The House of William

Will blog for brand awareness

[thehouseofwilliam-blog]

The pervasiveness of stereotypes and the bamboo ceiling

I’ve often wondered why there aren’t more examples of Asian Americans in positions of leadership in the corporate world.  The fact that Asians comprise just 1.5% of officer positions in Fortune 500 companies doesn’t reconcile with my own experiences; in both my undergraduate and MBA classes Asians were well overrepresented relative to the US population.

Asians have long been viewed as an example of the “model minority.”  On average, Asian Americans tend to outperform educational attainment, test scores, and make up a disproportionate share of higher education.  However, all else equal a white man or woman is 154% more likely to hold an executive role.

This largely stems from pervasive stereotypes about Asians.  A 2001 study showed that Asians were often viewed as very competent, but low on social and leadership skills.   Unfortunately, Asian stereotypes often comes into conflict with society’s perceive notions of leadership:  while leaders are often seen to be masculine, dictatorial, and confrontational, the prevailing Asian stereotypes are of docility and subservience.  This partially explains the funneling effect of Asians in corporate America - there is strong representation at entry level corporate jobs but as you go up the corporate ladder representation gets lower and lower.

It’s important to keep this in mind, especially when thinking proactively for issues of inclusivity and diversity.  The success of Asian Americans in higher education and lower management have created a perception that proactive inclusion programs targeting Asians are unnecessary.  However, Asian representation at the top of the corporate ladder is serious and it’s worth investigating what inherent biases are at play that have created this paradigm.

[thehouseofwilliam-blog]

How America Woke Up Fabulous

Changing social attitudes is hard. I mean, it’s 2018 and we’re still seeing Nazi’s walking down the street. 

And although there’s still much room for progress on a variety of social issues, I think it’s important to call out when they occur so that we can learn.  These successes can provide helpful insights for social movements, governments, and companies who seek to promote more positive attitudes and behaviors.

Case in point: acceptance of same-sex marriage in America improved much more rapidly than most would have predicted. 

Compared to other social movements such as abortion, women’s suffrage, and interracial marriage, same sex-marriage saw a much faster increase in social acceptance.  Since 2004, support for gay marriage has increased at a rate of about 2.4% each year.

Now, that is not to say that we as a society have reached where we need to nor am I discounting the years of struggle and hard work for advocates who helped make that possible.  But I do think it’s remarkable that compared to so many other social issues, same-sex marriage saw much faster acceptance.  How did this happen?

One thing that is important is that with support for gay marriage, the increased adoption is driven more by people changing their minds, whereas for things like women’s suffrage the main driver was literally old stubborn people dying and being replaced my more progressive-minded people that pushed the movement forward.

There are two drivers: 

(1) Depictions of same-sex couples are increasingly common in media.  TV Shows and actors like Will and Grace, Ellen, and Rosie O’Donnell paved the way for broader acceptance.

(2) People are increasingly likely to have an LGBT family member or neighbor.  For instance, it’s very possible that conservative parents could end up having a gay son or daughter.  So with the spectre of homosexuality much more proximate, it’s natural that attitudes might adjust.

These two things speak to the power of social proof in pushing attitude change of thorny cultural issues. 

So what lessons can we learn from this?

Advertisers & governments pay attention: it’s important to use social proof effectively.  Make your role models aspirational and personal.  Prime people to think of their close friends and family members who may be struggling with your particular social issue and they are much more likely to change their minds.

[thehouseofwilliam-blog]

Jersey Shore Fashion Week

You don’t need to watch Devil Wears Prada to know that the high-end fashion industry is cut-throat.  Luxury brands are constantly competing with one another in order to capture the mindshare (and eventually the wallets) of the ultra-wealthy.  In order to gain a competitive advantage, many fashion brands are turning to an equally aspirational segment of society: celebrity.

Nowadays, the idea of movie stars or pop singers being brand ambassadors is taken for granted, but it’s actually a fairly recent phenomenon.  It wasn’t until the 1990s that Anna Wintour first started putting celebrities on the cover of Vogue.  This phenomenon has only increased in recent years.  With pop culture becoming increasingly celebrity obsessed, many luxury brands are realizing the value of having a celebrity candidly wearing their clothes in a paparazzi photo or social media post.  As a result, the average red carpet celebrity gets $100,000 in freebies every year.

That makes sense.  People like a cool celebrity.  Cool celebrity likes your brand.  Ergo, people will like your brand.  But can this work the other way around too? Remember the Jersey Shore?  Well, I recently found out that luxury handbag makers would send the cast of the Jersey Shore handbags in the hope that Snooki, JWow, and company would be seen carrying them around town.  You might find that odd - the “Jersey Shore” aesthetic seems very off-brand for institutions such as Gucci and Louis Vuitton. Well, it turns out that these fashion houses would send the cast their competitor’s bags.

