Categories
Brand Strategy Featured

The 14 New Rules of Brand Strategy

Six years ago, I shared my 16 Rules of Brand Strategy, a list of tenets to build or test your company’s strategy. That article went viral and is still referenced today more than any of my other pieces. But consumers and culture have changed a great deal, so it’s time to write some new rules. 

Consider the original 16 rules to be the cost of entry. They are now the baseline requirement for brand building. This new and revamped list is how you build on that foundation and level up to greatness. 

You will quickly see that these rules are not only valuable for brands but can (and should) inform product, UX, sales, marketing, PR, HR and nearly every other business activity.  

1. Don’t rebrand the product when you can rebrand the problem.

Rebranding the product puts you in a consideration set with other products, but rebranding the problem can put you in a consideration set of one.

EVRYMAN reframed the problem of therapy from “finding yourself” to “creating yourself” before they positioned their product. Cofertility rebranded the problem of fertility from “egg freezing and donation” to “touching human lives” in order to make their product newly relevant.

We recently helped a client in the debt relief industry rebrand the problem of owing money. Debt relief is a murky category with shady players, and while we understood the tremendous integrity that our particular client was built with, we knew it made no sense to say, “Hey, trust us! We’re the good guys!” (a very common mistake many brands make).

Instead, we dug deep in our psychographic research and saw something remarkable—when people go into debt, they become the debt.

Their entire identities are reduced to one dimension: They no longer identify with their hobbies, they stop going to family functions, stop volunteering, stop enjoying time with friends, stop taking pride in their work, stop planning their lives. 

They lose what makes them human, and understanding this was the real brand opportunity.

The brand wasn’t about an honest debt relief company with good products, although that was very true, the brand was about re-dimensionalizing people. We reframed the problem of “debt” to the problem of “losing selfhood.” And that is the concept we built their entire strategy on.

Immediately, their rebranded ads, messaging and positioning saw a huge uptick, while the culture of the company evolved toward a singular vision that guided every decision toward a common goal.

Think clearly about what you’re branding, because sometimes there is something much bigger than just the product.

2. Real conversion happens emotionally, not logically.

People who have damage in the emotional centers of their brains are normal in every single area of their lives with one notable exception—they can’t make good decisions, and sometimes they can’t make decisions at all. 

It turns out that decision making is driven by emotion, and logic is what we use after the fact to justify our actions. Risk assessment, emotional processing, memory, self-perception and social cognition are all bound together in our brains, and they are all part of a very complex, very emotional decision-making process.

That means B2B is just as emotional as B2C. It means underneath every feature a user tells you matters to them lies an emotion they themselves perhaps don’t understand. It also means feature-led branding will always lose.

You need to find out the emotional triggers that will truly convey your value to the user. Emotions, not features (or USP or benefits or measures of being “better” than your competitor) should be the basis of your brand.

When people convert from the heart and not the head, they are more willing to pay for premium products, more willing to evangelize and more likely to remain loyal in the face of UX and product issues, delays and other challenges. Why would you give up that much goodwill by ignoring emotion?

3. Changing belief means changing identity.

Most brands have one giant challenge between them and success: changing people’s beliefs. 

But the thing about belief is that it’s much more than ideas floating in our heads. Atomic Habits author James Clear famously documented how those who are most likely to stick to changed beliefs and behaviors are the people who first change their identities. Entrepreneur Seth Godin put it another way when he said, “People like us do things like this.”

Belief and identity are so intertwined that changing our beliefs can feel like losing ourselves. It’s scary. We live in a culture that sees it as a sign of weakness—for example, consider the fact that instead of celebrating politicians who evolve their worldviews, we approach them with distrust and skepticism.

But when we change our beliefs, we change our behaviors, and it’s oftentimes the most effective way to get people to understand the value of your brand.

The best way to change people’s minds is to help them see themselves differently in the world. In order to change the beliefs that held people back from running, Tracksmith first had to create an identity around a new “running class” of people who do it for the personal ritual. It created room for a new kind of runner—someone who wasn’t winning races but still had permission to enthusiastically invest in their running practice.  

If your brand needs people to change their beliefs, give them an identity worth adopting.

4. Loose places crave tight cultures.

Every category has a culture. Psychologist Michele Gelfand has found that cultures fall on a spectrum between tight and loose. Tight cultures like finance and sports are governed by strict norms, whereas loose cultures like parenting, food or psychedelics may have an overabundance of information but few steadfast rules everyone can agree on.

Loose culture categories feel chaotic. What diet is the right one for me? Am I raising my kid right? What is the morality of doing illegal drugs for mental health? These categories don’t have a paradox of choice. They have an absence of norms.

I’ve found exploring this theory offers a useful framework for brands. Every brand must assess the tightness or looseness of their culture. If there is a pervading sense of normlessness, then it is likely that your audience is looking for a specific perspective.

Today’s most successful food brands bring a tight culture to loose places. Lesser Evil snacks, Ezekiel breads and Garden of Life supplements are brands built on tight culture.

Ezekiel, for example, conjures the authority of biblical language to define what constitutes real, natural food. Is religious metaphor a cute vehicle for branding bread? Sure. Is it a genius device for bringing a strong set of norms that help consumers assess their bread choices amidst shelves of other options? Also very much yes.

If there is a loose culture, there is an opportunity to set the rules of engagement for your space.

5. Love is great. Hate is useful. Indifference kills.

Most brands have the problem of user indifference. People may think you have a nice enough brand but that doesn’t compel them to convert. Don’t get mired in a quest to gently move indifferent people down the funnel.

Your goal should be to create so much tension that your brand really turns on your lovers or really turns off your haters but leaves no room for indifference. Chasing indifferent users will run your company into the ground.

Ideally you’d want to lean into the love side of the equation, but you can successfully lean into the other side, as well. Marmite’s “love it or hate it” messaging created a near-mythical story around it’s divisive flavor, but the truth of the matter is that people were generally indifferent until the company decided to rebrand around this polarizing idea. 

Oatly created https://fckoatly.com/, an aggregated history of hate toward the brand that you either get and really love or don’t get and really hate. The one thing you can’t do is remain indifferent.

Most founders see indifference as being on the path to love, but that’s a dangerous falsehood. Love and hate are on two ends of the same path, while indifference is a dead-end highway in another town. You will waste precious time and dollars that could have been spent learning about your true base and how to broaden your audience from there.

You’d rather have lovers and haters than a world of bystanders.

6. Make people leave their biases at the door.

Be cognizant of the consumer biases in your category. People may think childcare is menial work, or that math skills are genetic, or that polyamory is shameful (all bases I have worked with for client brands), but it doesn’t matter if they’re true or not. What matters is if people carry those biases to your door.

You can either let them enter with old biases that will make them blind to your USP, or you can signal a whole new set of rules that will make people enter with an open mind, ready to behave differently. I believe this will be one of the most important factors in defining the brands that win and the brands that lose in the next decade. 

When Qualtrics rebranded their category from user data to experience management, they forced a new perspective on how data should be employed. Experience management meant seeing things more holistically across customers, employees and broader stakeholders and crafting an experience, not merely diagnosing problems.

It precluded people from bringing old notions about data into this new environment, which was crucial to their 2019 acquisition for $8 billion, referred to as an “eye-watering” sum at the time.

7. Don’t hide the experience behind conversion.

I often meet companies that have great products and services but their brands do little to reveal the experience beneath. They may talk about features or benefits, but they don’t surface the feelings that underpin them. 

However, without first understanding the experience, users are afraid of unknowns around how to engage and measure the benefit.

Don’t make your user wait until conversion to understand what the experience truly is, because most of the time, they won’t get far enough to find out. Instead, give them a glimpse of how they will feel upfront. Allow them, in some small way, to experience your offering without having to first convert.

Airbnb did this when their brand said, “Belong Anywhere”. That phrase offered a brief window into the experience of traveling by way of locals’ homes that, until then, had been locked far behind the door of conversion.

Find out what really happens on the other side of conversion, capture the way that your users change by way of your experience, and move it up front. 

8. Don’t let value get misattributed.

When my team was building the brand for one of the world’s largest work platforms, we saw something very interesting happening in the user journey.

The super users that got the most value out of the platform believed they had “hacked” it somehow. They believed that they themselves had figured out how to leverage the power of the platform in their business, without recognizing that the UX was actually designed to get them to that point.

Once we saw it with this client, we began to see it with many others. If your user journey is really good at helping people extract value from your offering, it’s highly probable that people think it’s because they are smart, not because you are good. And that means less loyalty and brand equity.

This is why storytelling around the user journey is so important. You need to take credit for all of the incremental value that is created well after conversion by demonstrating the thoughtful choices and guiding beliefs that led you to build that specific journey. Think of it as the digital version of craftsmanship. It’s an important narrative that helps people understand the value that you created for them.

9. Brand first, business second.

Brand is not the look of your website or the tone of your marketing voice. It is the organizing idea for every activity your company engages in, including product, UX, sales, communications, recruiting and even your org chart. 

People read brands between the lines. They understand your brand not by what you say but by what you do, and what you do counts in every single touchpoint, in every single channel. That’s the point of brand strategy—to orient every single business activity toward the same outcome. You should see your brand strategy as a filter for every decision.

The Lego brand is about meaningful play for every age, but that brand isn’t borne of their website or marketing alone. You must take their positioning, product strategy, collabs, press, communities, business model and innovations altogether to understand their deeper brand. If you stopped at the website, you’d just think it was a toy company.

Patagonia’s brand is about drastic measures to save the earth, such as suing the US government and rebuffing the very VCs that turned the brand into a west coast status symbol. These were tactical decisions made through the lens of the brand.  

Strong businesses have brand strategy at their core. You’d be hard pressed to find much daylight between business and brand for companies like Tesla, Apple or Meta.

