16442: Could Consumer Complaints Create Cultural Change?

 

Advertising Age reported on a 4-year survey whose 2023 results showed 53% of consumers think corporations should not get involved in political or cultural concerns, versus almost 30% saying corporations should take a stand on issues. The figures indicated an increase of about 10 percent versus the survey’s 2019 results.

 

Ad Age also noted the following:

 

“Support for corporate activism grew among younger consumers in the wake of the 2020 killing of George Floyd, and sentiments have stayed that way … Among millennials and Gen Z, 41% say corporations should use their influence to impact political and corporate issues, up from 27% in 2019. Support among Gen X and baby boomers is also growing but remains well below 50%—just 17% of boomers are supportive, with support among Gen X is at 23%.”

 

The data poses questions that could apply to Adland. That is, how would consumers react upon learning that most corporations are partnering with White advertising agencies where diversity is a dream delegated, deferred, diverted, dodged, and denied? Might consumers demand that corporations use their influence to impact change in the exclusive industry?

 

It’s clear that commitment to racial and ethnic diversity has dwindled in recent years at White advertising agencies and corporations. Yet consumer dedication remains steady.

 

MadMen character Don Draper once quipped, “If you don’t like what is being said, then change the conversation.” Hey, if you don’t like the lack of diversity in Adland, perhaps it’s time to invite consumers to join the conversation.

 

Brand activism—over half of consumers not interested in hearing companies’ political and social stances

 

Brands might be better off supporting their employees rather than making public statements, Morning Consult finds

 

By Erika Wheless

 

A majority of Americans say brands should not take stands on social, corporate, or cultural issues—but a desire for companies to speak out is rising, especially among younger generations, according to a new report from Morning Consult. And some issues are more polarizing than others: General statements about diversity in the workforce have widespread support, but there is less support for backing LGBTQ+ rights, especially among older Americans.

 

The report is based on a survey of roughly 20,000 U.S. adults between August 2019 and Sept. 2023. In 2023, the survey found that 53% of respondents said corporations should not get involved in political or cultural issues, while almost 30% said corporations should take a stand. In 2019, 61% of respondents said corporations should not get involved while 19 percent said they should take a stand, according to the survey. (The remaining respondents said they don’t care or don’t know.)

 

Support for corporate activism grew among younger consumers in the wake of the 2020 killing of George Floyd, and sentiments have stayed that way, according to Joanna Piacenza, head of industry intelligence at Morning Consult. Among millennials and Gen Z, 41% say corporations should use their influence to impact political and corporate issues, up from 27% in 2019. Support among Gen X and baby boomers is also growing but remains well below 50%—just 17% of boomers are supportive, with support among Gen X is at 23%.

 

For marketers speaking to a broad audience, this presents a damned if you do, damned if you don’t scenario. But the report also outlines what issues consumers care about the most: often what’s happening internally at a company.

 

It’s what’s on the inside that counts

 

Across generations, how a company treats its employees and customers is a paramount issue. The report found that roughly 9 in 10 Americans said that it’s important that companies they buy from take care of their employees, have products readily available, and always do what’s best for customers, even in challenging times.

 

The data showed that internal company actions resonated with customers more than external advocacy —71% of consumers said they viewed a company as more favorable if they paid their employees well; 69% said they viewed a company as more favorable if a company was known to be a place where employees liked to work; 66% liked if the company paid men and women equally; 65% liked if it made goods in America; and 60% cared if the company supported the U.S. military.

 

“There is a ‘keeping your own house in order’ feel that consumers have toward brands,” Piacenza said. “Brands should be doing more to show their benefits or highlight why their employees are happy. Treating workers well is its own form of good advertising because then you aren’t risking an angry employee going viral about you online.”

 

The actions with the least impact on a brand’s favorability included supporting the Me Too movement, advocating for gay rights, supporting the Black Lives Matter movement, advocating for transgender rights and advocating for stricter abortion policies.

