title</a> of our most trusted brand for three and a half years. But recent cost-of-living pressures have put supermarkets in the spotlight for all the wrong reasons. </p>
<p>Roy Morgan Research’s <a href="https://www.roymorgan.com/findings/9472-risk-monitor-quartely-update-december-2023">most recent trust rankings</a> show Woolworths has slipped to number two, handing its crown to hardware behemoth Bunnings. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/brad-banducci-checks-out-from-woolworths-signalling-a-business-out-of-touch-with-its-customers-224066">Brad Banducci checks out from Woolworths, signalling a business out-of-touch with its customers</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>It’s clear that trust is fragile and can be quickly squandered when brands lose touch with those they serve. </p>
<p>So what makes us trust a brand in the first place? And why do we trust some more than others? </p>
<h2>What makes us trust a brand?</h2>
<p>According to customer experience management firm Qualtrics, <a href="https://www.qualtrics.com/au/experience-management/brand/brand-trust/">brand trust</a> is </p>
<blockquote>
<p>the confidence that customers have in a brand’s ability to deliver on what it promises. As a brand consistently meets the expectations it has set in the minds of customers, trust in that brand grows. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>There are many ways to go about measuring brand trust. A typical first step is to ask lots of people what they think, collating their general opinions on product quality and the brand’s customer service experience. </p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="Woman types customer review using laptop" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/582085/original/file-20240314-20-3hx1q2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/582085/original/file-20240314-20-3hx1q2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/582085/original/file-20240314-20-3hx1q2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/582085/original/file-20240314-20-3hx1q2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/582085/original/file-20240314-20-3hx1q2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/582085/original/file-20240314-20-3hx1q2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/582085/original/file-20240314-20-3hx1q2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Customer ratings and reviews are an important factor in assessing overall brand trust.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/customer-review-good-rating-concept-by-1967758090">Ken Stocker/Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>This can be strengthened with more quantifiable elements, including: </p>
<ul>
<li>online ratings and reviews </li>
<li>social media “sentiment” (positive, negative or neutral)</li>
<li>corporate social responsibility activities </li>
<li>philanthropic efforts </li>
<li>customer data security and privacy. </li>
</ul>
<p>Some surveys go even deeper, asking respondents to consider a brand’s vision and mission, its approaches to sustainability and worker standards, and how honest its advertising appears. </p>
<h2>Is this a real and useful metric?</h2>
<p>The qualitative methodology used by <a href="https://www.roymorgan.com/findings/9472-risk-monitor-quartely-update-december-2023">Roy Morgan</a> to determine what Australian consumers think about 1,000 brands has been administered over two decades, so the data can be reliably compared across time. </p>
<p>On measures of both trust and distrust, it asks respondents which brands they trust and why. This approach is useful because it tells us which elements factor into brand trust judgements. </p>
<p><a href="https://roymorgan-cms-prod.s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/07035120/9472-Risk-Monitor-Quartely-Update-December-2023-1-1.pdf">Customer responses</a> about the survey’s most recent winner, Bunnings, show that customer service, product range, value-for-money pricing and generous returns policies are the key drivers of strong trust in its brand. </p>
<p>Here are some examples: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Great customer service. Love their welcoming staff. Whether it’s nuts and bolts or a new toilet seat, they have it all, value for money.</p>
<p>Great products and price and have a no quibble refund policy.</p>
<p>Great stock range, help is there if you need it and it is my go-to for my gardening and tool needs. Really convenient trading hours, and their return policy is good.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>In addition to trust, there are three other metrics commonly used to assess brand performance: </p>
<ul>
<li><p><strong>brand equity</strong> – the commercial or social value of consumer perceptions of a brand </p></li>
<li><p><strong>brand loyalty</strong> – consumer willingness to consistently choose one brand over others regardless of price or competitor’s efforts</p></li>
<li><p><strong>brand affinity</strong> – the emotional connection and common values between a brand and its customers.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>However, trust is becoming a disproportionately important metric as consumers demand that companies provide <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/bernhardschroeder/2020/01/16/from-the-traditional-to-the-outrageous-four-brands-that-use-honest-transparency-to-build-loyal-customers-with-non-traditional-marketing-and-branding/?sh=6689f81320a1">increased transparency</a> and exhibit greater care for their customers, not just their shareholders.</p>
<h2>Why do Australians trust retailers so much?</h2>
<p>Of Australia’s top ten most trusted brands, seven are retailers – Bunnings, Woolworths, Aldi, Coles, Kmart, Myer and Big W. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/582082/original/file-20240314-28-h0xdf4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="table shows that Bunnings is now Australia's most trusted brand, and Optus the least trusted brand." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/582082/original/file-20240314-28-h0xdf4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/582082/original/file-20240314-28-h0xdf4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=279&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/582082/original/file-20240314-28-h0xdf4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=279&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/582082/original/file-20240314-28-h0xdf4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=279&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/582082/original/file-20240314-28-h0xdf4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=350&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/582082/original/file-20240314-28-h0xdf4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=350&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/582082/original/file-20240314-28-h0xdf4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=350&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The latest changes to Australia’s most trusted and most distrusted brand rankings.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.roymorgan.com/findings/9472-risk-monitor-quartely-update-december-2023">Roy Morgan Single Source (Australia)</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>This <a href="https://www.fastcompany.com/90901331/america-most-trusted-brands-companies-report-2023-morning-consult">stands in contrast</a> with the United States, where the most trusted brands are predominantly from the healthcare sector. </p>
<p>So why do retail brands dominate our trust rankings? </p>
<p>They certainly aren’t small local businesses. Our retail sector is <a href="https://www.afr.com/companies/retail/in-the-shopping-trolley-war-the-supermarkets-have-to-give-20240122-p5ez4k">highly concentrated</a>, dominated by a few giant retail brands. </p>
<p>We have only two major department stores (David Jones and Myer), three major discount department stores (Big W, Target and Kmart) and a <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-02-23/a-history-of-the-duopoly-coles-woolworths/103494070">supermarket “duopoly”</a> (Coles and Woolworths). </p>
<p>It’s most likely then that these brands have been enjoying leftover goodwill from the pandemic. </p>
<p>As Australia closed down to tackle COVID-19, the retail sector, and in particular the grocery sector, was credited with enabling customers to <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/inside-story-how-woolworths-and-coles-joined-forces-to-avert-covid-19-disaster-20200611-p551lk.html">safely access</a> food and household goods. </p>
<p>Compared with many other countries, we did not see a predominance of empty shelves across Australia. Retailers in this country stepped up – implementing or improving their online shopping capabilities and ensuring physical stores followed health guidelines and protocols.</p>
<p>Now, with the pandemic behind us and in an environment of high inflation, the <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-02-20/woolworths-coles-supermarket-tactics-grocery-four-corners/103405054">big two supermarkets</a> face <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2024/feb/20/do-coles-woolworths-specials-actually-offer-savings-choice-survey-supermarket-price-gouging-inquiry">growing distrust</a> and a <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Supermarket_Prices/SupermarketPrices">public inquiry</a>. </p>
<h2>Lessons from the losers</h2>
<p>After <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/nov/20/optus-scandals-network-outage-cyberattack-ceo-resignation-kelly-bayer-rosmarin">two high profile disasters</a>, Optus finds itself the most distrusted brand in Australia.</p>
<p>Its companions in the “most distrusted” group include social media brands Meta (Facebook), TikTok and X. </p>
<p>Qantas, Medibank Private, Newscorp, Nestle and Amazon also made the top 10. </p>
<p>The main reason consumers distrust brands is for a perceived failure to live up to their promises and responsibilities. </p>
<p>For example, <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/09/18/amazon-working-conditions-safety-osha-doj/">worker conditions at multinational firm Amazon</a> are seen by some consumers as a reflection of questionable business practices. </p>
<p>Other brands may have earned a reputation for failing to deliver the basics, like when chronic <a href="https://www.afr.com/companies/transport/compensating-travellers-for-cancelled-flights-long-overdue-20240212-p5f45c">flight delays and cancellations</a> plagued many Qantas customers. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-optus-outage-shows-us-the-perils-of-having-vital-networks-in-private-hands-217660">The Optus outage shows us the perils of having vital networks in private hands</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Lessons from the winners</h2>
<p>On the flip side, consumers have rewarded budget-friendly retailers with increased trust in the most recent rankings. </p>
<p>Aldi, Kmart and Bunnings have improved their standing as trusted brands, no doubt in part because they have helped many Australian consumers deal with tight household budgets. </p>
<p>As discretionary consumer spending continues to tighten, we may see a more permanent consumer shopping <a href="https://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/retail/rise-of-the-value-shopper-as-budgets-are-crunched-a-threat-and-opportunity-for-retailers/news-story/9b7a355cfb3866ec60d2ee42b7cbd567">shift towards value for money</a> brands and discounters. </p>
<p>Trust is a fragile thing to maintain once earned. As we move through 2024, Australian companies must pay close attention to their most important asset – strong relationships with those they serve.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/225578/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Louise Grimmer does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Despite growing wariness of supermarkets, Australians have an enduring trust for retail brands that sets us apart from other countries.Louise Grimmer, Senior Lecturer in Retail Marketing, University of TasmaniaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2208052024-01-10T16:34:08Z2024-01-10T16:34:08ZPost Office will struggle to rebuild brand trust – as Boeing and Facebook scandals show<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/568654/original/file-20240110-16-jk1eme.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C4207%2C3246&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/people-line-outside-post-office-cambridge-1865055061">Edward Crawford/Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The Post Office, once an <a href="https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/EJM-11-2014-0691/full/html">iconic British brand</a> has fallen from grace following the <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-post-office-scandal-is-possibly-the-largest-miscarriage-of-justice-in-uk-history-and-its-not-over-yet-211217">Horizon IT Scandal</a>. With over 11,500 branches, it’s the <a href="https://corporate.postoffice.co.uk/#:%7E:text=With%20over%2011%2C500%20branches%2C%20we,retail%20franchise%20network%20in%20Europe.&text=An%20anchor%20of%20UK%20communities,people%20who%20rely%20on%20us.">largest retail franchise</a> network in Europe, offering a variety of products – not just postal, but cash and banking, foreign exchange and government services. Post offices are also often an important social hub for communities, not to mention offering a chance to run a vital local business for people around the UK.</p>