To make brand inferior to business is a mistake.

10. Strive for brand singularity.

Brand singularity is when the company brand, the CEO brand and the employer brand are all synonymous. It creates a powerful flywheel effect in which no matter who your brand reaches or how it reaches them, you can be certain it’s the same resounding message every time.

Not many companies have accomplished this yet. It’s hard to maintain one brand, let alone three that echo each other.

Amazon, despite seasonal blowback, has incredible synchronicity between its employer brand, customer brand and Jeff Bezos’ personal brand. They all stand for efficiency.

You see it in all three places, from their customer manifesto and investments in delivery to the carefully-placed stories of Jeff’s two-pizza rule, upcycled boardroom tables and the story of a guy who found a way to sell books without having to store them anywhere.

It attracts talent, consumer trust and investor money.

11. Treat community like the first layer of brand.

Our world of relationships is shifting from weak ties to strong ties—from wide networks mostly filled with strangers on platforms like LinkedIn and Instagram to narrow but deeper networks where we share intimate values and culture like Discord and Patreon. 

In our research, we’ve found that people are coming to expect community to be the first layer of brand, especially in premium spaces where people are paying more in money, time or education in order to use the product or service.

The community around Fly By Jing is what sells their premium-priced sauces and spice mixes. The company’s marketing, product and overall experience are solid, but it is the community that signals what this brand is really about. Chances are that if you asked someone about Fly By Jing, they would start by telling you about the brand’s enthusiastic community first.

Where we once looked to experts, community now drives the level of trust needed to convert in costly spaces.

12. Solve 5 problems with 1 solution.

One of the best heuristics for a good brand strategy is if it solves multiple problems with a single solution. I personally like a ratio of 1 to 5.

Architectural Digest’s recent rebrand has turned the once stuffy media label into a newly relatable lifestyle hub that represents far more than architecture alone. 

According to WANT, the branding agency behind the rebrand, Playbook for living was a new brand positioning idea that “captured in a powerful and simple way, the notion of AD as the definitive ‘dream’ book that could direct and guide the essential aspects of how architecture and design unite to create living spaces.”

This concept allowed AD to successfully make their brand relatable to a much larger audience without alienating their core base of conservative readers, moving from being a utility (an educational resource) to being a lifestyle (a resource for imagination and inspiration). It meant tapping into the emotional opportunities of rule #3—“changing belief means changing identity”—to make themselves relevant to the much larger conversations of life, style and identity. It also positioned the brand as a part of pop culture, which has resulted in natural and impactful collabs with celebrities and influencers and has helped form a strong community of like-minded people around the AD brand.

They solved 5 problems with 1 solution, and this ratio is what makes a brand strategic.

Having this high ratio means you are creating more equity with significantly less resources while keeping all of the company’s momentum focused on a single direction. It means you are leveraging specific brand choices today that will create a future market which favors your brand over others. You can’t deny that the AD brand has created a new design culture that today sidelines competitors like Dwell and Wallpaper.

Planning (5 solutions for 5 problems) creates work. Strategy (1 solution for 5 problems) creates great advantage. 

13. Optimism is the only secret weapon.

If strategy lives on a time horizon, brand strategists need to have a strong grasp of where the world is headed. Although it’s very easy to only see the negative outcomes that can happen on that horizon, any futurist or historian can tell you that it is the optimistic future that pushes us forward and usually wins out.

Time and time again I have experienced how optimism is a brand strategist’s only secret weapon. When you can forecast the unexpected benefits of technologies, cultural movements, emerging beliefs and behaviors instead of only seeing the negative outcomes of so much change, you can plant your brand’s flag in the right territory.

Pessimism is easy, but optimism is very hard, which is part of the reason Concept Bureau Senior Strategist Zach Lamb has dubbed it a status signifier of our modern era.

It’s a skill that takes a tremendous amount of imagination and flexibility because it rarely comes naturally. You must cultivate it (and if you’re interested in doing that, I recommend Jane McGonigal’s book Imaginable). It is the optimists, not the pessimists, who make the future and who are able to stand out in the present.

14. Let the work change you.

Never judge your user, even if you see something in them that you don’t like or want to change. My ultimate test for knowing if my team and I or our clients are approaching the user with total empathy is to answer the question, “Has the work changed you?”

Have you looked at the user with enough of an open mind to let it change you as a person? Have you listened with enough presence to connect with a stranger or have a small piece of your worldview shifted?

You can’t experience that kind of change without first asking a certain kind of question. “Can you tell me a little bit about your work?” in a user interview will never get you transformative answers. “If you could have had a job for another life, what would it be? Who would you have been?” demands a degree of openness.

You will understand their deeper value systems, the lies they tell themselves, the struggles they conceal and the lenses through which they make decisions. All of these insights are a goldmine for not only branding, but for UX, UI, pricing, positioning and product.

Your goal with user research shouldn’t be to merely gather data but rather to make people feel seen. Without deep empathy, you are guaranteed to miss an important insight. 

The reason why strategists love what they do is because it allows them to constantly evolve past their own limited beliefs. Working with a beauty brand made me excited about getting older. Branding a construction tech company made me proud of the American work ethic. Spending time with the fans of a plus size clothing brand made me grateful for parts of myself I once tried to erase.

In fact, “Let the work change you” is our company’s first value. It’s that important.

Ask yourself the last time the work changed how you related to a population you thought you had nothing in common with. If you’re not changing, you’re not really doing the work.

 


 

You don’t need to follow all of these rules to have a successful brand, but it’s crucial that you embody the general spirit of this list, which is to always be questioning and investigating the deeper reasons why people think, behave and believe the way that they do. 

The greatest brand strategies have one thing in common: they understood their users. On a fundamental level, that’s what building a company is about, too. Understanding people is what leads to big and impactful ideas.

I believe the path to an incredible brand strategy already exists for every brand. Your job is to keep searching until you find it, and my hope is that this list acts as a wayfinder on your journey there.

Categories
Culture Featured

Conspicuous Commitment Is The Next Era of Status

Lately, everyone is cold-plunging themselves into an icey bliss. Steaming themselves in home saunas. Taking double-digit and increasingly esoteric wellness supplements. Pushing their consciousness to its limits at psychedelic retreats. Biohacking their way to immortality. Losing their bodies in sensory deprivation tanks or darkness retreats. Meditating regularly and seeing breathwork coaches. Attending healing sound baths. Downing Athletic Greens. Binging nootropics. Intermittent fasting. 

You’ve probably seen all this online, if not done some of it in real life. And you’ve probably also noticed how our culture is encouraging us all to “put our own oxygen masks on first,” as the saying goes. After the mental health and self-care revolutions of the past decade, not to mention the psychological magnifying glass of the pandemic, we’re all doing the work. Self work has become the new workism, characterized by the same ferocious zeal. 

Today, those on dating apps report they don’t want to go out with people who aren’t in therapy. That’s right, the latest deal breaker in the dating market is inadequate attention to the self. Vulnerability is the new black. 

The fashion of our times is to let it all hang out in the public eye. Our cultural mantra is to “live your truth.” The trending mode of expression for influencers is to share what’s going on behind the scenes in their minds, effectively de-influencing and penetrating the sales facade. Authenticity has become the inescapable imperative of our time. 

Such a deep focus on the self is key to understanding how social status works today. In 2022, Gallup found that Americans’ satisfaction with “the way things are going in my personal life” neared a 40-year high, even as their satisfaction with “the way things are going in the U.S.” neared a 40-year low. These are startling results, indicative of a profound shift in how we relate to ourselves and one another. 

In a similar 2023 finding, The Wall Street Journal found that Americans have dramatically pulled back from our historically prosocial values. 

America Pulls Back From Values That Once Defined It, WSJ-NORC Poll Finds, WSJ 3/27/2023

Taking stock, what’s clear is that we’re on an accelerating journey inwards. We’ve radically turned away from society and into the self, which has impacted the ways we seek to stand out and distinguish ourselves. 

Status is no longer defined externally by the peacocking of conspicuous consumption; instead, it’s become defined by conspicuous commitment, by the deep, abiding belief in and commitment to a project of internal self-betterment. 

We’re no longer bragging about our possessions, the experiences we’ve had or the moral highgrounds we’ve taken. Instead, we’re showing off our discipline and self-denial, our asceticism and the pains we’ve endured for physical and psychic gains.

How did we get here? We can’t blame it all on Goop. What happened to Escalades and Ibiza, to Birkin bags and “I voted” stickers? 

In a society with diminished future hopes, the most prized commodity is the ability to transcend the nihilism and ironic detachment that is so in vogue. When the felt sense is that life’s prospects have been dimmed by a litany of societal factors, and when it’s so easy to criticize, tear down and take refuge in irony, earnestly committing to a disciplined project of self-improvement – wherever it’s directed – stands out. Deeply believing in something optimistic has become a new luxury that isn’t available to everyone. 

This new form of status is most apparent in the therapeutic and wellness domains, but it’s also what’s behind the meteoric rise of psychedelics. It’s what’s fueling the elite’s obsession with longevity. And it’s what’s beneath the effusive glee of personal AI optimization efforts. 

The Birth of Conspicuous Commitment

If you’re finding it harder to understand social status these days, you’re not alone. In his 2023 book, The Status Revelation, journalist and documentarian Chuck Thompson argues that “no one has any idea what status and prestige are anymore.” Thompson concludes that money can’t buy happiness, and increasingly, it doesn’t even buy status. Likewise, Vox has recently declared that shared trends – long the foundation of status displays – are dead

Status hierarchies can’t survive the seismic social upheavals we’ve endured over the last decade. Agreement is no more: It’s been well-documented that society is breaking, that we’ve splintered into mutually hostile reality tunnels, that we’re fully post-truth, that it’s nothing but tribal factionalization

These conclusions dovetail with recent research from my colleagues at Concept Bureau. CEO Jasmine Bina published a fascinating piece exploring the rise of High Fidelity Society, in which our stable, governing social conventions and identity-binaries have given way to a much more fine-grained multiplicity of social existences. Strategist Rebecca Johnson has argued that brands can no longer aspire towards mass relevance and broad appeal and instead need to focus on cultivating niche relatability to individual personalities. 