Is this not the most petty thing you’ve ever heard?

I love this example because it’s both extremely catty and clever.  Fashion houses are hoping to exploit in-group, out-group biases.  Though we may like to watch Snooki on TV, we don’t to be associated with her or her style.  Therefore, seeing her with a Gucci bag inherently makes that bag less desirable.  

[thehouseofwilliam-blog]

A Tale of Two Companies

It was the best of times. It was the worst of times.  But you’ll mostly remember the worst of times.

Providing quality customer service is a crucial part of any successful enterprise.  But in more importantly than providing good customer service is avoiding bad service.  This is especially true today.  Because of the power of social media, every single customer has a major platform from which to hold companies accountable.

There’s a lot of research that shows that people remember bad interactions more than good.  Furthermore, in today’s social media age, bad customer service is far more likely to be shared than good.  

Who could forget this massive faux pas, courtesy of United Airlines?

Remember the United Airlines video of a passenger being dragged off a plane? It dominated news cycles for weeks, cemented United’s reputation for poor service, and caused its stock to drop precipitously, knocking $250M off it’s market value.

On top of that, once a company has a reputation for bad customer service or poor quality, that brand identity is extremely hard to shake. Just ask Comcast, America’s most hated company.

Some have tried.  Remember Domino’s bold campaign that admitted that the pizza sucked?  

Dominos: We promise to stop sucking

Admitting that your product is terrible extremely risky strategy, hence why few companies try this approach.

In general, it’s probably easiest to not suck in the first place.

[thehouseofwilliam-blog]

Here’s something to wine about

Honestly, I’ve never been able to tell good wine from bad. It turns out that many “experts” might not be able to either.  Study after study prove that in blind taste tests many wine connoisseurs failed to distinguish quality from trash.  Some even failed to realize the red wine thy were drinking was actually white wine with food coloring.

So if experts can’t tell the difference, does this mean that the difference in wine quality is all in our head? Does it all come down to marketing? And if so, why does the wine industry spend so little on advertising?

According to the case, the single most important factor for wine consumers was the country of origin (as the market is actually quite fragmented within country).  This got me thinking: if I were a brand manager for a “New World” wine, how would I exploit these facts to create a successful marketing strategy?

I’d do two things:

1. Sell the Country, not the brand

There are so many wineries out there that consumers have little brand loyalty. But they do care about country of origin. So instead of having five different Chilean wine companies run advertisements in the US, I’d push for a shared marketing budget where we’d run a campaign about chilean wine in general.  The benefits would be much greater than if each brand were to run its own distinct campaign.

Example: Made by Australia (Jacob’s Creek)

2. Develop a distinct personality

Wine consumption is changing - it’s no longer reserved for the rich upper classes.  And as younger consumers start drinking more and more wine, there opens up a major market opportunity for affordable wines that cater to a more fun, millennial population (think Corona, not Heineken).

Here’s how not to do it: Frontera

In this spot, Frontera tries to emulate the class and sophistication associated with old world wine countries like France or Italy.  Nothing about this ad sparks any association with Chile (which is crucial as country is what consumers care the most about.).  Frontera loses an opportunity both to differentiate itself and to emphasize the country of origin.

Here’s how it’s done: Yellowtail

What’s great about this spot is that (1) Yellowtail uses symbols to really emphasize the wine’s Australian heritage (Kangaroos and Australian accents).  This is great because we know consumers really care about the wine’s country of origin.  (2) Yellowtail also creates an identity that stands out in the crowded market: it’s fun and youthful! (think Corona vs Heineken).

I figure those are important lessons for any brand manager who doesn’t want to wined up irrelevant.  In vino veritas.

[thehouseofwilliam-blog]

Putting limes in the neck of a Corona is stupid, but  I do it anyways

And it’s because of marketing.

“People don’t drink beer, they drink marketing.” This hot take comes courtesy of Michael Foley, former CEO of Heineken.

It’s true. Corona and many other beer brands have done an amazing job at creating an entire story around their brands.  When I close my eyes and I picture myself drinking a Corona, I am sitting on the beach in the sun with a Corona in my hand (and stupid lime in the neck).  That image is entirely different than what I see when I picture myself drinking a Heineken (upscale cocktail party) or Budweiser (JK I don’t picture myself drinking Budweiser).

Not only do these brands invest a lot in their identity, but they carefully craft them so that they are distinct from one another.  Corona wants to be the beach beer.  This is important as it harkens back to its classic Mexican roots and associations (people think of Mexico as a vacation spot).  Nothing about Corona itself is inherently beachy - all those associations are pure marketing and psychology.

Anyway - I just find it super interesting how much thought the marketers behind Corona put into crafting their brand story.  And I’m very impressed with how much success they’ve had.

Now I really want a beer.