<p>The Horizon system, developed by Fujitsu, was introduced in 1999 to help branches manage transactions, accounts and stocktaking. It has since been revealed as faulty, causing account shortfalls often initially blamed on those people running the branches (known as sub-postmasters and mistresses). As a result of the system’s errors, these workers were accused of fraud and theft, and wrongly prosecuted. A <a href="https://www.itv.com/watch/mr-bates-vs-the-post-office/10a0469/10a0469a0001">new ITV four-part drama</a> has put a spotlight on the scandal, renewing pressure on the government Post Office to <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-67926661">exonerate and compensate</a> hundreds of former workers.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/mr-bates-vs-the-post-office-depicts-one-of-the-uks-worst-miscarriages-of-justice-heres-why-so-many-victims-didnt-speak-out-220513">Mr Bates vs The Post Office depicts one of the UK's worst miscarriages of justice: here’s why so many victims didn’t speak out</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>One of the <a href="https://www.onepostoffice.co.uk/secure/latest-news/our-business/brands-we-trust-where-we-sit-in-the-rankings/">UK’s most trusted brands</a> only a few years ago, the Post Office has since drawn near-universal ire
<a href="https://www.itv.com/news/2021-04-23/post-office-postmasters-horizon-court-of-appeal">for its treatment of its sub-postmasters and mistresses</a>. The ITV show has only reignited the controversy.</p>
<p>Trust is crucial to the relationship brands develop with consumers. These connections help attract new customers, but also create long-term buying habits. It takes time and effort to build this kind of trust, but it can crumble in an instant, as major brands like Facebook, Boeing and Volkswagen – and now the Post Office – have found. Rebuilding this trust after a scandal takes even more time and effort and the results can be mixed.</p>
<p>Brand trust is multifaceted but can be thought of as the <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/257541748_Does_Having_an_Ethical_Brand_Matter_The_Influence_of_Consumer_Perceived_Ethicality_on_Trust_Affect_and_Loyalty">confidence, reliability and credibility</a> that consumers and other stakeholders – such as investors, suppliers, employees and even competitors – associate with a brand. It reflects the belief that a brand is competent, consistent, honest and takes responsibility for delivering on its promises and acting in the best interest of consumers. </p>
<p>People can <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/209515">develop strong emotional attachments to brands</a> and trust is typically <a href="https://hbr.org/2019/07/the-trust-crisis">at the core</a> of these relationships. Trust underpins people’s commitment and <a href="https://business.columbia.edu/sites/default/files-efs/pubfiles/593/The_Chain_of_Effects.pdf">loyalty</a> to a brand. And when a brand earns people’s trust, it can be rewarded with more sales, positive word of mouth, and long-term custom, <a href="https://www.adobe.com/content/dam/cc/uk/aboutadobe/newsroom/pdfs/051121-future-of-marketing.pdf">according to research</a>. <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/227895249_Examining_the_Antecedents_and_Consequences_of_Corporate_Reputation_A_Customer_Perspective">Academic studies also show</a> the importance of trust to corporate reputation. </p>
<h2>From hero to zero</h2>
<p>So, when this trust is broken, it can be highly damaging for a brand, as big names have found in the past. </p>
<p>In 2018, social media platform Facebook was at the centre of a major data breach. Governments around the world questioned the company’s commitment to data privacy after <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/apr/08/facebook-to-contact-the-87-million-users-affected-by-data-breach">87 million users</a> were confirmed to have had their personal data shared with Cambridge Analytica. The political consultant was using the data to target voters during the 2016 US presidential election. </p>
<p>Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg apologised in a Facebook post acknowledging “a breach of trust between Facebook and the people who share their data with us and expect us to protect it”. But his initial response – <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/mar/21/mark-zuckerberg-response-facebook-cambridge-analytica#:%7E:text=The%20Facebook%20CEO%20broke%20his,expect%20us%20to%20protect%20it%E2%80%9D.">deafening silence for five days</a> – probably didn’t help shore up consumer trust in the brand. </p>
<p>The scandal had huge implications for data privacy and governments acted swiftly to pass laws and regulations to protect consumers, including the EU’s <a href="https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/digital-services-act-package">Digital Services Act</a>. In the aftermath of scandal, Americans were also <a href="https://theconversation.com/cambridge-analytica-scandal-facebooks-user-engagement-and-trust-decline-93814">less likely to trust</a> Facebook. </p>
<p>More recently, aeroplane maker Boeing’s reputation for quality has been decimated. First, a damning <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt11893274/">Netflix documentary</a> examined the 2018 and 2019 crashes of two 737-MAX jets and the company’s choices about <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/film/2022/feb/22/downfall-the-case-against-boeing-netflix-documentary-737-max">passenger safety</a>. Boeing spent <a href="https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/we-regain-trust-one-aircraft-at-a-time-says-boeing-boss-dave-calhoun-998fwztnv#:%7E:text=of%20Alba%202023-,We%20regain%20trust%20one%20aircraft%20at%20a,says%20Boeing%20boss%20Dave%20Calhoun&text=Boeing%20has%20spent%20four%20long,its%20bestselling%20737%20Max%20aircraft.">four years rebuilding trust</a> after <a href="https://www.boeing.com/737-max-updates/official-statements/">the two fatal crashes</a>. But the recent <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-67915771">mid-air cabin panel blow out</a> of a 737 MAX 9 has seen Boeing hit the headlines again, further damaging the company image and leaving customers, pilots, crew and regulators asking why they should trust the company. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/vt-IJkUbAxY?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>At an all-staff meeting shortly after the incident, <a href="https://edition.cnn.com/2024/01/09/business/boeing-safety-meeting-737-max-factory/index.html">CEO Dave Calhoun told employees</a> that Boeing must acknowledge “our mistake” and has promised total transparency. A video of <a href="https://www.boeing.com/737-9-updates/index.page#:%7E:text=hosted%20a%20meeting%20with%20all%20employees">his opening statement</a> was also posted on the company website.</p>
<p>Volkswagen experienced similar trust issues after a scandal dubbed “emissionsgate” or <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34324772">“the diesel dupe”</a>. The car company is still struggling after the US environmental regulator <a href="https://www.epa.gov/vw/learn-about-volkswagen-violations">accused the company</a> of cheating on vehicle emissions tests. Customers <a href="https://www.thedrum.com/news/2015/09/23/has-volkswagen-s-emissions-scandal-smashed-brand-beyond-repair">lost trust</a> in the brand and the company, after admitting fault, also had to pay billions of dollars in fines and compensation claims. </p>
<p>“Our most important task in 2016 is to win back trust,” Volkswagen CEO Matthias Mueller said in a January 2016 speech at an auto industry event.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/t7ne3cwqI4A?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<h2>Rebuilding trust in a brand</h2>
<p>In the aftermath of a brand crisis, <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13527266.2023.2172601">communication</a> in the form of this kind of brand apology is key. But <a href="https://theconversation.com/boeing-is-doing-crisis-management-all-wrong-heres-what-a-company-needs-to-do-to-restore-the-publics-trust-114051">Boeing</a> is still being accused of doing crisis management “all wrong”, and Facebook has also been <a href="https://insigniacrisis.com/2019-facebook-a-lesson-in-crisis-management">criticised</a> for its scandal response. </p>
<p>The speed of the response matters. An effective crisis management approach typically involves company leaders issuing swift public statements – often filmed – acknowledging responsibility and full transparency about the mistakes that lead to the scandal and the remedial steps.</p>
<p>Trust can be rebuilt but it’s a long-term process. Some <a href="https://fabrikbrands.com/brands-and-companies-that-have-repositioned-themselves/">companies</a> such as Starbucks and Gucci have successfully <a href="https://press.farm/brand-repositioning-strategies-rebuild-trust/">repositioned their brands</a> to alter the perceived image held by consumers. This involves changing marketing elements such as prices or promotional methods to attract new customers and refresh the brand image. In some cases, it involves a complete rebrand with a new logo and tagline.</p>
<p>The latest headlines have reignited debate about what the Post Office and the government should do to address the Horizon IT scandal. The Post Office must find the right kind of crisis management strategy if it wants to weather this storm and regain its position as a trusted British brand.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/220805/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Sameer Hosany does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Companies like Facebook, Volkswagen, Boeing – and now the Post Office – have seen how easy it is to destroy brand trust. But communication and transparency are key to rebuilding efforts.Sameer Hosany, Professor of Marketing, Royal Holloway University of LondonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2197252024-01-04T12:51:30Z2024-01-04T12:51:30ZHow subtle forms of misinformation affect what we buy and how much we trust brands<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/566367/original/file-20231218-18-bq4prp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=42%2C0%2C4700%2C3123&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Both direct and indirect misinformation influence brand trust. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/motion-escalators-modern-shopping-mall-201174746">estherpoon/Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Misinformation isn’t just blurring political lines anymore. It’s quietly infiltrating our shopping trolleys in subtle ways, shaping our decisions about what we buy and who we trust, as my research shows. </p>
<p>Spurred by political events, misinformation has garnered widespread media coverage and academic research. But most of the attention has been in the fields of <a href="https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257%2Fjep.31.2.211&fbclid=IwAR04My3aiycypMJKSI58e84gDvdrodsB9fqCycH9YfepWDDDwT--fZnVPvo;%20https://www.nyu.edu/about/news-publications/news/2019/january/fake-news-shared-by-very-few--but-those-over-65-more-likely-to-p.html">political science</a>, <a href="https://www.cell.com/trends/cognitive-sciences/fulltext/S1364-6613(21)00051-6?dgcid=raven_jbs_etoc_email">social psychology</a>, <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306457318306794">information technology</a> and <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/21670811.2017.1360143">journalism studies</a>. </p>
<p>More recently though, misinformation has also gained traction among <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0148296320307852">marketing</a> and <a href="https://myscp.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/jcpy.1288">consumer</a> experts. Much of that research has focused on the direct impacts of misinformation on brands and consumer attitudes, but a new perspective on the topic is now emerging.</p>
<p>What if the influence of misinformation extends beyond explicit attacks on brands? What if our choices as consumers are shaped not only by deliberate misinformation campaigns but also by subtle, indirect false information? </p>
<p>My own research has explored the dynamics of misinformation from a consumer standpoint. I have looked at how misinformation <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0148296320307852">spreads</a>, why people find it <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/07439156221103860">credible</a> and what we can do to try to <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/mar.21479">mitigate its spreading</a>. </p>
<p>However, my latest <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352250X23001616">study</a> looks at direct and indirect forms of misinformation and their consequences for brands and consumers. I have found that one of the major consequences of these types of misinformation is the erosion of trust.</p>
<h2>Direct and indirect misinformation</h2>
<p>Misinformation comes in direct and indirect forms. It can be direct when it purposefully targets brands or their products. Examples of direct misinformation include fabricated customer reviews or fake news campaigns targeting brands. </p>
<p>It was fake news that led to the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/12/10/business/media/pizzagate.html">“pizzagate” scandal</a> in 2016, for example. This involved unsubstantiated accusations of child abuse against prominent individuals linked to a Washington DC pizzeria. While last year, the brand Target was <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSL1N37S2U1/">falsely accused</a> of selling “satanic” children’s clothes on social media. </p>