Yet there is widespread cultural agreement that the long-term prospects of most individuals are diminishing. So, how do we cope? Create Tomorrow, a think tank of futurists, recently released their 2024 Future Consumer Report and one of their key predictions is the continued rise of what they’re calling “Tragic Optimism.” 

The tragically-optimistic mindset is characterized by a more realistic framing of life that is closely connected with coping. We’re now wide-eyed and fully aware that the majority of us are moving into the future with more limited horizons and lessened prospects. 

The cultural ubiquity of tragic optimism is the main reason why 91% of consumers want more humor, playfulness and absurdity from brands these days. Humor and irony speak to the lack of agency that many in society are feeling – if you can’t beat them, you can at least mock them.

Eve Lee, Founder of The Digital Fairy, LinkedIn 2/17/2023

Commitment, on the other hand, is wholeheartedly post-nihilist and post-ironic. It’s deeply earnest and sincere – it’s dead serious – and it requires the foil of tragic optimism to stand out as something different and rare, something capable of conferring status.

Conspicuous Commitment is The Fourth Turning of Status

The post-war golden age of American capitalism ushered in the American dream. For decades, your worth was defined by what you had, and there was a clear hierarchy. The era of consumption-based status peaked in the early 2000’s, epitomized by MTV’s Cribs, which, incidentally, has just been rebooted. Already, cultural commentators are panning it, saying it won’t work because “wealth porn isn’t appealing anymore.” 

Overt displays of wealth began to fade from fashion with the financial collapse of 2007. Millennials graduated into one of the worst job markets of all time and had their lifetime economic prospects dashed. Naturally, they began to assert a new value system that eschewed material wealth in favor of deeper meaning – or at least the appearance of it. Experiences in the service of better stories became the status currency as the YOLO economy took root and Instagram became, for a time, the mainvein of culture. 

The dominance of experiences came to an end when society started to fully come apart in 2016. Even the carefree pursuit of experiences became contentious. Suddenly, your version of status wasn’t mine; it was what you believed about our breaking society that mattered. Beliefs about economic equality, inclusivity, climate change, the reality of white privilege, anti-capitalism, masks, non-monogamy and drug legalization began to confer tribal status. Psychologist Rob Henderson is the values era’s leading theorist with his concept of luxury beliefs

In response to these developments, socially-conscious, values-based branding became the go-to tactic, even to the point of parody. In response to Unilever’s recent announcement that all 400 of its brands will soon be getting mission statements, The Wall Street Journal asked, somewhat rhetorically, “Does Your Mayo Need a Mission Statement?” Unilever’s move illustrates how commodified this mode of branding has become. Ultimately, this kind of branding ends up all sounding the same, squeezed as it is by the narrow limits of the universe of values. 

Most companies haven’t realized that we’re moving beyond such prosocial cultural stances. 

Varieties of Conspicuous Commitment 

What all emerging forms of conspicuous commitment share is a consecration of the self. Conspicuous commitment puts self-discipline into evidence for all to see, and it transcends the irony, nihilism and tragic optimism our culture is mired in. We now gain status precisely from the internal world building we do. The stories we create about who we are, and most importantly, who we’re becoming, are the fundamental status currency today. 

Variety One: Asceticism

Above all, today’s status displays are characterized by self-discipline and non-religious religiosity, by deep, non-ironic commitment to a personal project of the self. 

They often look like pain. 75 hard is a great example. 75 hard is a “transformative mental toughness” program. Discipline is its product. 75 hard asks you to work out everyday, eat well, drink lots of water and forgo alcohol. Boastfully, the program announces that 95% of people who try 75 hard will fail. The hashtag #75hardchallenge has been viewed almost 1 billion times and #75hard has over 1.5 billion views on Tiktok. 

The program’s founder, Anthony Frisella, asserts that “it takes confidence. It takes grit.

It takes belief in yourself. It takes fortitude. It takes endurance. It takes perseverance. It takes a willingness to win. These are NOT traits you are born with… “

@madisonjan, TikTok 6/7/2021

This TikTok is a representative example. All the ingredients are there: “Shutting out” the world and going into the self to work on one’s mental landscape and body. Discipline, it turns out, is the missing piece of the interior jigsaw for many people in today’s culture. 

Similarly, Wim Hof, founder of the Wim Hof Method, simplifies existence down to breathing and exposure to cold. In this system, there’s nothing that cold shock therapy and breathing can’t fix, and if someone commits to being a person in the Wim Hof way, they’re rewarded with “maximum energy, restful sleep, an uncluttered headspace, and a host of other benefits. It is a gym membership, mindfulness coach, and health insurance all rolled into one.” 

Asceticism can also look like tidying up. Social media is increasingly filled with cleaning resets where people explain how they clean and reorganize their spaces; morning and evening “5-9” routines where people explain how they structure their daily routines; cabinet and pantry organization where people explain their systems for simplifying the chaos of daily life. 

What all these trends express is the status derived from ordering thyself. The right amount of challenge allows us to feel like we’re becoming stronger, more disciplined, hardened and resilient people. 

Variety Two: Immortality

A new techno-utopian longevity movement is forming that knits together biohacking and artificial intelligence. The movement’s most prominent evangelist is tech CEO Bryan Johnson, who is on a public quest to reverse the aging process and become the same biological age as his son. 

Johnson is spending 2 million dollars a year and enlisted a team of 30 doctors to break the spell of aging. In his new venture, Blueprint, he aims to generate “aging escape velocity.” 

Bryan Johnson and son, Instagram 1/30/2023

Here is Johnson’s philosophy in his own words: 

“The enemy is Entropy. The path is Goal Alignment via building your Autonomous Self; enabling compounded rates of progress to bravely explore the Zeroth Principle Future and play infinite games. This time, our time, right now – the early 21st century – will be defined by the radical evolution of intelligence: human, AI and biology. Our opportunity is to be this exciting future… You want as-perfect-as possible health? Get out of the way and let a system comprised of your body + science do the work. That’s counter intuitive. We are accustomed to thinking our minds are the solution; not the problem.”

His language, particularly in the selection I emphasized in bold, betrays earnest intent that is not hyperbolic. “Playing infinite games” speaks directly to the goal of immortality, and building “your autonomous self” via “goal alignment” shows a master command of the new language of conspicuous commitment.

The money is paying off. According to Johnson, he’s experienced: “5.1 yrs epigenetic age reversal; Reduced my pace of aging by the equivalent 31 years in 18 months; Now aging more slowly than the average 10 yr old.” 

Johnson may be the most salient example of technologically-enabled biohacking at the moment, but he’s far from alone. The uber-wealthy questing towards immortality are merely the font of a much broader reservoir of people asserting agency and taking control of their bodies and minds. General understanding of longevity science and health are now mainstream, and laypeople are developing their own bespoke wellness stacks, trying to live for as long as they can. 

Immortality is the undercurrent beneath many of the most hopeful AI future narratives popular among the likes of Johnson. A recent scan of headlines reveals a surge in articles about how AI is bringing humanity to the doorstep of immortality. 

Prominent futurist and computer scientist Ray Kurzweil predicts we will effectively achieve immortality by 2030. Intelligence advances and nanotechnology are both vital for mapping our neural connectomes for digital life.

Much is uncertain here, but what is clear is that these technological advances will not be evenly distributed. When our lives’ length’s begin to diverge, longevity becomes the ultimate luxury good.  

Variety Three: Psychedelic Spirituality  

Going back decades, the frontier of scientific and spiritual exploration has been aimed outward at the horizon of the stars. Cultural storytelling and media narratives focused on colonizing the universe, a species in continual galactic expansion. 

Yet the reality of exploration as it’s actually occurring tells a different story, one of inwardness. Author and science journalist Michael Pollan, in his 2019 book How to Change Your Mind, asserts that “psychedelics will be for the study of the mind what the microscope was for biology.” 

Psychedelics are the perfect technology for the inward gaze at the heart of conspicuous commitment. The internal mining is now at full-throttle. We admire those who push their minds to the limits, diving deep inside to see what’s unearthed.

@therealbrom from Empath Ventures, Twitter 3/27/2023

Ketamine therapy is now readily available in the mail, no special permissions required. Psilocybin (mushroom) therapy is available in a handful of blue states, and red states are now joining them in a push for general decriminalization outside of therapeutic contexts. And the U.S. Food and Drug Administration is moving toward legalizing MDMA for the treatment of post-traumatic stress disorder. 

Soap brand Dr. Bronner’s recently made access to psychedelic-assisted psychotherapy a keystone wellness benefit available to all of its employees. Many other companies are sure to follow in their footsteps as we move into the future. 

Yet psychedelics are not only in vogue as medicalized mental health treatment, they exist as a broader cultural force. As we shun traditional, mass religions, it’s never been more fashionable to be a spiritual seeker, creating meaning ad hoc and personally. The presence of these personally-defined meaning systems confers status in our new paradigm. 

Conspicuous Commitment is Evidence of Culture in Transition 

At first blush, it seems easy to regard conspicuous commitment cynically as a detached preoccupation of the elite, but that would be a mistake. Though individuals may remain mired in nihilism, cultures never do. The breakdown of our guiding social structures in rapid succession was never going to occur without a fallout, and our culture has begun the process of awakening from the meaning crisis

@elizabeth.april reposting @wordsarevibrations, Instagram 4/14/2023

If the first step toward any kind of collective renewal is each of us putting our own oxygen mask on first, then so be it. Any therapist working will tell you self-work is an essential precondition. When we do begin to lay the foundations of our new social infrastructure, we can expect to re-engage each other on stronger, more honest ground. 