 

External issues

 

If brands are going to issue public statements, there are five issues that consumers feel that brands are able to speak about: support for the police, diversity in the workforce, climate change and the environment, women’s rights and gender equality and voting rights. Race and racism in America was the sixth-most popular topic, with 67% of U.S. adults saying that brands are able to speak about it. But this was a topic that had the greatest difference between the general population and Gen Z, with 73% of Gen Zers saying that corporations should issue public statements around race, compared to 56% of the general population.

 

Among the issues consumers want to hear about the least from brands is access to abortion and contraception, though that topic resonated with nearly 60% of millennials who want brands to speak out, compared with just 45% of the general population. Online censorship, LGBTQ+ rights, transgender rights and efforts to ban books were also among the issues consumers want to hear about the least from brands.

 

Bud Light and Target are among the brands that faced backlash this year among some consumers for LGBTQ+-related marketing campaigns and products.

 

Issues that U.S. consumers agree corporations should be taking a stance on include threats against U.S. democracy, the protection of government institutions, women’s rights, climate change and diversity and inclusion in the workplace, according to the report.

 

Piacenza notes that company statements around certain issues have to be specific, including how they phrase their stance. “We have women’s rights high up as an acceptable issue for brands to make public statements about, but abortion access is lower,” she said. “So if you are a more female-focused brand or a brand with a majority-female customer base, and you want to make a statement about the Dobb’s decision, you should phrase it as a women’s rights issue, not access to abortion.”

 

Why the divide

 

Majorities of Gen Z adults, millennials and Democrats said “a lot” or “some” corporate brands are in touch with the average American, compared with less than half of Gen Xers, boomers and Republicans who said the same. It’s another sign that younger and more liberal Americans see corporations drifting toward their own viewpoint, while older and more conservative Americans feel increasingly isolated from brands.

 

“If you believe that a brand aligns with your values and they take a stand, you’re more open to hearing from them,” Piacenza said. “But on the other hand, if you feel that you aren’t aligned, you don’t want to hear from them as much.”

 

A misalignment in values led to Bud Light’s woes, which began last April when conservatives complained about transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney posting about a custom can bearing her image, eventually leading to a steep sales decline. Morning Consult’s report found that roughly one in five Americans said they have boycotted a company over the past year for political reasons. Younger, college-educated, high-earning consumers, baby boomers, and Republican men are the most likely groups to boycott brands for political reasons.

 

“This really comes down to knowing your audience,” Piacenza said. “If you are unsure about taking a stance, keep your head down and go about your business.”

12854: At Grey, Integrating Is Grating.

Adweek reported new Grey New York Chief Strategy Officer Jonathan Lee is focused on integrating creativity and technology at his new workplace. Um, despite having a Black CEO, the White advertising agency hasn’t even managed to integrate different generations—and Grey has fumbled in its attempts to foster cultural integration too. As previously noted, the industry’s inability to integrate digital mirrors the failure to integrate anything and everything else.

Grey New York’s New Chief Strategy Officer Will Help Integrate Creativity and Technology

Jonathan Lee brings track record of success

By Marty Swant

Starting today, Jonathan Lee is the new chief strategy officer at Grey New York.

Lee joins the agency from Huge, where he spent three years as global managing director of planning and strategy. Prior to that, he held senior leadership roles in strategic and account planning at both traditional and digital agencies, including the digital agency Rosetta and TBWA\Chiat\Day New York.

Grey North America CEO Michael Houston said Lee will be tasked with evolving the Strategy Group at Grey, where he will drive development and implementation of a single point of view encompassing every aspect of the agency.

“It’s been said that the future of advertising lies at the intersection of creativity, data, media and technology,” Houston said. “Jonathan brings a track record of success in all of these areas as well as traditional brand planning.”

In an interview with Adweek on Monday afternoon, Lee said his experience at both traditional and digital agencies provides the background necessary for understanding and implementing integration. He said it’s important to maintain the integrity of each component while also applying them in the “right way at the right time.”

“The analogy I use is sausage,” Lee said. “You recognize the ingredients, but you get something different out of it.”