<p>The consequences of direct misinformation can be far reaching, leading to a breakdown in brand trust. This erosion is particularly pronounced when misinformation originates from seemingly trustworthy sources, forcing brands into crisis management mode. </p>
<p>For example, in late 2022, Eli Lilly’s stock price fell by 4.37% after a <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/11/14/twitter-fake-eli-lilly/">fake Twitter</a> account impersonating the pharmaceutical company falsely announced that insulin would be given away for free. Investors were misled and the company was forced to issue multiple statements to regain their trust. </p>
<p>But beyond the realm of blatant brand attacks lies a subtler, less understood territory I call “indirect misinformation”. This type of misinformation doesn’t zero in on specific companies, but instead cloaks itself in issues like politics, social affairs or health issues.</p>
<p>The constant exposure to misinformation around issues like COVID-19 and politics can have a ripple effect. And my research, which reviewed the academic marketing literature on direct and indirect misinformation, argues that this constant barrage has the potential to impact consumer choices. </p>
<p>Consider the two distinct levels where these effects unfold for a company. At the brand level, reputable names may unwittingly find themselves entangled in disreputable fake news sites through <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0276146718755869">programmatic advertising</a>, in which automated technology is used to buy ad space on these websites. And while the misinformation itself might not directly impact brand trust, the association with dubious websites can cast a shadow over attitudes to brands. It can also <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1016/j.intmar.2018.09.001">impair</a> consumers’ intentions towards the brand. </p>
<p>Simultaneously, at the consumer level, the impact of indirect misinformation is profound. It breeds confusion, doubt and a general sense of vulnerability. Continuous exposure to misinformation is linked to <a href="https://misinforeview.hks.harvard.edu/article/misinformation-in-action-fake-news-exposure-is-linked-to-lower-trust-in-media-higher-trust-in-government-when-your-side-is-in-power/">decreased trust</a> in mainstream and traditional media brands, for example. </p>
<p>Consequently, people might become wary of all information sources and even fellow consumers. Subconsciously influenced by misinformation, they may make different purchase decisions and hold <a href="https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/full/10.1086/708035">altered views</a> of brands and products.</p>
<h2>What can brands do?</h2>
<p>While the negative repercussions of direct misinformation on brand trust have been well documented, shining a light on the subtler impacts of indirect misinformation marks a crucial step forward. It not only opens new avenues for researchers but also serves as a warning to brands. It urges them to be more proactive in their approach to misinformation. </p>
<p>If indirect misinformation makes consumers mistrustful and sceptical, brands could take preemptive measures. Tailoring specific marketing communications to instil trust in brands, products and offers becomes paramount in a world where trust is continually under siege. Building and maintaining a reputation for trustworthiness is essential for companies.</p>
<p>As we navigate this terrain of hidden influences, the call for a more comprehensive understanding of misinformation’s multifaceted impacts also becomes clearer. Researchers, brands and consumers alike need to decode the hidden messages of misinformation. This could help to fortify the foundations of trust in an era where it has become a precious commodity.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/219725/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Giandomenico Di Domenico is affiliated with the International Panel on the Information Environment. </span></em></p>Trust in brands may be eroded as awareness of misinformation increases according to new research.Giandomenico Di Domenico, Lecturer in Marketing & Strategy, Cardiff UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1504562020-11-27T03:05:22Z2020-11-27T03:05:22ZCoon’s rebranding dilemma: polishing a brand name to stay out of controversy<p>The makers of Coon cheese will no doubt have paid close attention to the publicity surrounding Nestle’s rebadging of its Red Skins and Chicos confectionary brands.</p>
<p>While the change of Chicos to Cheekies was uncontroversial, the change of Red Skins to Red Ripper – a name given decades ago to Soviet serial killer Andrei Chikatilo – was widely mocked.</p>
<p>The perils of rebranding helps explain the length of deliberations by Canadian-owned Saputo Dairy Australia, which has controlled the Coon brand since 2015. It announced in July it would “retire” the name, in the wake of increasing activism about brand names considered to have racist connotations. </p>
<p>“We are working to develop a new brand name that will honour the brand-affinity felt by our valued consumers while aligning with current attitudes and perspectives,” it <a href="https://www.broadsheet.com.au/national/food-and-drink/article/coon-cheese-getting-name-change-following-complaints-racism">said at the time</a>.</p>
<p>Saputo <a href="https://www.news.com.au/finance/business/retail/saputo-dairy-australia-affirms-plan-to-dump-racist-coon-cheese-brand/news-story/6dc3af4e241c493cad121acb6f849145">reaffirmed</a> this month it would change the name, but was still “working on the new brand development and look forward to revealing it to our customers and consumers once completed”.</p>
<p>That change can’t come soon enough for Indigenous activist Stephen Hagan, who has lobbied for Coon’s retirement from the Australian market for <a href="https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/indigenous/activist-cheesed-off-by-coon-rebranding-delay/news-story/690ffa2dc352dbe3eeaeb0e2fcbc2373">more than two decades</a>. </p>
<p>But the Nestle experience explains why the Coon deliberations are taking so long.</p>
<p>A well-known brand identity is hugely valuable in the food market. It’s how shoppers find and choose things in supermarkets that stock as many as <a href="https://www.marketwatch.com/story/grocery-stores-carry-40000-more-items-than-they-did-in-the-1990s-2017-06-07">40,000 more products</a> than they did 50 years ago. Re-establishing a brand, with a new identity, is expensive and risks losing market share.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Supermarket aisle" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/371677/original/file-20201127-14-ey5m7w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/371677/original/file-20201127-14-ey5m7w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=435&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/371677/original/file-20201127-14-ey5m7w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=435&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/371677/original/file-20201127-14-ey5m7w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=435&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/371677/original/file-20201127-14-ey5m7w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=547&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/371677/original/file-20201127-14-ey5m7w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=547&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/371677/original/file-20201127-14-ey5m7w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=547&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The average supermarket now has 40,000 more products than 50 years ago.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>How Coon cheese got its name</h2>
<p>Previous owners of the Coon brand, Kraft and Dairy Farmers, resisted demands for a name change on the grounds the association with an American racial slur for African Americans was mere coincidence, with the cheese being named after its American creator Edward William Coon, who <a href="https://patents.google.com/patent/US1579196A/en">patented his method</a> for making it – known as “Cooning” – in the 1926.</p>
<p>Australian dairy manufacturers began making cheese using Coon’s methods in the mid-1930s. In keeping with a common branding strategy at the time, the cheese was marketed using the name of its creator. </p>
<p>It is not known if that decision was made with knowledge the word had by then been in use in the US as a <a href="https://journals.openedition.org/ejas/9712?lang=en">derogatory term</a> for African Americans for a century.</p>
<p>In any event, the brand lived on in the Australian market. Coon is now the leading brand in the hard/cheddar cheese category, with <a href="https://www.euromonitor.com/cheese-in-australia/report">a 9% market share</a> (followed by Bega with 7.7%).</p>
<p>That share has been built over decades. Research shows strong brand loyalty in the cheese market, particularly for <a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3585273">cheddar and sliced cheese</a>. Coon’s owners will therefore be carefully weighing how to rebrand Coon to minimise the risk of shoppers failing to recognise it by another name and opting for another well-known brand. </p>
<h2>Brands on the run</h2>
<p>Given all this, it is reasonable to assume the retirement of Coon is being done under some duress. </p>
<p>But social media, woke activism and the internationalisation of the Black Lives Matter movement has changed the landscape, putting pressure on companies to retire all brand names associated with historic racial stereotypes. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/brands-backing-black-lives-matter-it-might-be-a-marketing-ploy-but-it-also-shows-leadership-139874">Brands backing Black Lives Matter: it might be a marketing ploy, but it also shows leadership</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Those brands include Minnesota-based Land O’Lakes butter (dropping its logo featuring a native American woman), Eskimo Pie ice-cream (now Edy’s Pie), and US Conagra Foods’ Mrs Butterworth’s brand of syrups, packaged in bottles the shape of a “matronly” woman.</p>
<p>The biggest to fall is the “Aunt Jemima” brand of pancake mixes, syrups and breakfast foods. In June, Quaker Foods North America (owned by PepsiCo) announced it <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jun/17/aunt-jemima-products-change-name-image-racial-stereotype">would finally retire</a> the brand, in use since 1889 and named after a character from 19th century minstrel shows. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="The Aunt Jemima's brand of cake mixes, syrups and breakfast foods has been around since 1889." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/371674/original/file-20201127-24-pelr7z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/371674/original/file-20201127-24-pelr7z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=386&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/371674/original/file-20201127-24-pelr7z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=386&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/371674/original/file-20201127-24-pelr7z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=386&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/371674/original/file-20201127-24-pelr7z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=485&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/371674/original/file-20201127-24-pelr7z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=485&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/371674/original/file-20201127-24-pelr7z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=485&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Aunt Jemima’s brand.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Like Coon’s owners, Aunt Jemima’s owners are still deliberating on how to rebrand. </p>
<p>Should it, for example, attempt to replace the Aunt Jemima visual identity with another character (or characters) better representing people of colour? Or will it simply “deracialise” the brand. After all, while removing stereotypical black faces from brands achieves one objective of the Black Lives Matter movement, removing all black faces isn’t necessarily a step forward in promoting diversity. </p>
<p>But that would be an extremely difficult feat to pull off.</p>