The emergence of conspicuous commitment is the first stirring of a life beyond the consoling seductions of nihilism, the dopamine hacking of consumer excess and the comedic jestering of ironic detachment. 

Conspicuous commitment gives the broader culture new ways to feel agency and to find genuine meaning in their lives. For the first time in a long time, it feels like something real, like the green shoots of an honest hope. 

What we need most are new models of what a generative, blossoming life looks like. If 75 hard, biohacking, or psychedelics aren’t for you, rest assured there will soon be many other models for living a committed, meaningful life. 

We should expect a profusion of different ways to commit, and brands will likely start distinguishing themselves – counterintuitively – by the challenges they present. When ease is everywhere, “difficult, but worth it” is not. Commitment is particularly suitable for finance, wellness, food, athletics, arts, and hobby pursuits, but there’s really no category where it can’t show up. 

What’s abundantly clear – dare I say hopeful – is that we’re a culture in transition, hellbent on repopulating our worlds with the meaning systems of a more disciplined existence. 

Categories
Brand Strategy Culture Featured

High Fidelity Society Is Reorganizing The World

We used to pass culture through objects. There was a time for many of us when a vinyl record, a luxury handbag or a Lisa Frank folder were relics that signaled “I am one of you.” They had singular meanings that everyone agreed upon, and appreciation of the object itself was at the center of the culture. 

But today, there is perhaps no more effective way to signal “I am one of you” than with a carefully selected meme or perfectly ungrammatical text. A specific mashup, a certain combination of emoji or a self-referential aesthetic can convey multitudes more about a culture now than any physical item ever could.

When we stopped passing culture through objects and started passing culture through digital artifacts, we moved from low fidelity society to high fidelity society

My cofounder, Jean-Louis Rawlence, coined the term high fidelity society to frame the moment our cultural signals shifted from wide knowledge to deep nuance. 

The low fidelity society of just a few decades ago thrived on singularities and binaries. Households had split roles, careers had predetermined trajectories, perceptions of gender ran within clear lanes, lifestyles spread across a simple set of socioeconomic classes, political parties were mirrored images of one another and economics followed the rules of supply and demand.

The spheres of possibility were narrow. We shared the same core values because we all watched the same TV, read the same papers and subscribed to the same institutions. 

Less information was the hallmark of a low fidelity society and what made it work. When a world is that small, it can only support a simple set of social rules. If a subculture didn’t fit our neat binaries and categories, it was omitted from the canon or filed down to fit into broader societal trends. It makes sense, then, that our cultural objects took little context to be understood. 

But high fidelity society shifted things. Suddenly, with our worlds online and with the ability to capture and codify so much more information, culture ballooned and our digital objects became massively heavy with meaning.

As the sheer volume of culture in our digital worlds inflates every day, the centerpoint of history only gets closer. This phenomenon has rendered trends meaningless as markers of time and place and similarly snapped our connection to what might be called the highest tier of cultural objects: historical art. 

 

@dtstrends

We’ve officially cycled through every single decade… whats next? 🔎 Nostalgia has been one of the strongest driving forces for a long time, but now that we are already cycled through Y2K into the early 2010s, we are starting to wonder… what’s comes after nostalgia? Out newsletter dropping on Monday will deep dive into this and give you free stock photos + strategic tips to stay ahead of the curve 🌊 #culturetrend #nostalgia #nowstalgia

♬ original sound – DTS

“Nowstalgia” and the loss of time and place.

 

Younger collectors are proving to have no regard for the masters or the canon because, as professor Giana M. Eckhardt notes, “If you look back at human development, there were tens of thousands of years in which things didn’t change that much. Humans have not developed enough to be able to react to social change that is this quick. This leads to people putting a value on the new in different ways from the past.” 

But I would take this insight a step further. What we’re really seeing is the weakness of physical objects as vessels of culture in our expanding high fidelity society.  

When a culture changes its medium, the medium changes the culture. Keep in mind that high fidelity society is not merely about more choice. It is about exactness. Our new medium of passing along culture has allowed for an incredible new fidelity to be had in every way we choose to engage with the world. When we engage in new ways, we create new realities. 

Nearly every singularity and binary – gender, family, identity, and so on – has crumbled. Lifestyles and socioeconomic tiers have at once exploded and collapsed into each other. Social rules have become complex (and if you don’t think so, you’re probably breaking them). Career paths are unrecognizable from where they were a decade ago, and a meme page like Litquidity can spin out into a VC, which it did. 

If you’ve ever laughed at a “starter pack” meme, you’ve felt the gulf between low fidelity society and high fidelity society. 

 

high earner, not rich yet finance guy in Montauk starter pack meme showing high fidelity society

 

A Litquidity meme can nod to various cultural touchstones in one simple image. It might make a reference to HENRY culture, self-skewer bruised egos and the need for status regardless of the cost in money or self-respect and embrace the cognitive dissonance of new wealth at a time when the markets have failed to act the way they should, while still reveling in the basic bitchness of it all. 

But most importantly, if you understand all of these layers together, you also feel the giddy, feverish camaraderie of those who practice the “farce of high finance”. And even if you don’t understand this meme, you still recognize that there is tremendous information density within it.

The physical objects of low fidelity society worked to homogenize our culture, but the digital artifacts of high fidelity society fragment culture into many pieces. And it is within those fragments that we can begin to see the future of business and branding. 

Dating app Feeld operates in high fidelity society. They are part of a cohort of early brands that feel the pressure for a new digital infrastructure to house our high fidelity needs, and my team and I were fortunate enough to work with them to develop their brand strategy.

Feeld has created a platform for dating in all of the ways that low fidelity society could not hold. Polyamory, consensual non-monogamy, homo- and heteroflexibility, pansexuality, androgyny, aromanticism, voyeurism and kink are just a few of the sexual identities that high fidelity society not only holds, but makes increasingly visible. Much like the Sapir–Whorf Hypothesis of language, the more ways we have of expressing ourselves, the more we will express ourselves in different ways.

All of these identities demand new forms of connection, and Feeld is creating a unique infrastructure that allows connections to evolve instead of conform. Every feature, whether it’s the typical swipe or the novel “desire” tag, is tested with the question, “Are we letting people create new forms of closeness and intimacy here, or are we forcing people to follow old models?”

One of the clearest insights in our research for Feeld was that people in the dating pool have begun to move away from a destiny mindset of marriage, the American dream or other low fidelity aspirations to a distinctly growth mindset. 

Daters today expect relationships to help them grow as individuals, and for many, there is no end state or goal. Instead, dating is a continuous form of growth and opportunity to discover  who they are. This user sentiment stands in stark contrast to the dating apps designed for low fidelity society that boasted of being “designed to be deleted”.

Most importantly, Feeld is not the fringes of culture. In our research, we found that heteronormative users, as well as people who had not yet experienced the platform, expressed the same desire for vivid connection, aliveness and a growth mindset. They simply had not found their avenues yet. Feeld is, in fact, all of us. 

In a sea of dating apps racing to flatten the human experience, Feeld has opened a portal to something much larger. Dating in high fidelity society is multiplicative. It has become recursive, and that requires a very different kind of platform.

 

feeld dating app

 

As New York Times reporter Gina Cherelus has astutely said, “To describe yourself as single and in search of a relationship is almost too simple of a label in 2023. The way we seek romantic connections, especially with the influence of social media and dating apps, has naturally altered our behaviors and language around dating.”

Feeld’s world of dating, sexuality and relationships embraces this ever-increasing complexity, in part by utilizing the layered meaning that characterizes high fidelity society. 

In high fidelity society, a wellness influencer can at once signal their health practices and political leanings with leetspeak like “medical indu$try”. An aesthetic like corecore can at once signal a certain subculture’s age, nationality, disillusionment with technology and the larger context of absurdist content that gives people room to criticize something while also sheepishly embracing it. Feeld respects the fact that its users are already immersed in a highly contextual world.

 

@flicksaga

Yea #nichetok #corecore

♬ The Sound of Myself – Disasterpeace

corecore TikTok by flicksaga

 

Not many brands operate in high fidelity like Feeld does, but more and more are making the jump, and we’ve had the privilege of working with some of them at Concept Bureau.

Companies that are building for high fidelity understand that they are no longer building for the average or the standard. They are building platforms and communities that allow for a fragmenting of experience, giving users room to create net-new realities. 

They know that as peoples’ communities and identities become more specific, our many different cultures will only become more narrow and deep. The mechanics of this new culture, then, naturally incentivize the compounding of meaning and with the proliferation of content creation tools (dare I say A.I.), the density of culture will only increase.

In our work, we have seen a growing appetite for high fidelity infrastructure in every single category. Whether it’s work, finance, health, luxury, education, parenting or anything else, people are already living high fidelity lives but are forced to express them on low fidelity platforms

When we see that tension, we know there is latent demand for new infrastructure. This is a once-in-a-generation opportunity for brands to leapfrog a market full of low fidelity players by ushering people into a high fidelity experience. 

But codifying high fidelity society is a difficult task for any founder. There is no precedent to fall back on, and as the world reorganizes itself, we have to be careful to not use old rulers for measuring new ideas. 

There are two major paradigm shifts that can guide you in the right direction and have proven to be fundamental in moving our clients over the line from low fidelity society into high fidelity society. 

They require a significant change in how we understand networks, but even more importantly, they begin to show us just how big of an opportunity lies ahead.