In recent years, Grey New York has doubled in size. Enhancing its talent, creative products and digital capabilities has led to heightened new business performance, and the company says it’s on pace in 2015 for a seventh year of record financial and creative performance. Key new business wins have included The Whitney Museum of American Art, Pandora and Folgers Coffee. The success has also led to a number of awards. This year at Cannes, Grey New York was the second most-awarded office in the world.

“We have the collective firepower to actually realize the ideas,” Lee said. “Now we have to get the strategic alignment to support them so they will be even bigger and even better.”

9204: Create Cross-Cultural Mentoring.

Advertising Age published a column on cross-generational mentorships, whereby coworkers of different age groups hook up to allegedly teach each other about 21st century life and the ad business. Sounds like a scheme hatched by Old White Guys to help them create the illusion that they’re still relevant—while also allowing them the opportunity to hook up in other ways with hot newbies. Worse yet, the piece was written by a talent recruiter, which puts a greater irrelevant spin on the perspective. Whatever.

Yet has anyone considered cross-cultural mentorships? And no, it’s not anything related to the cross-cultural con artistry hyped by places like Draftfcb. Rather, let’s connect culturally clueless White people with people of color. Ship Dan Wieden to Uniworld and Jeff Goodby to GlobalHue. Organize a Texas-based exchange program between Sanders\Wingo and The Richards Group. Hey, White ad people love minority internships. So let them experience one versus simply making meager monetary donations.

6804: Generational Differences.

Generation Y: David Carradine star of Kill Bill series
Generation X: David Carradine star of Kung Fu series
Greatest Generation: David Carradine son of John Carradine

Hat Tip To MTLB

6529: Stereotypical Tips…?

Quickly scan this column from AdAge.com, then check the brief MultiCultClassics commentary immediately following…

Bolster Your Career at Every Level
Chief Talent Officer Offers Tips for Finding Opportunity Amid the Chaos

By Laura Agostini

In today’s economy, holding on to your job is no easy feat. No matter where you look, the headlines are grim, proclaiming the worst. Economists are predicting a loss of at least 2 million jobs this year, and we don’t know what lies ahead in 2010.

Even under these circumstances, many of us are seeking a career, not just a job. But finding a way to build a career in one of the worst job markets in decades is a new challenge—and many of us are not quite prepared for what that entails. In the best of times, there still aren’t enough hours to get your own work done. Now you’re most likely doing your job plus someone else’s, and still trying to network after hours.

So the question becomes: How can you find opportunity within the chaos? The answer isn’t simple (these things rarely are), but the first thing you can do is stop worrying and start focusing on every assignment at hand.

Given the realities of today’s economic climate, employers are asking their employees for more time, more accountability and more innovative thinking. And therein lies the opportunity for ambitious employees, at every level, to demonstrate their value and make themselves indispensable to their managers and executive team. These actions will pay dividends not only in the short-term crunch but also in the long-term, as the industry emerges out of this slump and companies are in a better position to reward employees who outperformed during tough times.

Now is the perfect time to go that extra mile in building your career. Our business is about relationships, and people will always remember additional effort.

Here’s how to say ahead at every level.

Junior (1-5 years in the workplace)
This is likely the first time you have faced an economic crisis. The uncertainty of it all and watching your colleagues lose their jobs can be overwhelming. Use this time to rededicate yourself to your career aspirations and, in turn, your position.

Do Less …
• Chatting with friends on Facebook
• Procrastinating
• Worrying about whether you will have a job tomorrow, next week or next month

Do more …
• Focusing on the now and what you can to become a valuable asset
• Finding a mentor to advise you and check your work
• Researching and reading up on your client, your industry, your competition

Middle management (5-10 years in the workplace)
By now, you know what it takes to succeed. You’ve moved through the ranks. You have the opportunity to reflect on how you made the grade and what it is going to take to stay on top of your game.