<p>It’s more likely Quaker Foods will emulate the approach taken by US multinational Mars, which in September announced the end of Uncle Ben’s, a rice brand launched in 1946 named after an African American rice farmer whose logo features a bow-tied “Chicago chef and waiter named Frank Brown”. Mars has opted to rebadge as “Ben’s Original” and drop the face.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="www.foodnavigator-usa.com" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/371676/original/file-20201127-19-1s937b1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/371676/original/file-20201127-19-1s937b1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=199&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/371676/original/file-20201127-19-1s937b1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=199&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/371676/original/file-20201127-19-1s937b1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=199&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/371676/original/file-20201127-19-1s937b1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=251&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/371676/original/file-20201127-19-1s937b1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=251&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/371676/original/file-20201127-19-1s937b1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=251&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Uncle Ben’s rebranding as Ben’s Original.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">https://www.foodnavigator-usa.com/Article/2020/09/23/We-listened-we-learned-we-re-changing-Uncle-Ben-s-rebrands-to-more-inclusive-Ben-s-Original</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The gravity of the deliberation over Aunt Jemima’s is exemplified by the sales boost for a competitor in the syrup market, Michele Foods, founded by African American woman Michele Hoskins. She <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/annakang/2020/08/18/black-owned-syrup-companys-sales-jump-78-after-aunt-jemima-brand-retirement/?sh=324f68705394">told Forbes</a> that July sales of her company’s syrups – based on a recipe handed down to her from her great great grandmother, America Washington, a freed slave – were 78% higher than the year before. </p>
<p>The Michele’s brand features Hoskins herself on the label. But as she told Forbes: “People want authentic products.”</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/where-woke-came-from-and-why-marketers-should-think-twice-before-jumping-on-the-social-activism-bandwagon-122713">Where 'woke' came from and why marketers should think twice before jumping on the social activism bandwagon</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Maintaining brand continuity</h2>
<p>Whatever Saputo decides is the next name for Coon, its intention will be to quell criticism without dramatically changing brand identity.</p>
<p>It will seek to do what Nestle clearly sought to do with renaming its <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-11-16/red-ripper-and-cheekies-the-new-name-of-allens-red-skin-chicos/12887278">Red Skins and Chicos</a> confectionery. It will want to change the name as little as possible and retain continuity with brand colours and styling.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/371675/original/file-20201127-20-1k7fl1l.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/371675/original/file-20201127-20-1k7fl1l.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=377&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/371675/original/file-20201127-20-1k7fl1l.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=377&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/371675/original/file-20201127-20-1k7fl1l.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=377&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/371675/original/file-20201127-20-1k7fl1l.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=474&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/371675/original/file-20201127-20-1k7fl1l.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=474&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/371675/original/file-20201127-20-1k7fl1l.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=474&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">From Red Skins to Red Ripper: little else in the brand identity has changed.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">The Conversation</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Note the new branding for Red Rippers looks almost identical to Red Skins (and the same with Chicos to Cheekies). So long as supermarkets stock these products in the same place on the shelves, customer confusion should be minimised.</p>
<p>Moon cheese, perhaps?</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/150456/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Abas Mirzaei does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Nestle’s experience explains why the Coon deliberations are taking so long.Abas Mirzaei, Senior Lecturer - Branding, Macquarie UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/916402018-03-26T00:37:31Z2018-03-26T00:37:31ZTrust and profitability: how some NZ brands are shortchanging domestic customers<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/211089/original/file-20180320-31596-6j16je.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Two new Tip Top ice creams, packaged with labels stating they are “brought to you by Tip Top”, are in fact made in Spain.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">from www.shutterstock.com</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>New Zealand’s reputation as a food exporter is based on branding around consistent quality and safety of New Zealand-made products.</p>
<p>However, recent stories relating to <a href="https://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/349846/tip-top-s-spanish-imports-what-the-helado">Tip Top importing ice cream from Spain</a> and <a href="http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11984664">Montana wines using Australian grapes</a> suggest that domestic customers are being shortchanged. Even some of New Zealand’s most iconic brands are implementing strategies that may lessen the trust domestic consumers have historically placed in them. </p>
<p>While these decisions have likely been made with profit in mind, there appears to be little concern for the potential to confuse, mislead or anger consumers.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/how-companies-like-united-and-wells-fargo-can-win-back-consumer-trust-76269">How companies like United and Wells Fargo can win back consumer trust</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>The importance of brand reputation</h2>
<p>Given that <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1057/palgrave.crr.1540005">profitability is strongly linked to brand reputation</a>, this seems a rather shortsighted strategy. Once a reputation is damaged, it may take a long time to fully recover. </p>
<p>Look at Cadbury for an example of this. For many years, Cadbury was frequently rated in the <a href="http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10655029">top ten of New Zealand’s most trusted brands</a>. Its 2009 decision to increase the palm oil content in its chocolate (and to reduce the size of the blocks but not the price), <a href="http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10655029">destroyed the trust</a> New Zealand consumers had in the brand. </p>
<p>The annual <a href="https://screenshots.firefox.com/BAW0DoWVhFClOH78/www.trustedbrands.co.nz">Readers Digest poll of consumers in 2017</a> shows Cadbury has still not made it back into the top ten most trusted brands. It should be noted that Whittakers used a <a href="https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/89733380/cadbury-backlash-a-win-for-kiwi-chocolate-brand">brilliant comparative advertising campaign</a> at this time and positioned itself as an iconic New Zealand brand. The company has been regularly <a href="http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/news/business/whittakers-wins-most-trusted-brand-for-sixth-year-in-a-row/">named as the most trusted brand</a> by consumers ever since. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/210958/original/file-20180319-104642-e0avqt.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/210958/original/file-20180319-104642-e0avqt.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=377&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/210958/original/file-20180319-104642-e0avqt.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=377&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/210958/original/file-20180319-104642-e0avqt.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=377&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/210958/original/file-20180319-104642-e0avqt.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=474&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/210958/original/file-20180319-104642-e0avqt.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=474&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/210958/original/file-20180319-104642-e0avqt.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=474&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">In 2017, Cadbury is still not back among the top ten most trusted brands.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Tip Top’s Spanish ice cream</h2>
<p>In 2017, consumers rated <a href="http://www.trustedbrands.co.nz/default.asp#mostTrusted">Tip Top as the fourth most trusted brand</a> in New Zealand. Most New Zealanders have grown up reaching for a Tip Top ice cream on hot days. The Fonterra-owned brand is simply synonymous with New Zealand (is there anything more Kiwi than an advert starring Rachel Hunter?) and it has positioned itself as an iconic Kiwi brand. </p>
<p>Yet, we now hear that two new ice creams packaged with labels stating they are “brought to you by Tip Top” are in fact “<a href="https://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/349846/tip-top-s-spanish-imports-what-the-helado">Made in Spain</a>”. It remains to be seen what impact this strategy will have on trust in the Tip Top brand going forward, but consumers do not like to be misled. </p>
<p>Up until now, any New Zealander picking up a Tip Top ice cream would have believed it was made in New Zealand using the milk and cream produced by our dairy farmers. And why, in a nation claiming to be one of the world’s best dairy producers, would we import ice cream? </p>
<p>Apart from angering and misleading our domestic consumers, this strategy could send a message to overseas consumers that contradicts the market positioning New Zealand’s dairy industry has worked so hard to achieve. </p>
<h2>Montana Sauvignon Blanc</h2>
<p>A <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2018/jan/31/wrath-about-grapes-critics-angry-after-new-zealand-winemaker-uses-australian-fruit">second example</a> comes from the Pernod Ricard owned Montana wine brand. While it is many years since Montana has been a New Zealand-owned winery, it remains a brand that is strongly regarded as having helped to launch the <a href="https://www.brancottestate.com/en-nz/our-perspective/our-story">Marlborough Sauvignon Blanc success story</a>. </p>
<p>New Zealand’s wine consumers are used to seeing Montana labelled bottles on supermarket shelves and they associate the brand with wines from Marlborough and other reputable New Zealand wine regions. Recently it was revealed that some of the most popular bottles of Montana Sauvignon Blanc (the Classics and Affinity ranges) are in <a href="http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11984664">fact produced using Australian grapes</a>. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"958351444079333376"}"></div></p>
<p>The front labelling looks very similar, although the word “Marlborough” has been removed. It is only on the back label that the country of origin is printed. </p>
<p>This is, of course, all perfectly legal but misleading to consumers nonetheless. Consumers who have enjoyed a regular tipple over many years will simply see the Montana logo and the Sauvignon Blanc varietal; they will have no reason to suspect the wine is not still being made from Marlborough grapes and nor will they have any cause to read the fine print on the back label. </p>
<p>Aside from misleading consumers, Pernod Ricard’s decision about its Montana brand may have a flow-on effect on the wider wine industry. The price of the Australian Sauvignon Blanc grapes is much lower than Marlborough grown equivalents, thus the Montana strategy may push the <a href="https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/101035811/montana-wines-to-be-made-with-australian-grapes-not-nz">grape price down for local producers</a>. </p>
<p>This decision may damage New Zealand’s reputation as the world’s leading producer of quality Sauvignon Blanc. If the international media report that our own wine businesses are importing Australian Sauvignon Blanc, then what does this say about our own wines and what does it do for our positioning in global markets?</p>
<h2>Buying Kiwi products</h2>
<p>A recent survey indicates that more than half of all New Zealanders want to buy and consume quality food and beverages that are <a href="http://www.nielsen.com/nz/en/insights/news/2016/made-in-nz-preferences-for-global-and-local-brands.html">produced in this nation</a>. But, it seems that it is increasingly difficult for consumers to identify a New Zealand product from an imported one. Even the use of an iconic Kiwi brand name may not signify “Made in New Zealand”. </p>
<p>It is clear that our brands are making decisions which are, intentionally or not, misleading consumers about a product’s country of origin. Regulations around country of origin labelling need to be improved to require labels to be on the front of all food and beverage products sold in New Zealand. This is the only way to remove confusion for the end consumer and to give them the protection ensconced in purchasing safe and high-quality New Zealand-made products.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/91640/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Sharon Forbes does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Some of New Zealand’s most trusted brands are implementing strategies that are misleading domestic consumers and risking their long-term brand reputation.Sharon Forbes, Senior Lecturer in Marketing, Lincoln University, New ZealandLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/762692017-04-20T00:08:47Z2017-04-20T00:08:47ZHow companies like United and Wells Fargo can win back consumer trust<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/165974/original/file-20170419-2408-1e6p387.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Trust is hard to win back once lost.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Handshake via www.shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>It’s every CEO’s worst nightmare: For whatever reason, the CEO’s company is engulfed in negative publicity that threatens to damage its brand name, harm sales and alienate customers for months or even years to come.</p>