Shift #1: From Goalposts to Participation

Low fidelity society is organized around goalposts. Getting a college degree, house, promotion, marriage, kids and retirement are the obvious ones. But there are other goalposts everywhere around us, like being a LinkedIn super connector, being verified on Instagram, making the Forbes 30 under 30, backpacking through Europe, starting your first business or “finding yourself”.

You have or don’t have. You reach the goalposts or you don’t. Up until this point, we’ve been able to measure value in binaries because low fidelity society gave us clear definitions of what mattered.

But high fidelity society resists such clear definitions. What matters to one fragment of culture will not matter to another. What matters to hopepunks vs. nihilists, keto warriors vs. vegans, tiny homers vs. van lifers or anti-natalists vs. mommy tribes will all be different. 

The desire to experience progress in one’s life never goes away, but how we measure that progress has become much more nuanced. 

In high fidelity society, goalposts are replaced by participation. In a culture where there is no singular end goal, progress becomes invisible and our value is instead measured by how deeply we engage. 

We realized that Feeld users across the board were not looking to reach the next goalpost. Their growth mindset resisted everything you might see in a traditional dating environment. Instead, Feeld users, and people in high fidelity society in general, pay attention to participation signals. 

It is not how much you have accomplished, but instead how much you have engaged and evolved. Over and over again, people described coming to Feeld in order to feel vividly connected to their minds, bodies and relationships, and they looked to learn from others who had done the same. They sought to participate rather than reach an arbitrary relationship goalpost, because participation proves a genuine interest in growth. 

Goalposts run out at some point. Business author Donald Miller has noted that after marriage and kids, life stops giving us scripts for how to matter in the world. Perhaps that’s why midlifers 50 years and older are Feeld’s fastest growing demographic on the app. Even up until then, you can likely sense that the goalposts of low fidelity society are becoming increasingly meaningless.

Polywork, a network for multi-hyphenate professionals, is another early example of a brand experimenting with new ways of measuring participation while de-emphasizing the traditional goalposts of their space. They’ve rethought what work and collaboration really mean in high fidelity society, and have built a creative model for revaluing participation between users. They understand that value systems are changing.  

It’s vitally important to note, however, that participation needs to be a currency between people. Platforms have historically made participation a currency between the user and the brand, but that’s meaningless in high fidelity society. We’re exchanging weak ties for strong ties, and deep networks for wide networks (something I have talked about here and here). 

Making participation between people something that is valued, measured and highly visible within the platform experience – without the expectation of reaching a goalpost – creates wholly new opportunities for high fidelity brands.

Shift #2: New Ways of Knowing

In high fidelity society, there is more than one way of knowing. 

For the past year, my Concept Bureau colleague, Senior Strategist Zach Lamb, has been exploring the new ways of knowing that have emerged in religion, politics and lifestyle. According to Zach, we’ve bypassed the models and institutions that used to mediate higher knowledge for something more immediate and direct. 

Knowing in high fidelity society is now firsthand. Self-directed ketamine startups aim to replace the therapist’s office. Mystical Instagram accounts have replaced church. TikTok has replaced school. 

Call it spirituality, intuition or being tapped in – whether it’s knowing god, knowing the truth or knowing oneself, the very business of knowing has become a highly personal and emotionally-driven endeavor. We are exploring new, unfettered ways of knowing everywhere around us. And all of these new ways of knowing help us create new stories about who we are in the world.

 

 

As culture multiplies and fragments, new ways of knowing will also be the hallmark of brands in high fidelity society. In such a dimensional era of culture, we can no longer determine what we need to know by glancing at a list of LinkedIn recommendations, a work history or a bulleted resume. Nor can we glean what matters from a Tinder blurb, an Instagram profile pic, a list of interests, a badge, a milestone number, a label or a bio. 

These rough, often misleading approximations of who people are have never fully worked, even in low fidelity society. And they will stop working entirely as culture becomes more exact. 

If we are building for the fragmenting of experience and creating room for nuance and specificity – for people to connect deeper instead of networking wider – then our platforms need to create new ways of knowing that go far beyond anything we see today, because every low fidelity signal will fail in the high fidelity world.

Feeld has the same challenge. Creating new ways of knowing another person (or oneself, a relationship, a couple and so on) will be fundamental to their success. They, like every other high fidelity brand, will need to reconsider how people both express themselves and understand  each other, oftentimes rethinking the very mediums through which people can connect.  

For us as brand strategists, it also meant engineering a brand experience that leaned into the feelings and emotions of truly knowing oneself and others. 

Every great brand sets the expectation of the experience before people cross the threshold of conversion. High fidelity companies need to be especially careful in setting the expectation of new ways of knowing, whatever that might be for a specific brand, because we can’t expect people to behave in high fidelity ways if we do not first make them leave their low fidelity biases at the door.  

Your brand is the first stop in shaking people out of their old habits. Every current way of knowing – from bulleted stats to blurbs to recommendations to bios to photo carousels – needs to be rethought. None of these help us feel a person, and absolutely none of them are a strong foundation for greater participation between people. 

Brands like Fieldtrip, How We Feel and allUP (a Concept Bureau client launching soon) have built innovative formats for new ways of knowing that historically weren’t available to their users. Each of them makes personal or interpersonal understanding the bedrock of their UX.

The new ways of knowing that will matter are those that help us weave a story about who we are in the world and how others’ stories intersect with our own. That is where high fidelity flourishes. 

The Universal Reorg

I’ve found high fidelity/ low fidelity to be a great tool for both organizing the players in a landscape and understanding where behaviors are headed. 

Brands that play in high fidelity society create a natural tension with low fidelity players. In branding, tension is a great tool for forcing a decision. Our new digital infrastructures will not just be incremental improvements. They will be invitations to either stand still or step into a new reality. 

But more interestingly, as a strategist I have seen just how eager people are to start living in high fidelity society everywhere, although they may not have the words to articulate it. In a particularly moving interview, a Feeld user said that in high fidelity, “You feel like you are able and allowed to glow in every part of your life […] I feel like I can breathe”. 

If I took that quote out of the dating space and put it in another space like work or finance or education or social media or fashion or beauty or wellness or anything else, it would still ring true. If you do good user research in your industry, you will eventually uncover this sentiment across your entire population, as well. The desire to live in high fidelity is universal across people and categories

It is not technology that begets culture, it is culture that begets technology, and in every generation there is usually one major cultural shift that reorganizes all of the technology ahead of us. High fidelity society is an incredible opportunity to position your brand as a force for moving forward. 

Categories
Brand Strategy Featured Futurism

There Is No Brand Strategy Without A Prediction

At the heart of every culturally impactful brand is a wager on what the next 5, 10 or 15 years will look like. Impactful brands make it their job to inch toward that vision in every single action they take.

Parsley Health is about functional medicine but if you experience the brand in any meaningful way, whether its logging into their patient portal, walking into a clinic, or following CEO Robin Berzin on social, you will see that they are betting on a very different kind of medical mentality emerging in the coming years among consumers.

Parsley believes patients will become the new experts: proficient in their own health and wellness, talking from an empowered point of view with their medical providers, and open to exploring complementary therapies that combine mind, body and soul.

Nearly all expressions of the Parsley brand are geared toward making this future a reality. Even though Parsley has great tech that makes the medical experience remarkably different from the usual visit to the doctor’s office, they rest their brand strategy on the changing user instead of their platform.

What Parsley gets right and so many others get wrong is that ideas, not technology, are what impact the future the most.

It was the romanticized notion of the nuclear family, not the mass production of cars, that changed America’s suburban topography. It is the changing notion of career and success, not the advent of laptops or post-Covid remote work, that will alter the world of work forever.

Oftentimes, future-forward brands tend to make technology the center of their strategies rather than a larger idea, but as Tom Vanderbilt puts it, “When technology changes people, it is often not in the ways one might expect.”

The washing machine had the potential to liberate housewives from the home, but instead it freed them up to do the work their housemaids once did. Though the technology changed, the idea behind a woman’s role had not.

Predicting the future is fundamental to your brand strategy but not as easy as it may seem. The correct signals often get lost in the noise of invention.

Taking a look at films from the 1960s that predicted the future, it becomes apparent just how easy technologies are to predict, but changes in behaviors and beliefs are much harder to forecast, even though they are the major drivers of a culture’s evolution.

“The Home of 1999”, a film from 1967 made by appliance manufacturer Philco-Ford predicted where technology would sit in our lives with surprising accuracy, but made glaring omissions in how culture would evolve.

The 1960s futurists behind this video predicted online shopping, but not female financial independence. They predicted emails, but not remote work. They predicted microwaves and other kitchen technology, but did not predict that fewer and fewer people would be eating around a dinner table together.

If this video feels strangely empty to you, it’s because while technology is an important part of the future, it simply is not the future itself.

Ideas, not technology or invention, are what change the future most, and that is what you should be betting on. Parsley has great tech, but it is the shifting cultural convention that will change their future, and every day they are speeding that change along.

The future isn’t new technology. The future is changed people. Your brand should be placing its bets on who we will become. 

Starbucks built a brand on the prediction of a changing culture that was lacking places to gather, and the creation of the third space to fill that future need.

So when Starbucks announces that they are piloting EV charging stations in their parking lots, it naturally makes one wonder if they’re still betting on that future.

Fast Company, October 26, 2022

On the surface, it seems that perhaps they are pivoting their bet to the technology. Starbucks wants to attract more road warriors, they know that more of those people will have EVs, and so they’re creating a convenient place for them to stop while they charge.

True, yes. But what may be more true is that our third space is changing.

A great deal of Starbucks’ square footage is used for work, and in the era of remote workers, even more laptops and bookbags have popped up in locations across the globe.

Starbucks isn’t betting on EVs. They’re betting on our changing relationship to the commute and work. What they see is EVs eventually becoming autonomous self-driving vehicles, and that presents a huge opportunity for behavior change: the car as the third space, where people who are no longer required to have eyes on the road can instead work on their way to their destination.