Do less …
• Complaining about the new generation’s sense of entitlement
• Feeling comfortable or complacent
• Stressing about revenue and focus on relationships, both client and company

Do more …
• Mentoring and training
• Identifying and rewarding talent who are willing to put in extra effort
• Reinvigorating yourself and remember what attracted you to the job and career initially

C-suite (15 years or more)
You are the coaches, the leaders, the ones steering the life rafts. Keep your eye on the business and help everyone row together through the rocky times.

Do less …
• Reminiscing about the old days, wishing you were old enough to retire
• Ignoring networking opportunities
• Looking over your shoulder

Do more …
• Accepting that times have changed and that you need to as well
• Diving into the latest technologies that engage and connect
• Listening to your employees, clients and peers

Whether you are 22 or 62, connecting with peers and business professionals both in and around your area of expertise is critical. Social networks such as LinkedIn and Facebook and industry organizations open you up to new technology, trends and opportunities to add to your skills portfolio. They introduce you to new ideas and new people that will inevitably keep you thinking at the top of your game.

Common sense? Sure. But finding the energy to execute against these tips can be a challenge right now. Make the time. You will continue to add to your resume and enable everyone in the organization to help build and maintain a positive culture through open communication, strong leadership and the sharing of ideas.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Laura Agostini is chief talent officer at Mediaedge:cia. Before joining MEC, she was chief talent officer at Publicis Modem, the global digital arm of Publicis Groupe.

There’s something disturbing about this column coming from a chief talent officer. MultiCultClassics humbly offers a few suggestions:

Do less …
• Stereotyping of generations and workers. It’s such a tired perspective. Take a closer look at your people. You’ll find nearly all groups chatting with friends on Facebook. As well as via cell phones, email, text, Twitter and more. Plus, everyone is worrying about whether they’ll have a job—in the next hour. Oh, and the criticism of C-suite employees reminiscing about the old days borders on ageism.

Do more …
• Championing of diversity. And we’re not just talking racial and ethnic diversity. Hey, if your staff is so easily categorized into three silos, perhaps it’s time to reconsider your ability to identify, hire and foster talent.

6330: Obama And Oboomers.

From The Associated Press…

In Obama, many see an end to the baby boomer era

By Associated Press

NEW YORK---- When George W. Bush lifts off in his helicopter on Inauguration Day, leaving Washington to make way for Barack Obama, he may not be the only thing disappearing into the horizon.

To a number of social analysts, historians, bloggers and ordinary Americans, Jan. 20 will symbolize the passing of an entire generation: the baby boomer years.

Generational change. A passing of the torch. The terms have been thrown around with frequency as the moment nears for Obama to take the oath of office. And yet the reference is not to Obama’s relatively young age—at 47, he’s only tied for fifth place on the youngest presidents list with Grover Cleveland.

Rather, it’s a sense that a cultural era is ending, one dominated by the boomers, many of whom came of age in the ‘60s and experienced the bitter divisions caused by the Vietnam War and the protests against it, the civil rights struggle, social change, sexual freedoms, and more.

Those experiences, the theory goes, led boomers, born between 1946 and 1964, to become deeply motivated by ideology and mired in decades-old conflicts. And Obama? He’s an example of a new pragmatism: idealistic but realistic, post-partisan, unthreatened by dissent, eager and able to come up with new ways to solve problems.

“Obama is one of those people who was raised post-Vietnam and really came of age in the ‘80s,” says Steven Cohen, professor of public administration at Columbia University. “It’s a huge generational change, and a new kind of politics. He’s trying to be a problem-solver by not getting wrapped up in the right-left ideology underlying them.”

Obama, it must be said, is technically a boomer; he was born in 1961. But he long has sought to draw a generational contrast between himself and the politicians who came before him.

“I sometimes felt as if I were watching the psychodrama of the baby boom generation—a tale rooted in old grudges and revenge plots hatched on a handful of college campuses long ago—played out on the national stage,” he wrote of the 2000 and 2004 elections in his book, “The Audacity of Hope.”

It’s been a while since historians spoke of generational change in Washington. Fully 16 years have passed since Bill Clinton, the first boomer president, took office. Before that, presidents from John F. Kennedy to George H.W. Bush—seven straight—were part of the World War II generation, or what Tom Brokaw has termed the “Greatest Generation.”