<p>The negative publicity can hit suddenly, seemingly out of the blue, or it can come in relentless waves, over a prolonged period of time, like a series of storms battering a coastal area, one after another. <a href="http://fortune.com/2017/04/13/wells-fargo-report-earnings/">Wells Fargo</a> and <a href="http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/doctor-dragged-united-flight-stands-gain-lawsuit-experts-say-n746186">United Airlines</a> have both been facing such an onslaught in recent weeks and months.</p>
<p>How does a company respond? How does it go about repairing a damaged brand name and winning back customers?</p>
<p>While I know very little about these particular situations apart from what I’ve read, seen and heard via various media outlets, I know how difficult it is to change consumers’ minds about a company and its products – and how winning back “trust” is easier said than done. </p>
<p>Five years ago, my colleagues – Gui Liberali of the Erasmus School of Economics in Rotterdam and Glen L. Urban at the MIT Sloan School of Management – and I jointly published a study, “<a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167811612000742">Competitive information, trust, brand consideration and sales: Two field experiments</a>.” Here’s what we learned. </p>
<h2>Regaining customer trust</h2>
<p>Over two years, we closely tracked four marketing field experiments by an American automaker whose brand had suffered from decades of negative publicity over the quality of its products. The experiments focused on company actions to earn back trust.</p>
<p>In one experiment, the automaker provided an opportunity for potential customers to test-drive competitors’ cars so that they might compare them with the company’s own lineup. Another experiment provided an unbiased internet recommendation system to help customers find the car that met their needs, even if that car was not made by the automaker. </p>
<p>Other experiments included customized relationship management and a moderated community to enable customers to speak to one another about all the cars they were considering. </p>
<p>The theory, and it was a good one, was that the new offerings by the automaker were much better than customers perceived them to be. The automaker believed it would win in a fair match-up and set out to enable customers to make the comparison. </p>
<h2>Why they succeeded</h2>
<p>What we found is that it’s simply not enough to tell consumers that they can and should trust a company. It’s critical to actually prove, again and again, that a company and its products can indeed be trusted – and customers must be provided with tangible, observable proof that a company has changed its ways and the quality of its products.</p>
<p>The automaker’s experiments enhanced trust, which – more importantly – led customers to consider and purchase its cars.</p>
<p>Today, this automaker works to provide competitive information to customers when there is good news and when it is cost-effective to do so. For example, customers are encouraged to test drive cars for longer periods of time. Dealers hold targeted competitive test drives for selected customers, sometimes renting competitive vehicles to make the test drives possible. </p>
<p>For the automaker, establishing genuine, observable trustworthiness wasn’t enough. Skeptical customers, who would not even consider the automaker’s cars, needed to be won over. The company found cost-effective ways, such as targeted marketing campaigns and digital marketing, to encourage these skeptical customers to pay attention and seek information. </p>
<p>The bottom line: There’s promised “trust” and then there’s genuine “trustworthiness.” And the only sure way of getting to that trustworthiness stage is to make genuine internal changes – and then to get customers back into dealership showrooms, in the automaker’s case, or into Wells Fargo bank branches or on to United airplanes. That’s the only way consumers can determine for themselves whether a company and its products are again “trustworthy.”</p>
<h2>Winning over skeptics</h2>
<p>When customers are skeptical, and even when they are not, it is good marketing for a company with superior products and services to provide competitive information about a company’s products versus its competitors’ products – with all the pluses and minuses involved in making such comparative information available to customers.</p>
<p>If a company has indeed changed and is producing a better-quality product or service, providing competitive information can be an effective way of winning over the highly skeptical customer and creating a much-coveted “virtuous cycle” of trust and loyalty.</p>
<p>I don’t know the details of Wells Fargo’s controversy and marketing plans for the future, or, for that matter, those of United. But if whatever they convey to the public isn’t targeted and backed up by tangible, trustworthy services and products, it probably won’t win back as many customers as desired. In both cases, it is important that the firms listen to customers and provide high-quality services.</p>
<p>Trust is earned over many years by providing to the customer the products and services that fulfill customer needs. Trust is earned by listening to and respecting the customer’s voice.</p>
<p>Trust me on this: Being trustworthy matters.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/76269/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>John Hauser receives funding from the American automaker that is listed anonymously in the article.. </span></em></p>Wells Fargo and United Airlines have both been facing an onslaught of negative publicity and will have a tough time restoring trust with their customers. Here’s a good place to start.John Hauser, Professor of Marketing, MIT Sloan School of ManagementLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/728162017-02-10T12:41:37Z2017-02-10T12:41:37ZBrand Beckham will weather the email storm<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/156360/original/image-20170210-23331-2qxzjm.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">No such thing as bad publicity?</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">The Sun</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>If nothing else, the <a href="http://uk.businessinsider.com/what-is-the-david-beckham-email-scandal-about-2017-2?r=US&IR=T">David Beckham email scandal</a> has provided some welcome respite from the apparently perpetual news agenda of Trump and Brexit. </p>
<p>It seems that the previously pristine and relatively scandal-free (at least in the past decade) sporting icon may not be as golden as his carefully cultivated image might suggest. In a series of stories last week <a href="https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/2794119/beckileaks-david-beckham-email-scandal/">The Sun</a> and the Daily Mail, along with several other European media outlets including France’s L’Equipe and Germany’s Der Spiegel, published details of Beckham’s hacked personal emails.</p>
<p>The Beckham that emerges from the emails is not the recognisably magnanimous and self-deprecating figure we have come to lately recognise. He appears to be petty and small minded – labelling the Honours Committee which apparently refused to grant him a knighthood “unappreciative cunts”. The Welsh opera singer Katherine Jenkins is singled out for her unsuitability for the OBE she received in 2014. She’s not worthy of it, Beckham is reported to have written.</p>
<p>Beckham’s advisers <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4190152/Hackers-release-tranche-Beckham-s-personal-emails.html">have said</a> that <em>some</em> of the text of the emails were “doctored” to include extra swearwords. And to be <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/football/2017/feb/06/hacked-david-beckham-emails-renders-injunction-worthless">fair to Beckham</a>, they add that his communications were heat of the moment and correspondence between two close friends – and on this point there but for the grace of God go all of us. Who hasn’t, at one point or another, raged to a friend about the injustices of the world and its inability to see how special we are?</p>
<p>But Beckham is an international superstar in an age when privacy is increasingly irrelevant and the big question now is whether or not “Brand Beckham” can survive the negative publicity.</p>
<h2>Advertising dream</h2>
<p>This is a man, don’t forget, who for the past 20 years or so has become an advertiser’s dream. His name has been successfully linked with, amongst many others, Vodafone, Marks and Spencers, H&M, Breitling and Samsung. As <a href="http://www.jomec.co.uk/blog/advertising-and-sport/">I’ve written before</a>, Beckham sells products because he can be many things to many people. He appeals to men and women. </p>
<p>To men he represents tenacity, skill, patriotism and success. Women appreciate his undoubted good looks, his loyalty and his willingness to embrace his feminine side. Castrol used him in adverts across the Asia-Pacific region <a href="http://v-scheiner.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/3588">after research found that</a> more than 80% of consumers in Thailand, Vietnam and China said a link with the footballer would be a reason to buy its engine oil.</p>
<h2>Shoot for goal</h2>
<p>But it’s crisis management time for Beckham – and one thing he should not do – if <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/celebrity-marketing-crisis-guide-2009-12?IR=T#is-no-comment-ever-a-good-strategy-2">the public-relations industry</a> is to be believed – is to stay silent. Keeping quiet allows the narrative to develop independently. Intervention in the story would at least direct the focus of attention towards the contrition which must be demonstrated. This is, after all, has been the tried-and-tested strategy in any celebrity scandal of the television age.</p>
<p>But that alone is not enough – Beckham needs the backing of the charities he has worked for and to be fair, UNICEF, for whom he has campaigned since 2005, was not slow in coming out to <a href="https://www.unicef.org.uk/press-releases/statement-unicef-relating-david-beckham-7-david-beckham-fund-unicef/">offer its support.</a></p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/zWsEuczNj48?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>It’s my guess that any damage that “Brand Beckham” has suffered is temporary. His reaction to the abuse and vitriol he suffered after his sending off in France 1998 suggests a man of strength and resolve more than capable of weathering this storm.</p>
<p>He is also a figure whose renown is global: who cares in Asia if he has issues with his tax returns or a predilection for badmouthing elites and contemporary celebrities? In the United States that sort of thing is positively welcomed and in some cases can even lead to high office.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Dj0qWXLn8MY?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>This is all part of a story which will not end at this point. Elis Cashmore, <a href="http://library.la84.org/SportsLibrary/ISS/ISS2601/ISS2601h.pdf">who wrote a book about Beckham in 2002</a>, highlighted the mythic qualities of the footballer’s life. Here was a man with a life of fairy-tale prince. Born into a modest background, this boy of exceptional skills overcomes adversity and exceptional setbacks to win the heart of a princess and the love and respect of the nation.</p>
<p>In this sense, the stolen emails and the surrounding fuss becomes just another chapter in the tale.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/72816/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>John Jewell does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>He’s one of Britain’s biggest brands – it’ll take more than a few grumpy messages to spoil that.John Jewell, Director of Undergraduate Studies, School of Journalism, Media and Cultural Studies, Cardiff UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/595552016-06-21T15:54:42Z2016-06-21T15:54:42ZAre we so used to corporate deception that we just don’t care?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/127562/original/image-20160621-13005-369vsy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=429%2C224%2C2252%2C1573&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Bold claims from adland have left us inured to deception.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/97640217@N04/17129152106/in/photolist-4TyR9L-8uYFUB-ceDRkf-dbE8Rb-7KubCq-aADnNB-eMhpNz-eMhn8B-rvm1BT-s6Do9J-7AUcpD-6XkiAS-6Xkimq-oobjvk-r2JW8Y-7AXZEm-ek9SHg-asiiR3-a4p2Lg-3bMqCV-4XUFSe-7AUc32-6GjUEP-8zNmfe-7AUsXx-yDnnt1-7AUcii-PdogZ-dyLBdP-7AUbVB-ARVHVn-dUh4UA">York Mix/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/">CC BY-NC</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Back in the old days, plain old products became “brands” when shoppers trusted them to deliver superior performance. Along the way brand advertising arose as a way of boosting consumption and building trust. In 1946 Procter and Gamble claimed that “Tide gets clothes cleaner than any other wash day product you can buy”. Such was P&G’s confidence that it offered shoppers a full money back guarantee. This was the classic “reason why” advertising and signified a golden age when advertisers enjoyed high levels of consumer trust.</p>