Work has already become decoupled from the office and the desk. There is a changing mentality that “work time” and “living time” are not two separate halves of the day, but rather many fragmented windows that splice in between each other. When the belief about when and where we work changes, so does Starbucks’ place in the world.

It’s not a given, but like any good brand, Starbucks is making a prediction and then working to make that prediction a reality.

When a brand has a prediction at the center of its strategy, it sends a signal to the market that the company not only intends to own that future, but that any other brand playing outside of that future will be sidelined.

Last year Kia Motors rebranded to drop the “Motors” from their name and simply become Kia with the tagline “Movement that inspires.” Like General Motors and Mastercard who also released newly minimalist logos around that time, they were working to distance themselves from their original technologies.

With all of these companies, the future prediction at the center of the brand was moving from the technology to a larger idea. Kia President and CEO Ho Sung Song made it clear that, “It’s no longer about machines, it’s about people.”

Moving from motors to movement implies a strong belief of the future for Kia – that it’s not going to be about making a better engine, but rather about changing our beliefs and behaviors around how we move in this world.

The greatest benefit of a brand strategy based on a prediction is that it naturally spells out the business strategy. The expert patient, the third space, the future of movement – all of these predictions lay out strong parameters for the business itself.

They dictate business model, product roadmap, UX, values, org chart and so on, in ways that technologies alone cannot. And when brand strategy begets business strategy, there is a beautiful symmetry that only makes both parts stronger.

Making the right kind of forecast means thinking deeply about where people are headed and what emerging beliefs, behaviors, mentalities, value systems, ideals and cultural ideas can be brought to the surface with the right conditions.

Technology creates new opportunities and branches in the human path, but it is only larger ideas and mindsets that dictate which path is ultimately taken.

The focus of your prediction matters because the brands that predict the future are the brands that make the future. Everybody else is simply following the path laid out by others.

Categories
Brand Strategy Featured Marketing

Brand Singularity Will Define The Next 5 Years

Brand strategy, at its core, is about predicting the future and then making that future a reality.

The outsized benefits of brand live 3, 5, sometimes even 10 years ahead. Brands that pull that future into the present day change users’ consideration sets and bend the will of the market toward their doorstep.

Strategists are futurists. There is no strategy without a prediction.

If you get those predictions right, you will get a brand strategy that amplifies the business strategy rather than trailing it.

There is one future signal that has an immediate impact on branding for nearly every company in the next few years and it can be found in a simple, unassuming chart about C-level job postings that was published in HBR this month.

The C-Suite Skills That Matter Most, Harvard Business Review August 2022

In the study, researchers found a rapidly growing appetite for CEOs with strong social skills coupled with an equally declining appetite for operational expertise. In other words, companies want leaders who know how to leverage and navigate culture more than they want leaders who know how to direct financial resources and technical expertise  —  and the inverse relationship between these two needs has only gotten more dramatic in the last 7 years.

It makes sense that as companies have become more complex they need leadership with higher levels of interpersonal fluency, but something else is happening behind the executive curtain.

The trifecta of consumer brand, the CEO’s personal brand and the company’s employer brand are all becoming the same thing.

Company boards are increasingly searching for ‘blue unicorns’  —  leaders with powerful social presence who, as Peter Aceto, former CEO of Tangerine once said, “would rather engage in a Twitter conversation with a single customer than see our company attempt to attract the attention of millions in a coveted Superbowl commercial.”

Blue unicorn CEOs are no longer figureheads for the company brand, but rather direct expressions of the brand itself.

Our perceptions of what makes a great leader have changed significantly in the last decade, due in part to lockdowns, unprecedented scandals of all kinds, and never-before-seen market dynamics. Today, we expect leaders to be highly self-aware, open and at times even vulnerable.

In fact, there is growing evidence that the number one predictor of someone’s success in today’s business climate isn’t IQ (intelligence quotient) or EQ (emotional quotient), but something called CQ: the quotient that measures “the capability to function effectively in a variety of cultural contexts.”

CEOs must first and foremost be stewards and navigators of culture. But there is perhaps an even larger brand benefit here.

Celebrity CEOs like Jay-Z, Martha Stewart, Steve Jobs, Elon Musk and Adam Neuman have created brands that make them impervious to angry boards and poor P&Ls, but also trained the public to demand a certain kind of enigma from its corporate leaders.

Enigma, charisma, whatever it is, we now expect a certain awe-inspiring magnetism from our CEOs, and this is increasingly the yardstick for measuring good leadership, instead of more historically important markers like strategic thinking and industry expertise.

Meanwhile, the public’s growing appetite for business news over the past few years has incented media to not only cover more business, but reduce its happenings into easy-to-follow storylines, which are bedazzled with drama, gossip and mystery.

The CEO has become a cultural bellwether.

And you can’t talk about culture without talking about the third piece of the branding trifecta: employer branding. Knowing how to build, navigate and bridge cultures is the biggest thing we see in employer branding today.

There is the obvious benefit of attracting high-level talent, but as my colleague Zach Lamb has pointed out, markets and consumers are paying attention to employer branding practices and cultures.

In our own research at Concept Bureau we’ve seen that in B2B sales a surprising number of clients will first vet a services partner by their Glassdoor reviews, believing that if that partner doesn’t treat their employees well they won’t treat their customers well, either.

As work memes take over our feeds and what happens inside a company continues to make the news, companies can’t afford to have an employer brand that is not completely synonymous with their overall brand.

In the near future we’ll be seeing Brand Singularity, where personal brand is company brand is employer brand, and the product is the story that emerges in the overlap of all three of these things.

Today’s typical brand addresses the trifecta with three different answers. Netflix’s consumer brand is closely tied to their content. CEO Reed Hasting’s personal brand is visionary at times, while lacking in more recent times. And their employer brand vacillates between ruthless and confused.

On the other hand, we have Hello Sunshine, Reese Witherspoon’s female-focused media company that has produced hits like Big Little Lies and Little Fires Everywhere in the eight years since it launched. They have not reached brand singularity yet, but already they are making inroads toward it and seeing the benefit.

Their content portfolio is thin, but there is a singular, synonymous brand between Witherspoon’s persona and the consumer brand. She is Hello Sunshine, and Hello Sunshine is her. It’s an overlap that is so powerful that Witherspoon just sold the company for over $900M.

Hello Sunshine is no Netflix when it comes to market cap, but $900M for a fledgling studio in a contracting market is by all measures outsized when compared to the giants in the room.

In the next 5 years, we will see companies reaching Brand Singularity and reaping the early rewards of market share, fandom and talent retention. They will be the companies that have done the hard work of creating a unified brand front  —  not synchronicity like we have seen with branding in the past, but instead synonymity.

Right now we see only parts of the equation being written. Many companies master personal brand + consumer brand, such as Hello Sunshine, but also the ventures of the Kardashian-Jenner clan and MrBeast. Even with only half of the Brand Singularity equation figured out, these names are making big profits.

As David Friedberg recently said, the influence of these brands is outsized and defensible. They prove that when the CEO is a direct expression of the brand and vice versa, their value takes on exponential proportions.

E95: Winter is Coming, Europe’s energy crisis, Kim Kardashian’s new PE firm & more

 

On the other side of the equation we see inroads being made with the overlap between employer brand and consumer brand.

Amazon may not be one of the most positive employer brands in their warehouses, but it is one of the most effective employer brands in the executive realm. If you pay attention to all of the messages in their press, good and bad, you will get a clear message about their operational excellence.

It’s no accident that stories about the empty chair in the meeting, the two pizza rule and three good decisions a day not only made their way into public consciousness, they served as signals of what the overall Amazon brand was about. Prospective talent, especially elite leaders, understand that even with rumored cutthroat practices, they would not be hindered by underperforming teams  —  a common concern among the many high quality leaders I have personally interviewed over the years, and a fact Amazon is banking on.

Amazon’s employer brand and internal culture is in reality a marketing vehicle for both attracting talent and buttressing the consumer brand. As Prime members, we read those stories with disdain, but somewhere in the back of our minds we know that’s likely why our packages miraculously arrive within 24 hours.

I recently wrote that the employer brands that consistently attract elite talent are the ones that lean on vision, not mission. Vision creates the kind of high-risk, high-reward messaging that great brands are built on. Many companies fall to their missions because they help keep the status quo internally, but it’s the vision that keeps a company’s workforce adaptable and responsible to the larger brand.

It’s been my experience that Brand Singularity, even if only partial, creates vast operational efficiencies.

Teams naturally move away from siloed practices that hold the company back as a whole. People in every single department find it easy to act as a brand owner in their own capacity (a CMO’s dream). Values, missions and visions stop being weaponized and start getting used properly. Positive internal cultures build faster and the circle around “who we are and what we do” becomes tighter.

Brand Singularity is just as much an operating principle as it is a branding one.

 


 

Having a single identity that captivates and motivates all audiences — customers, employees, prospective talent, board members and investors alike — is the inevitable outcome of a dynamic world where no one group is siloed and no one side of the business works in a vacuum.

Brand Singularity is incredibly hard to reach but will be a major competitive advantage for those that achieve it.

We’ll be seeing more and more brands moving toward this new state over the next 5 years, and it will require a conviction and dedication to brand that we perhaps haven’t seen much of yet. But once it starts popping up across the landscape, it will be the defining factor between brands that attract value from the market and those that chase it.

Categories
Brand Strategy Featured Marketing

How To Brand A Community

If your product is a community, or your community is beginning to become the product, you are already living in the future of Strong Ties.

And in this future we need new rules for brand strategy.

Weak ties historically allowed us to extract value from the peripheries of our networks (think LinkedIn, Instagram and Twitter), while strong ties extract value from relationships at the center of our networks (think Patreon, Polywork, and the proliferation of like minded living communities).