If Obama isn’t a boomer in spirit, then what is he? Not exactly a member of Generation X, though obviously that generation and the next, Generation Y (also known as Millenials) embraced him fully and fueled his historic rise to the presidency.

“Gen Xers are known to be more cynical, less optimistic,” says social commentator Jonathan Pontell. “Xers don’t write books with the word ‘hope’ in the title.”

Some call late boomers like Obama Cuspers—as in, the cusp of a new generation. One book has called it the 13th generation, as in the 13th generation since colonial times. And Pontell, also a political consultant in Los Angeles, has gained some fame coining a new category: Generation Jones, as in the slang word ‘jonesing,’ or craving, and as in a generation that’s lost in the shuffle.

Jonesers are idealistic, Pontell says, but not ideological like boomers. “Boomers were flower children out changing the world. We Jonesers were wide-eyed, not tie-dyed.”

And Obama, he says, is “a walking, living prime example of Generation Jones. He’s a classic practical idealist. It’s not the naive idealism of the ‘60s.”

Wide-eyed or tie-dyed, Obama will be sworn in by an early “Joneser” himself—Chief Justice John Roberts, who turns 54 at the end of January. And while the average age of the new Congress is 58.2 -- an early boomer group—the new president is bringing some “Jonesers” with him.

Obama’s chosen treasury secretary, Timothy Geithner, is 47. His pick for education secretary, Arne Duncan, is 44, as is Susan Rice, his U.N. ambassador. (His apparent pick for surgeon general, 39-year-old neurosurgeon and TV correspondent Sanjay Gupta, is a true Gen Xer.)

Of course, Obama’s also bringing in veteran Clintonites—most notably Hillary Rodham Clinton, 61, his former campaign rival, as secretary of state. And his vice president, Joe Biden, 66, and defense secretary, Bush holdover Robert Gates, 65, are pre-boomers. But those are the kind of choices—inclusive of other perspectives, embracing rivals—that lead many to call Obama the first post-boomer president.

“It may be technically correct to call him a boomer,” says Douglas Warshaw, a New York media executive who, at age 49, is part of whatever cohort Obama is in. “And it’s in the Zeitgeist to call him a Gen Xer. But I think he’s more like a generational bridge.” He adds that Obama got where he was by “brilliantly leveraging the communication behaviors of post-Boomers,” with a campaign waged across the Web, on cell phones and on social networking sites.

One analyst of popular culture believes Obama definitely symbolizes a new generation—just not one connected to the year he was born.

“I think it’s hilarious that everyone wants to categorize people by their birth year, especially now, a time when our parents are on Facebook,” says Montana Miller of Bowling Green State University. Obama, she says, represents a generational shift in ways less tangible than age.

“You can see it from his approach to knowledge. Never before have we had a president who’s troubled about giving up his Blackberry,” Miller says. (Indeed, Obama is still in a struggle over whether he can keep the device.) “He’s constantly exposed to multiple perspectives, to what people out there feel and think.”

Obama’s biracial heritage also plays into the generational shift, Miller says. “It’s so emblematic of how the world is changing,” she says. “So many people are now some sort of complicated ethnic mix. Today’s youth are completely comfortable with that.”

Will Obama speak of generational change when he stands on the podium to issue his inaugural address? Given some of his rhetoric on the campaign trail, it’s reasonable to think he will—just as, some six months before he was born, JFK pronounced on Inauguration Day that “the torch has been passed to a new generation of Americans, born in this century, tempered by war, disciplined by a hard and bitter peace.”

Interestingly, Kennedy is often claimed by boomers to be one of their own, even though he was nothing of the kind; born in 1917, he’d be 91 now. In the same way, many Gen Xers and even Gen Yers like to claim Obama, too.

“As humans we all want to be part of something bigger than ourselves, part of a page in a history book,” Pontell says. And at least for now, he adds, “Obama’s a rock star, and people are dying to call him one of their own.”