<figure class="align-left zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/127521/original/image-20160621-13008-nn2e2l.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/127521/original/image-20160621-13008-nn2e2l.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/127521/original/image-20160621-13008-nn2e2l.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=839&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/127521/original/image-20160621-13008-nn2e2l.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=839&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/127521/original/image-20160621-13008-nn2e2l.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=839&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/127521/original/image-20160621-13008-nn2e2l.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1054&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/127521/original/image-20160621-13008-nn2e2l.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1054&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/127521/original/image-20160621-13008-nn2e2l.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1054&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Promises, promises.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://file.vintageadbrowser.com/5s05lwqy2p3wyh.jpg">http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/</a>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Fast-forward 70 years and TV, one of the most trusted advertising formats, is <a href="http://www.nielsen.com/uk/en/press-room/2015/consumer-trust-in-traditional-advertising-declines-in-uk-while-a-recommendation-from-friends-remains-most-credible.html">only trusted by 56% of people</a>. So how did we get here? </p>
<p>There’s a clue in the stats from the UK’s Advertising Standards Authority (ASA), which protects consumers from harmful, misleading or offensive advertising. Last year it received more than 37,000 complaints. As a result over <a href="https://www.asa.org.uk/News-resources/Media-Centre/2015/ASA-Annual-Report-2014.aspx#.VyxHI_mDGko">3,000 advertisements were changed or withdrawn</a>. </p>
<p>One of the reasons for that is that advertisers are always looking for an edge, and that includes “reason why” advertising designed to communicate how the product is different. It doesn’t matter how – just that it is different. It may be how the brand performs on an attribute valued by customers. Or in the case of Mars Treets from the 1960s a claim that it “melts in your mouth not in your hand”. </p>
<h2>Confused.com</h2>
<p>Broadband internet providers find it hard to be different and the focus of their advertising has typically been on price. This is known to be the most important attribute shaping consumer buying decisions. Following an investigation, however, the ASA and Ofcom <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b078x6g0">discovered that</a> “people expected to be misled by broadband ads” and that around 80% of customers are unable to calculate <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-36195454">the total costs of their contract</a>. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/127531/original/image-20160621-12995-ew3mkc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/127531/original/image-20160621-12995-ew3mkc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/127531/original/image-20160621-12995-ew3mkc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=319&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/127531/original/image-20160621-12995-ew3mkc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=319&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/127531/original/image-20160621-12995-ew3mkc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=319&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/127531/original/image-20160621-12995-ew3mkc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/127531/original/image-20160621-12995-ew3mkc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/127531/original/image-20160621-12995-ew3mkc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Oh what a tangled web …</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/stuant63/2240432052/in/photolist-4pYNoQ-8zQJn-bnsaE8-hTGUU-ehGe21-9HGykn-4KPB3t-ehk6kN-8zRCg-5jo7zE-8ELsW9-r7fBR4-9AhUDS-9j1Ma5-3gXSyw-7wLgje-5jck6c-6vTgiF-832zvc-4Ksn5e-cqWkvq-9cqdH-c8AXC1-yUD9g-3wYEYs-57QDcs-cAgp2u-5a3FdK-66W7JM-7LLwmQ-5Sw1iK-cxkJs7-8f5YM6-5Fx4Q6-9KVeFv-6rUfDb-9cAp9h-4RqERd-oUVJ18-6iuv1z-a3DqaD-bQofQ-2vHmbT-tiGSb-4TydjP-4gpRyc-4NkvT8-8zQc5-9LDWNQ-bVY3Go">stuart anthony/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/">CC BY-NC</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>As a result of the ASA’s investigation, broadband ads should now be designed to allow easier price comparisons rather than to “confuse or mislead”. But, in many advertisements the focus is not on price but on other performance cues used by consumers as a “reason why”. And of course, performance claims should be both practical and verifiable such as “Tide washes clothes cleaner” or “Fairy lasts longer”.</p>
<p>In 2009, the advertisement for Olay’s “Definity Eye Illuminator” eye cream featuring Twiggy claimed to “reduce the look of wrinkles and dark circles for brighter, young-looking eyes”. People complained that the model’s eye regions were airbrushed and not achieved by use of the product alone. The ASA <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/media/2009/dec/16/twiggys-olay-ad-banned-airbrushing">agreed that the ad misled customers</a> and it was subsequently banned.</p>
<p>In other cases, you might get a chance to prove your claim. This was the case when Reebok said its Easytone trainers helped you to “better legs and a better bum with every step”. For many consumers this is a very compelling reason why. Sadly though, the performance advantage couldn’t be verified through scientific evidence, the ad was banned, <a href="https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2011/09/reebok-pay-25-million-customer-refunds-settle-ftc-charges">and the company fined</a>.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/MMc2hBxzLvg?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<h2>Fairy nuff</h2>
<p>The weight of all these cases means we might not have the same confidence while shopping for Tide washing powder in the early 1950s. But you do get the odd bright spot in the gloom. The makers of Persil objected to a claim from P&G that its Fairy Liquid dishwashing detergent lasted “twice as long as the next best selling brand”. But after rigorous testing the <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2424224/Fairy-liquid-really-does-twice-long-rival-brands-advertising-watchdog-rules.html">ASA found that</a> the product did indeed last “at least” twice as long as Persil. </p>
<p>Sometimes brands get public and media scrutiny without any explicit claims or complaints but for what customers “infer” from advertisements or product packaging. Tesco was <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-35889282">recently been under fire</a> for its new range of “fictional farm” brands – a bucolic bit of packaging which sells food <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/wordofmouth/2016/mar/22/tescos-fictional-farms-a-marketing-strategy-past-its-sell-by-date">under a range of homely titles</a>. It doesn’t seem unreasonable for shoppers to expect that a chicken branded as “Willow Farm” at least began its life on something called Willow Farm, or that their punnet of strawberries was really picked at a farm called “Rosedene”. Mind you, the approach has also been used by Aldi for years. So do we really mind?</p>
<p>And fake farms, after all, are small beer. The recent scandals at Volkswagen and Mitsubishi witnessed advertising that was based on something that then turned out to be untrue. This has far more serious consequences. Those “reasons why” of importance to car buyers – power outputs, emissions and fuel consumption figures – often feature prominently in advertisements. The <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mitsubishimotors-scandal-mileage-idUSKCN0Z707R">Mitsubishi scandal in Japan</a> involved manipulated fuel economy tests. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/127552/original/image-20160621-13039-q579zw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/127552/original/image-20160621-13039-q579zw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/127552/original/image-20160621-13039-q579zw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=281&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/127552/original/image-20160621-13039-q579zw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=281&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/127552/original/image-20160621-13039-q579zw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=281&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/127552/original/image-20160621-13039-q579zw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=353&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/127552/original/image-20160621-13039-q579zw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=353&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/127552/original/image-20160621-13039-q579zw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=353&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Tarnished.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/mynameispaul/2319745226/in/photolist-4wZirm-LQYRp-6bxao7-5qqMwX-6CajdQ-cwxS1-5fdNDB-4XbUaX-3aUEs-EvQy1-ywa2m-caWTp9-9eged9-6YsCqz-mL2uj-dQ46B-8rwYp4-cKhX2o-8rC75r-9LXbBX-aCufrD-9PccMq-9RVRJD-6kg4F8-bAtyNr-5jtKFo-62hExB-4yD4yq-5pUtSd-2ZyWiM-N273b-3t3FB4-5eWjDS-6mezjw-4NPVKH-5eWpAW-dLBDU7-8HcMoK-aCwVx9-24NML5-doCyQm-4qBvLC-us6z-AWxDt-3t3G8T-oU5iQ-28gSCx-3aUDM-24JmtV-3t3FRX">Paul/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">CC BY-NC-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>With so many incidents of consumers being misled, it’s not surprising that the majority of people <a href="http://www.nielsen.com/uk/en/press-room/2015/consumer-trust-in-traditional-advertising-declines-in-uk-while-a-recommendation-from-friends-remains-most-credible.html">trust personal recommendations</a> much more than ads. And so it might seem odd that brands seem to be able to recover relatively quickly. After Volkswagen’s emissions scandal – the <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/industry/11884738/VW-emissions-scandal-whats-it-all-about.html">biggest corporate scandal of recent years</a> – the brand dropped to the bottom of the BrandIndex list (a measure of brand quality, value and reputation). </p>
<p>Just three months later it’s <a href="https://www.marketingweek.com/2016/02/05/volkswagen-brand-on-road-to-recovery-as-it-launches-first-campaign-since-emissions-scandal/">up from 35th place to 18th</a>. Rehabilitation of the share performance is also back on track – up 26% since its February low and according to analysts VW is an “investable company” again. </p>
<p>There are clearly short-term consequences of misleading ads in the form of bans and fines and more serious consequences for instances of proven deception. But in the long run how much does it really matter? Our trust in advertising might now be so low that we are happy to let misrepresentation and even downright fraud wash over us as we keep heading for the tills.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/59555/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Timothy Froggett does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Advertising complaints hit 37,000 in the UK last year, but companies keep chancing their arm.Timothy Froggett, Senior Lecturer and Course Leader for Marketing, Anglia Ruskin UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/340092014-11-11T00:21:10Z2014-11-11T00:21:10ZTeary Qantas ad campaign not the branding the airline needs<p>With its new “Feels like home” campaign, Australian airline Qantas is <a href="http://www.news.com.au/national/qantas-launches-new-feels-like-home-brand-campaign/story-fncynjr2-1227115739823">seeking</a> to “rekindle that emotional connection Australians have with the airline”. Improvements in staff morale and company yield are also expected, in what is the second major marketing activity since a new uniform was introduced in 2012. </p>
<p>The challenge for the once iconic airline remains creating a convincing point of difference and delivering much-needed improvements in customer loyalty.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/16RhgfA662k?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>The campaign falls short on some key marketing principles.</p>
<p>The golden rule of advertising dictates the brand should appear early in promotion material. Qantas shows its logo long after one minute – a lifetime for a society with a short attention span. The Qantas logo, planes and uniformed staff appear only subtly thereafter, which is perhaps not enough to trigger affection. </p>
<p>Key in brand building is the creation of positive, strong and unique associations with the brand. Associations typically relate to product attributes, coupled with an emotional bond. In this regard, Qantas’ campaign solely pushes an emotional spin with a “come home” feeling, but that is not unique to Qantas and also lacks the positioning of what the product itself has to offer. </p>