This is a massive shift considering that weak ties have been the underpinning of social innovation for the last two decades, and are now declining while strong ties are starting to emerge as the dominant threads of our social fabric.

New social innovation means that any meaningful group will be forced to rearrange itself, whether it’s an online community, a movement, employee culture, subculture, club or cult following.

Strong tie communities tend to have the following characteristics:

  • They naturally incentivize going deeper with smaller circles of people, rather than going wider with larger circles of people.
  • They prioritize innovation in how people connect, not how many people they connect with.
  • They allow members to individualize themselves instead of forcing them to standardize themselves.
  • They give members true ownership, either through literal shares and coins, or by giving them the power to shape the group culture, norms and evolution.

When strong ties become the future of community, community becomes the new brand.

This is how to build that brand strategically.

1. If you break an old system, you must create a new one.

Occupy Wall Street, Anti-Vaxx and Anonymous were all communities based on opposing or tearing down old systems. None of them fulfilled their visions.

That’s because old systems leave vacuums in their absence. You cannot successfully remove an old system without replacing it with a new one.

This is why secular congregation communities like Sunday Assembly and Oasis that offered gatherings without god went nowhere, but fragmented spiritual groups like Nuns & Nones and spiritual leaders like Esther and Jerry Hicks or Gabby Bernstein that give safe haven and new systems of meaning to the post-religious, are thriving.

Sunday Assembly London, August 31, 2022

The first group broke an old system. The second group broke an old system and replaced it with a new one.

Many communities – from online groups to movements to even countries – exist in opposition to something else. Yet if the situation or the rhetoric changes, all value and credibility can be lost in an instant.

The once highly buzzed about r/antiwork community, whose tagline is “Unemployment for all, not just the rich”, works to tear down old systems but offers nothing new.

It’s no wonder that r/antiwork lost nearly all credibility when a short Fox News interview revealed just how directionless the community was in their vision for what would replace the current “work” system.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4IfzpgGwHkI

A mod from the subreddit r/antiwork on Fox News

 

As New York Times journalist Oliver Whang questions, “Hating your job is cool, but is it a labor movement?” It seems the answer is no, it is not.

Scholars increasingly point out that the problem with many community brands is that they demand “the destruction of existing institutions without offering an alternative vision of the future or an organization that could bring it about.”

The winners consistently create new systems to replace old ones.

2. Know why you gather.

If you don’t know the real reason why you gather, you will miss the few, brief opportunities that could take your brand to greatness.

In 2019, when kids’ drawings emerged from a detention facility in Texas where migrant children between the ages of 10 and 11 years old were being separated from their parents, the Smithsonian made the very interesting decision to try and acquire the artwork.

A drawing by a migrant child at the Catholic Charities Humanitarian Respite Center in McAllen, Texas
A drawing by a migrant child at the Catholic Charities Humanitarian Respite Center in McAllen, Texas. NPR, July 9th, 2019

The Smithsonian, whose collection spans Apollo 11 pieces, Dorothy’s ruby red slippers, and the Hope Diamond, is a treasure trove of easy-to-love Americana. But over the years the museum has realized that their people don’t gather to marvel at American history. They gather to witness the humanity of America.

When the migrant children’s drawings emerged, it made sense for the Smithsonian to identify it as a collection of art to gather around. Without really knowing why they gathered, the opportunity would have been lost.

Why you gather has huge implications for how your community’s brand is perceived. Knowing why you gather is the same as knowing how your brand creates value. 

It’s a crucial truth that many community brands fail to articulate, and even those that do often lose sight of it over time. Knowing why you gather keeps your brand centered.

It’s the only way to seize landscape opportunities that would have otherwise gone unnoticed.

The Smithsonian said something when they pursued the artwork of migrant children at the center of a political firestorm and America’s reckoning with its own sense of humanity. And the people that will hopefully one day gather around those drawings will not only know why they are there, but feel where we have been as a country.

3. Embrace optimism.

Or perhaps more accurately, resist pessimism.

As Nat Friedman has said, “Pessimists sound smart. Optimists make money.” This is true in community branding as well. Pessimistic communities may attract attention, but it’s the optimistic ones that grow and prosper. 

Most anti-capitalist groups go some distance on pessimism, but communities like FI/RE or Fat FI/RE run much further on optimism. The perceived merits of each community notwithstanding, it is clear that optimism mobilizes people toward a shared goal much faster.

Optimism is especially important when it comes to employer branding, both within the company culture and in attracting ideal talent.

In my own work and research I’ve seen that truly optimistic brands lean on their visions, not their missions, to rally people. That’s because the best talent moves to be inspired, and that only happens when you have a vivid vision of the future that only your community can create. Visions paint the future, and missions spell out the who-what-how of getting there.

In my interviews with high level talent for employer branding, we consistently see sought after talent be drawn to visions, not missions. This group of people wants to gather and grow around an optimistic ideal and know that in their short time to make a difference in the world (and just as importantly, in their careers) they will be aiming big enough to do something that matters.

Companies that lead with mission tend to focus more on making their audiences happy (missions usually speak to customers and can leave out employees entirely). Making a subgroup of people happy is not the same as changing the world.

Why are cults at an all time high around the world, especially in first world countries, despite education and socioeconomic background? Why do crypto, DAO and NFT communities refuse to die, despite countless news cycles calling the end of these movements?

Because there is a deep seated, stubborn optimism baked into the DNA of those communities and their brands that will not be destroyed.

Yes, even cults are driven by optimism, as cult expert Amanda Montell pointed out in my interview with her:

“The ultimate fatal flaw across all cult followers from folks who joined the Heaven’s Gate, the nineties suicide cult, to folks who strike up with multi-level marketing cults, in scare quotes, was yeah, not desperation, but optimism. This overabundance of idealism, that the solutions to their problems, whether that was racism or classism or for financial insecurity, could be found and if that they affiliated with this group, with this leader, they could be a part of that change. It takes someone really optimistic to sign up for a belief like that…

Optimism that was their Achilles heel more than any of the qualities that the cult documentaries you might watch would lead you to believe.”

Oftentimes that optimism is what carries a young community from near death to new life.

But take care that your optimism doesn’t border on emotional hijacking. Why did this Heineken commercial work so well, while all of those Dove Beauty ads eventually fell to criticism?

https://youtu.be/XpaOjMXyJGk

Heineken gave us a reason to be optimistic. Dove, and the body positivity community it inspired, however, “put the onus on people living in marginalized bodies to turn their criticism inward. This time, though, those people are told not to be ashamed of their physical selves, based on the premise that there was never anything wrong with them to begin with, as though the same companies that claim to be guiding this “movement” haven’t been selling insecurity for years”, according to journalist Amanda Mull.

Communities need optimism, not emotional hijacking. Don’t mine the trauma of your users for an emotional response, no matter how optimistic it may seem on the surface.

4. Surface your vibe.

Perhaps the most primal reason why people gather in communities is because of how it makes them feel, so it’s worth knowing what that feeling is and how you can surface it. Yes, we all want to feel like we ‘belong’ when it comes to community, but you have to go deeper if you want to create a memorable brand.

Vibes and feelings are user heuristics for what the community represents. In a complex world, vibes are an easy shorthand for knowing if a community makes sense or not.

Your vibe is the emotional read someone has on the brand. Lego has a nostalgic aesthetic. Nike has a distinct voice. Airbnb platforms belonging. All of these brands have communities but none of these qualities alone make a vibe.

A vibe makes someone sense something greater than what they see or read.

We’re Not Really Strangers angles everything toward its vibe. Its content, its products, its language, its aesthetic, its Instagram (and Finsta) create the feeling as if we are all waking up from a dream where we forgot how intertwined humanity is.

Quite literally, their content and brand touchpoints evoke feelings of sudden remembering, of recognizing someone you didn’t remember at first. It is a sweet returning to the human race. Yet what they sell is ice breaker card games and inspirational gear.

Vibes activate our System 1 thinking of intuition and knowing. You know a community and brand like We’re Not Really Strangers even before you understand it.

Vibes are tangential to brand relatability, a topic that my Concept Bureau colleague Rebecca Johnson has studied extensively:

“You have to find moments that tap into your audience’s subconscious. It’s about revealing something that exists at the edges of their identity […]

Relatable brands reflect their audiences’ identity in a way that goes beyond the product they’re selling. They reveal and validate hidden truths to which their audiences can connect and relate.”

Creating a vibe requires great intimacy and great vulnerability, two things which only make sense in the new era of strong ties.

5. Memorialize the good and the bad.

TITSOAK and lossporn are both memorials of the communities they come from.

If you are in either of these groups, you know that each term is a phrase of self-deprecation. TITSOAK is an absurd line that Twilight fans laugh at themselves for loving, and lossporn is the people of r/wallstreetbets memorializing the ridiculous losses and risks they endure in their larger quest to win over the system.

They demonstrate that it’s just as important to memorialize the bad stuff as it is to memorialize the good stuff. The good stuff is a great celebration of the community’s successes, but memorializing the bad stuff does something very different.

In relationship science, it’s been found that the way a couple remembers their fights and low points is a huge predictor of whether that relationship will succeed.

People who remember their arguments with anger or disdain tend to have poor outcomes, but couples who laugh about their disagreements and remember them as endearing and valuable moments of growth are far more likely to stay together. They effectively create a story around those moments. That story becomes part of their mythology.

This is no different in communities. Groups that can memorialize their failures with humor, gratitude and pride strengthen the bonds between their people. 

The failures, the goofs, the slip ups, the embarrassments and losses – they’re all valuable moments to continue building your group’s mythology.

At Concept Bureau, my team laughs at how insular our own thinking can be, and how the same topics keep coming up over and over again no matter where the conversation starts.