<p>The campaign starts with a slightly negative undertone with sad moments and faces. This is unlikely to create a positive, strong and unique association. The message for the consumer is too generic with a focus on the core product in aviation, which is transportation, or getting you home. But all airlines offer this service.</p>
<p>The approach does not differentiate Qantas from competitors. A true point of difference would have been featuring distinct Qantas service features, the augmented product in marketing terms, related back to the brand’s Australian heritage.</p>
<h2>The clincher</h2>
<p>The key problem of the new campaign is that there is no convincing marketing message. If you reside in Australia and book a ticket to return to Australia, then any airline will take you home. </p>
<p>The point to emphasise would have been the “how” – how does Qantas take you home? On this the campaign is silent, unlike competing brands that have gained market share and consumer preference through emotional campaigns centred on service quality. </p>
<p>The campaign does not sell a service proposition, for example an “Aussieness” in service, and that is a real missed opportunity. The same problem applies to the still relatively new uniform, which replaces one that centred on Indigenous Australian iconography – which made it clearly and uniquely Australian. Yet new research at Macquarie shows low recognition of the new uniform.</p>
<p>The “Feels like home” campaign is unlikely to dramatically improve consumer perception and preference for Qantas. Both campaign and uniform could represent nearly any modern Western airline. It could be British Airways or American Airlines - there is no distinctive element to it.</p>
<p>Qantas’s previous “You’re the reason we fly” campaign in 2012 had a better theme than the new campaign since it did precisely this. It told customers why they should choose to fly with the airline. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/GQeJh83-eYE?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Promoting service quality is the name of the game in a hyper-competitive market. East Asian airlines have leveraged this understanding in their previous campaigns. </p>
<p>Korean Air promotes “Excellence in flight” with global campaigns on CNN and YouTube, stressing that “it’s all about you” (i.e. the customer). Asiana, also based in South Korea, promotes <em>originality</em> (serve customers with a fluttering mind), sincerity (treat customers like family), suavity (treat customers with a smile) and high quality. Uniforms for both airlines showcase traditional Korean colours and the uniform supports a dignified and polished brand image, making a difference in the customer’s mind.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/CXVb3EZTtp4?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Singapore Airlines was one of the first to promote its brand using Asian hospitality, a unique Asian appearance with a local uniform and top service. The airline has reached an unprecedented, positive and unique brand image through that long-term brand-building approach. Latecomer brands in the Middle East also stress service quality. </p>
<p>Back in Australia, Qantas rival Virgin Australia also positions its upgraded brand on service quality, implying it has now reached service levels provided by Qantas.</p>
<p>East Asian and Middle Eastern carriers have gained market share in Australia with their premium service at the expense of Qantas. A drastic change in brand management at Qantas is necessary to make employees proud to work for Qantas once again and in turn make customers happy to fly Qantas. </p>
<p>Qantas should learn from the past to develop more effective campaigns and also benchmark itself more clearly with strong competitors. A positioning strategy around “Aussieness” would likely create a point of difference since Asian and Middle Eastern carriers would be unable to copy it. </p>
<p>With a unique Australian brand positioning, Australian brand appearance/uniform and Aussie-type service quality, the Qantas brand could be revitalised so that staff and customers call Qantas home again by default.</p>
<p><em>The researchers are founding members of the Global Aviation Research Network (GARN) at Macquarie University, Sydney.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/34009/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Lucy Taksa receives funding from the Australian Research Council</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Chris Baumann and Troy Sarina do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>With its new “Feels like home” campaign, Australian airline Qantas is seeking to “rekindle that emotional connection Australians have with the airline”. Improvements in staff morale and company yield are…Chris Baumann, Senior Lecturer in Business, Macquarie UniversityLucy Taksa, Professor & Head of Department Marketing and Management, Macquarie UniversityTroy Sarina, Lecturer - Department of Marketing and Management, Macquarie UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/322422014-10-01T05:31:41Z2014-10-01T05:31:41ZTrust will out: how the financial crisis boosted the best leaders<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/60181/original/rtft8vmv-1411735290.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">John Lewis: cutting edge?</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/declarationend/5730844671/in/photolist-9Jq5sK-eni1xB-enoGSE-emVMu2-enuecW-entJWL-emXgPD-emWLjr-enikzp-env3wN-emVxja-enuLXY-enm4XA-envxYG-enovpo-enRDj5-enp2C9-enodN7-envidU-enkW2C-enRL6N-enmEuW-envRt7-enmy8f-enRxx3-enjHHo-enxmcY-enhLPH-emWECx-emXptc-entZ7b-enRqkd-enkGeU-enmMmy-eninHW-emX9qt-enT5PA-enSwyC-ennyty-emVExa-eni8B4-emVa9e-enif4B-enRRZm-enuw4J-enRiob-enhm28-enix9M-enScym-dPf4th">Andy K</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Six years on from the financial crisis and still many of us feel deeply unsure about institutions and individuals we had previously revered as beacons of reliability and certainty. The need to repair that broken trust has put pressure on leaders within banks and other household-name businesses to doubly demonstrate their trustworthiness to their customers, to their employees and to society at large. Among the finger-pointing and mea culpas, however, a more optimistic picture emerges. </p>
<figure class="align-left zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/60413/original/fdjqbw6t-1412082948.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/60413/original/fdjqbw6t-1412082948.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/60413/original/fdjqbw6t-1412082948.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=526&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/60413/original/fdjqbw6t-1412082948.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=526&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/60413/original/fdjqbw6t-1412082948.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=526&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/60413/original/fdjqbw6t-1412082948.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=661&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/60413/original/fdjqbw6t-1412082948.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=661&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/60413/original/fdjqbw6t-1412082948.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=661&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Results from a 2011 CIPD survey show the private sector held up well when looking at leaders who were less trusted by employees.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.cipd.co.uk/binaries/where-has-all-the-trust-gone_2012-sop.pdf">CIPD</a>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>We have trawled through data collected over 3 years from 22 significant public and private-sector organisations (links <a href="https://www.cipd.co.uk/hr-resources/research/where-trust-gone.aspx">here</a>, <a href="http://www.cipd.co.uk/hr-resources/research/cultivating-trustworthy-leaders.aspx?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=pr&utm_content=generic">here</a> and <a href="http://www.cipd.co.uk/hr-resources/research/experiencing-trustworthy-leadership.aspx">here</a>) which draw contributions from a cross-section of employees, trade unionists, middle managers and HR professionals, as well as senior managers and their colleagues and bosses.</p>
<p>The data show that in the aftermath of the crisis – through waves of downsizing and restructuring, salary cuts and divestments – there were individual leaders and organisations who kept and cultivated the trust of their customers and employees despite all those around them losing ground. </p>
<p>Organisations such as the John Lewis Partnership, Unilever, BAE, BBC Worldwide (the commercial arm of the BBC), HMRC, GKN and some leaders in the NHS demonstrated this ability. It appears that their high levels of integrity delivered tangible business benefits to their organisations, even if their initial motivation was not about the profit and loss account.</p>
<h2>Contact sport</h2>
<p>According to the contributors to the studies, these senior leaders were able to hold their teams to account while simultaneously displaying a natural sense of concern for others, whether those “others” were employees inside the organisation or people outside in the market place or public. The impression given by the research is that these people displayed an old-fashioned benevolence which helped them to display their people skills on an everyday basis. And not just by updating their Twitter accounts from the business-class aircraft cabin.</p>
<figure class="align-left zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/60397/original/d3vnp8gj-1412069842.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/60397/original/d3vnp8gj-1412069842.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/60397/original/d3vnp8gj-1412069842.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=667&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/60397/original/d3vnp8gj-1412069842.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=667&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/60397/original/d3vnp8gj-1412069842.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=667&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/60397/original/d3vnp8gj-1412069842.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=838&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/60397/original/d3vnp8gj-1412069842.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=838&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/60397/original/d3vnp8gj-1412069842.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=838&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Smiley Happy People?</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/truthout/8432380971/in/photolist-dR9a5P-JofyA-dorsj5-53HQcb-5pqzGx-8hS9xA-dA5tWJ-7LpG1n-6jVo47-b9DKX-zbS2y-7VB4iz-8DbWMg-nAi4GZ-e72r4y-75D4dv-8TjkzX-aKsJst-j2SRK7-gYvpzA-bzQpv-gYwfHz-56d2zX-dH5Ajv-8BnKr4-dcshm-Hfy3A-4ttnMB-5wkirG-4td8x9-JQA7z-AhsmJ-6nxepM-nV9y7r-TTWz-5sPq1U-x5K4Z-9F9Acy-aojkoj-8BtemK-8BtdTg-8Bwk2W-9AfGY2-4Na3YE-8LzY1-2jJZ2-99acZg-4W4dqV-g7Hp5-53rhF1">Truthout.org</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>These are leaders who instead hit the shop floor and regularly sought contact with customers and employees. It is also important to note that these beacons of trust are no super heroes. They are instead the most human among leaders, <a href="http://www.bizjournals.com/bizjournals/how-to/growth-strategies/2014/06/how-being-vulnerable-can-strengthen-leaders.html?page=all">showing and sharing their own weaknesses</a> to others on many occasions. That demonstration of openness and vulnerability made others trust them more. As one of the leaders we spoke to said:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>I think leadership can often be just a veil that people hide behind and people don’t want to show vulnerability or weakness, or if they have shown that they made a mistake it is seen as a pure weakness. You can be a successful leader with a different approach and actually that can be even more positive because you create greater trust.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>And from another:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>I think none of us are perfect are we? So it makes it easier if I make a mistake to admit it, get over it… that’s really important to me. Whereas if you’ve got someone where you think: “Oh, they’re really perfect, they never do anything wrong”. It feels quite hard to work for.</p>
</blockquote>
<h2>Human race</h2>
<p>It appears then, that being sufficiently human to admit mistakes and flaws and weaknesses, made it easier for staff to trust some leaders more than others. And this was a further critical finding. For <a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidkwilliams/2013/06/20/the-most-valuable-business-commodity-trust/">high levels of trust</a> to be generated in organisations, there has to be a reciprocity of trust. Followers need to able to forgive mistakes and still trust their leaders, while leaders need to demonstrate that they trust their staff by not engaging in unnecessary monitoring or micro managing. According to one leader we spoke to: “Trust is a two-way street. I need to be trusted and I need to trust the other person.”</p>
<figure class="align-left zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/60398/original/gfxz2yzm-1412070582.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/60398/original/gfxz2yzm-1412070582.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/60398/original/gfxz2yzm-1412070582.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/60398/original/gfxz2yzm-1412070582.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/60398/original/gfxz2yzm-1412070582.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/60398/original/gfxz2yzm-1412070582.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/60398/original/gfxz2yzm-1412070582.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/60398/original/gfxz2yzm-1412070582.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">In the know.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/nakedcharlton/234153993/in/photolist-mG6PP-mWLz2U-inSYf9-3YdbPB-7PSLEE-4VT6EL-fE5Vh-8fs8TM-e1uxy7-5dZBUj-e96Hct-e96H5c-e9cnBS-e9cnMh-e9cnJA-6UukR5-4bzMqm-65qsu5-25GCsx-D39Qh-mPnicr-pvZDx-6TLM83">Jon's pics</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>So, why then are so many other organisations failing to deliver this quality of trusted leadership? One thing that emerged from the research was that, while the selection and development of leaders has grown ever more technologically sophisticated, it remains hard to detect a person’s benevolence and integrity during a one-day assessment. Indeed, many agreed with the sentiment of one HR director who said he reckoned the head office car park attendant was better at predicting the trustworthiness of leaders than HR systems. Why? Because they watched these leaders’ behaviour when the boss thought no one else was looking! </p>
<p>Benevolence and integrity can only be assessed through knowing and observing someone’s behaviour over time. It also can be assessed by asking them about their contribution to the legacy of the organisation – what will they leave behind as a contribution for future generations?</p>
<h2>Rumbled</h2>
<p>Questions and assessments like these require organisations to not simply consider the technocrat at work – the deliverer of results – but also the nature of the whole person, the rounded nature of the leader in work and in society. It is a technique called “whole-person interviewing” used with effect at BBC Worldwide and also by the HR team <a href="http://www.thelivingleader.com/john-lewis-embrace-the-whole-person-approach-to-development-and-further-their-reputation-as-a-savvy-employer/">at the John Lewis Partnership</a>, one of whom commented:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>You are asking, for examples… from both the work life and home life. You are looking at the range of their career and not just their permanent job. So you really allow the whole light and colour of the individual to come through.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>HR directors interviewed as part of the research accepted that some of their own techniques had crowded out the space for personal judgement on the part of business leaders. They admitted that in the past they had placed too heavy an emphasis on the tangible aspects of leadership, such as ability or competence, and too little on the intangible and essentially intuitively identified aspects, such as benevolence and integrity. </p>
<p>And their employees and customers had rumbled that gaping omission when watching, listening and ultimately rejecting a generation of self-serving and individualistic senior leaders.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/32242/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Veronica Hope Hailey does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Six years on from the financial crisis and still many of us feel deeply unsure about institutions and individuals we had previously revered as beacons of reliability and certainty. The need to repair that…Veronica Hope Hailey, Dean, School of Management, University of BathLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/249832014-03-31T14:13:07Z2014-03-31T14:13:07ZFlaws in our thinking mean banks can do without our trust<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/45163/original/9j53wbmn-1396260098.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=3%2C919%2C2440%2C1685&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Hitting a brick wall?</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/lydiashiningbrightly/3413506579/in/photolist-6cD7zH-6fDoRm-6rbjN4-6ttxsE-6xCnBy-6M7qqA-6VTbjr-6VTbsp-6VTbAr-6VTc5B-6VTcdt-6VTcn2-6VTcw2-6VTcUM-6VXcDS-6VXcS1-6VXd35-6VXdg9-6VXdpq-6VXe3s-6VXeY5-6VXfmh-6VXfxN-7b9JvG-7b9XNc-7bdHrW-7dowuE-7fd4kJ-7iYCv1-7ky9Xn-7kyajk-7kyaEi-7kC3Cq-7kDfdh-7pFQGw-7tGVoG-7wGvzV-7YCRdg-7YG63j-9z9iGq-9z6hbR-9z9j2E-9z9jnJ-dhpfAG-dhpeDP-91Uyzg-91XFeh-9i8DDm-91ovk7-9pZ2EP-aHagS6/">lydia_shiningbrightly</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The ongoing global financial crisis (because we’re not out of it yet, are we?) is often characterised as a crisis of trust. Distrust of the banks was a major theme – but distrust extended also to credit rating agencies and to the politicians and regulators who were presumed to be overseeing and monitoring the banks on citizens’ and investors’ behalf.</p>
<p>The reputation of the finance industry, and those working in it, remains toxic to this day: many finance professionals at all levels say they are deemed “guilty by association” and the popularly expressed sentiment is that not one of them can be trusted.</p>
<p>Well, maybe it’s not quite that bad. Last year’s <a href="http://www.edelman.com/insights/intellectual-property/2014-edelman-trust-barometer/">Edelman Trust Barometer</a>, an international survey on trust, found that “banking” is not the least-trusted industry. It came second from bottom, trusted by less than half of respondents (49%). The only problem with this optimistic reading is that only “financial services” came out worse (with a paltry 46%).</p>
<p>Several banks are apparently busy, or trying to appear busy, working to recover their lost or damaged reputations. Goldman Sachs pledged reforms in the wake of the SEC’s US$550m fine in 2010 over the <a href="http://uk.reuters.com/article/2010/04/16/us-goldmansachs-abacus-factbox-idUSTRE63F5CZ20100416">dubious “Abacus” deal</a>, while the mandate for the 244-page <a href="https://www.salzreview.co.uk/web/guest">Salz review</a> into LIBOR rigging, <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006mg74/features/ppi-information">PPI mis-selling</a> and other allegations at Barclays was to help the bank “rebuild trust”.</p>
<p>Several banking adverts can be interpreted as carrying explicit or implicit messaging around trust. A personal favourite of mine is NatWest’s noble declaration: “If we spilt coffee on your carpet, we wouldn’t cover it with the rug”. They might deny it was them, or blame you for not having laminate flooring, but still… it’s arguably an improvement.</p>
<h2>Understanding trust</h2>
<p>Governments and regulators, chastened by their complicity or failure of oversight, have sought to introduce revised rules and procedures, and edicts, to encourage, cajole or – failing that – coerce the banking profession to be more obviously trustworthy. Yet, while some legislation appears to have had a modest impact, notably the <a href="http://www.mofo.com/files/uploads/images/summarydoddfrankact.pdf">Dodd Frank Act</a> in the US, other institutional responses have been sidestepped with predictable contempt. That includes, most recently, the <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/10732919/Investor-giant-warns-banks-on-pay-arrangements-ahead-of-EU-bonus-cap.html">EU’s ill-judged bonus cap</a>. The widespread impression is that very little has changed to give customers and investors and regulators confidence in bankers again.</p>
<p>No wonder trust in the industry is so low.</p>
<p>My view is somewhat different: An alternative reading of what is happening in our relationship with banking, based on what research tells us about how trust is built and repaired, suggests that trust in banks – in one sense of the word – is astonishingly high.</p>
<p>To see why, we need to consider the nuances of this superficially straightforward but essentially complex thing we call trust. After decades of research from sociologists, psychologists and economists most scholars would argue that trust, properly understood, can be defined as confident reliance on another party, on the basis of positive expectations of their likely future conduct.</p>
<figure class="align-left ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/45167/original/ntp5vsrj-1396261791.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/45167/original/ntp5vsrj-1396261791.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/45167/original/ntp5vsrj-1396261791.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/45167/original/ntp5vsrj-1396261791.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/45167/original/ntp5vsrj-1396261791.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/45167/original/ntp5vsrj-1396261791.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/45167/original/ntp5vsrj-1396261791.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Are we all just hoping for the best?</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/cinnamon4girl/4908229602/">cinnamon_girl</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Trust is a three-stage process, beginning with an evaluation and a judgement call about the other party’s conduct and character: the evidence for their trustworthiness. This is typically broken down into three, sometimes four, characteristics: their ability (technical competence), their benevolence (motives and interests), their integrity (honesty and fairness), and their predictability (consistency of behaviour). All need to be high enough to generate the confidence to trust, but some dimensions will be more important than others. </p>
<p>If we have enough evidence to trust, we tend to move on to the decision to trust: the willingness to render ourselves vulnerable to the actions of the other party. We then demonstrate this – we make the decision real – by actually taking a risk. We do this by authorising them to act on our behalf, sharing or even surrendering something important to them, collaborating on a joint venture, or associating our reputation with theirs, for example. The outcome of that behaviour feeds back fresh evidence of their trustworthiness – and so the cycle continues, whether of reinforced trust or distrust if our vulnerability is abused.</p>
<p>The three stages are important, because what I see happening is this: people say they don’t trust the banks, but their behaviour suggests otherwise. If there really has been a collapse in trust in banks, it should be utterly reckless for people to leave their money in the hands of the institutions implicated in the global financial crisis. We should see mass withdrawals and transfers to alternative operators: more reliable or less tainted. In the UK, this would be the building societies (mutually owned financial companies, often owned by their customers). It only takes a week to <a href="http://moveyourmoney.org.uk/">transfer all your accounts in the UK</a>, but this critical mass of revulsion has not fully materialised. There is no sign of panic among the major retail banks.</p>
<h2>The sequence breaks down</h2>
<p>In trust terms, there is therefore a curious disconnect between the “beliefs” stage of trust, and the “decision” and “action” stages. The expected sequence isn’t being followed. People’s risk-taking behaviours – allowing people they label as “thieves” and “liars” access to all their money – belie their espoused beliefs. So, what explains this gap between what people say they think, and how the same people act?</p>
<p>Models of trust suggest two explanations: people’s distrust of banks is an opinion based on an evaluation of the banks’ trustworthiness, but the risk-taking act is still viable because protections are now in place, from national and trans-national government bodies, that enable people to feel that their money is apparently safe. The banks can be deemed untrustworthy, as long as the financial system has been rendered more trustworthy by external agencies.</p>
<p>Another reason is that the apparently irrational risk-taking act of keeping one’s money in a distrusted bank is because that bank is still providing an economically beneficial service, and/or because there are few other options. Again, in the UK, we are fortunate to have a genuine alternative. Several colleagues of mine in European countries envy us.</p>
<p>These are under-explored dynamics. The banks may not be trusted, but despite public efforts, few in the retail arms seem to be losing much sleep. The challenge for researchers and policy-makers is to understand what might prompt real change. What we need is a “market for trustworthiness”, rewarding the capable and decent banks (and allowing them to be profitable), while showing intolerance for deliberate and systematic abuses of trust. Internal reforms and external governance are struggling to create a creatively destructive impetus for change; now, surely, it is the customers’ turn.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/24983/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Graham Dietz does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The ongoing global financial crisis (because we’re not out of it yet, are we?) is often characterised as a crisis of trust. Distrust of the banks was a major theme – but distrust extended also to credit…Graham Dietz, Senior Lecturer in Human Resource Management/Programme Director MSc Management Programmes, Durham UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.