So naturally we created an annual bingo card to memorialize our folly. Some of the boxes like “Bonkers” and “Minnesota” reference real slip ups or all-out disagreements.

Concept Bureau’s 2022 Bingo Card

We now wear that bingo card on sweaters, tote bags and mugs with appreciation for the group.

6. Strong ties or nothing.

Most of these community examples come from organic communities, but what about brands specifically? How do they employ the same levers for building thriving, meaningful community among their people?

There’s one golden rule that can’t be violated: a community brand’s job is to create strong ties.

Organic communities on reddit or Discord naturally do this, but very, very few brands do.

After decades of culture built on weak ties, strong ties can feel risky. It’s hard to break away from the comfort of a one-to-many approach that is so common with weak ties, where a brand acts as the central voice in a brand community.

The experience is not dissimilar to a fandom gathering around a stage. Something that has immediate payoff and can easily be measured.

Strong ties, however, work very differently. A brand must continuously find ways to deepen relationships not between the brand and the people, but between and among the people themselves. 

Harley Davidson has been doing this for a long time through events, gatherings, activations and destinations that deepen and strengthen how every member connects with every other member.

The community has become the brand, and people (users and non-users alike) understand that what you are buying is much more than a bike, and much more than belonging. They are buying the promise of connection.

Other luxury carmakers work in much the same way. A Lamborghini executive once told me that what they sell is a community, and the car is simply the price of entry.

Harley Davidson and others like it work very hard to deepen the connection between each driver. Strong ties are what drive the community brand forward.

 


 

Some of these rules may feel more like business strategy than brand strategy, but a solid brand is the basis of any strong business. The two are becoming increasingly intertwined.

How far is the distance between business and brand for Tesla, Apple or Meta? What about Coinbase, ByteDance or Instacart? Squint your eyes and the business and brand begin to look the same. To separate them is a mistake.

And that is what I mean when I say community has become the new brand. As community becomes the prime offering for many companies, it is also the forefront of how their brand is perceived.

Your employee community, user community, category community—all of these groups are becoming stronger signals of brand than ever before.

Be deliberate in how they are built and perceived.

Categories
Brand Strategy Featured

A Time To Build Tight Brands In the Chaos of Loose Cultures

The one thing humans can’t handle is chaos. It’s why the Soviet Union fell only to install Putin, and the brief moment of hope that was the Arab Spring led to a familiar regime of autocrats.

It’s also why when there is a decrease in government stability, there is an increase in religiosity in both Eastern and Western cultures. In a 1978 Gallup poll it was found that 80% of people who leave their religion ultimately come back to it, and although researchers are only just beginning to study this phenomenon, I can tell you from my own work with both religious and atheistic brands, people who leave organized religion quickly become eager to replace the void with another system of meaninga dimension most atheist groups have failed to consider. 

In all of these instances, people swung from an extremely tight culture to an extremely loose one, and then curiously, back to a tight culture once again. 

No matter the magnitude, sudden freedom brings a normlessness (and in some cases, disorder) so uncomfortable that we would rather subscribe to clear rules than to wade into the unknown without any at all.

It’s a facet of human nature that cultural psychologist Michele Gelfand has studied extensively. Every culture falls on the spectrum from tight to loose: from highly structured and normative to loosely held and evolving. When a culture veers too far in one direction, there is often a reaction in the opposite direction. 

When it comes to branding in today’s world, however, we’re seeing an emerging trend where tightness is especially effective in loose places. 

It’s easy to see the value of tightness in hindsight. Tight brands like Greenpeace, Trumpism or the modern Académie Française may appear like anomalies, but they are in fact deeply humanand highly predictablereactions to loose cultures. The people in these groups felt destabilized by evaporating social codes, and in that mental state, welcomed in the strong voice of certainty. Where there is chaos, there is someone promising a new order.  

But sometimes the most destabilizing chaos isn’t on the world stage. Nor is it a public outrage or even a shared experience.

It’s found instead in the quiet chaos of our everyday lives: making a home, raising a family, putting a meal on the table. These mundane corners of the human experience are also where we find the loosest pockets of culture today: places where there is a glut of information but few steadfast rules. Where despite incredible progress and empowerment, normlessness has taken over.

And it’s in these well-traveled but chaotic spaces that a new generation of brands has stepped in to tighten the vice. 

The Religion of Food and Nutrition

In America, we don’t know what to eat, where to eat or how to eat, and the more one tries to figure it out, the more confused they can become. 

A favorite anecdote of mine is a note hidden in the comments section of a 2017 New York Times article about clean eating. A reader named Ellen, below, describes the chaos of having to cook Thanksgiving dinner for a family that has one person who is gluten free, another who is dairy free, one who is keto, and another who is low fat.

As journalist Julia Belluz has pointed out, we’ve entered the “United States of Divided Dinner Tables. We’ve shifted from a culture where everyone eats the same thing at supper to a hyper-individualized one, where guests almost certainly won’t be willing to break the same bread, or eat any bread at all.”

Generally speaking, the American diet looked much simpler up until the 1940s, when dinner tables across the country had more in common than not. 

Social propaganda films streamed into homes, telling women not only what to cook at dinnertime, but daughters how to set a table, sons how to greet their fathers before the meal, what was appropriate to talk about, and so on. Programs like this continued to proliferate onto colored screens in the early 1950s.

But after WWI, and with an influx of GIs coming home with expanded palates, things began to change. 

Soldiers had developed a taste for things like pizza, french wine and oregano (to give you an idea of how intense the appetite for new flavors was, sales of oregano in the U.S. rose by a remarkable 5,200% from 1948 to 1956). Meanwhile, post-war Americans had more wealth and began to travel, taking in the smells, tastes and methods of new cuisines. 

Suddenly, America’s new foodie culture was born and for the first time we began to see food less as sustenance and more as experience. The rules of food were breaking and an outgrowth of exploration began. Food was now an “aesthetic choice”, a decision mired in context.

Today, grocery stores carry an average of 50,000 items, but in the 90’s, there were a mere 7,000 SKUs on store shelves. That means in the past 30 years alone, we have had to navigate a shopping experience with over 40,000 more options than before. Consider the fact that in 2014 there were already 12 flavors of Thomas’ English Muffins and 19 different varieties of Cheerios, each one promising a slightly different experience. 

The problem here is not the paradox of choice. Choice can be a wonderful thing if people know how to navigate it. 

The real problem is the lack of norms around what foods are good or right to eat. 

Despite growing mountains of research, we still don’t know what the ideal diet is, we don’t know why adult onset food allergies have skyrocketed, and of all the lies that hurt any American generation, the food pyramid was probably one of the biggest. It is a plight on American health that will take decades upon decades to undo. 

Even something as simple as bread can surface how normless American food culture is. French bread is baked with limited unprocessed ingredients, with most French people living within 5 minutes of a bakery, and 50 times more bread bakeries per capita than in America.

French norms around baking bread also inform their social norms around eating it. There are strong codes around how to buy it, how to eat it, and how it relates to the larger meal that is understood among all.

American bread, on the other hand, has been industrialized, contains many ingredients that are banned and considered carcinogenic in other countries, and is only found aging on grocery store shelves for the large majority of people. 

It’s inspired a cottage industry of food activists like alittlelesstoxic and thefoodbabe who make it their job to decode food labels and expose dangerous American food regulations and policies. Yet the irony of many wellness influencers in the larger community is that in the process of dispelling food falsehoods, they often propagate other falsehoods around medicine, politics and conspiracy theories. 

In France, food norms are powerful and cohesive forces, while in the US food is simply a whirlwind of chaos. 

But the chaos begins even before our meals get to the table are served. In 2019, before Covid forced us to bake sourdough and throw together whipped coffees, people were already migrating away from eating at the dinner table. 

In a survey of 1,000 adults, it was found that 30% of people were eating dinner on the couch, and 17% of people were eating it in their bedrooms—two places where there is likely a screen and likely no conversation or interpersonal gathering. Remember that rooms have rules, and when we change the room, we create a vacuum of norms.

Scholars have also noted how fewer and fewer people are eating together, and only about half of families who live together have dinner together. As food and screens got closer to one another, it makes sense that open plan kitchens began to blend meals and entertainment even more. #Mukbang, #feederism and #foodporn made eating and watching the same thing, and the room itself disappeared.

Despite progress and an abundance of information, there is an anxiety-inducing looseness all around us when it comes to food.

Food culture has become chaotic and normlessness has taken over. 

But what is interesting is the way in which some brands have created cultural tightness by leveraging our deepest beliefs. 

Between 2016 and 2018, three lawsuits were lodged against Whole Foods and Lacroix collectively. All of them were concerned with the use of the word “natural” in their food labeling. In all cases, the plaintiffs had felt dupedthat the “natural” branded language and imagery were in fact lies once they interrogated the ingredients list, where they found confusing (at times questionable) chemicals.

Whole Foods settled two of those claims, while La Croix was able to dodge theirs when the plaintiff publicly retracted her statements. But controversy over the word “natural” is nothing new. 

In 2009, there was a spate of lawsuits aimed at food makers using the same term, including Snapple, Ben & Jerry’s, Häagen-Dazs, and Nature Valley. In fact, the FTC had tried to come up with a definition for the word “natural” as early as 1974, and the FDA has been trying (and failing) since 1991. 

These cases have been hard to navigate because the word “natural” is so much more than just a word. Author and religious scholar Alan Levinovitz has written extensively about food and language, and he reveals the larger complexity hiding under such a simple term. 

According to him, the word “natural” has become a “sort of a secular stand-in for a generalized understanding of goodness, which in religion you’d call holiness, or purity, or something like that. “Nature,” with a capital N, [has taken] the place of God. In a secular society, we don’t look to religions to tell us what to eat or how to heal ourselves, so you need a secular substitute when it comes to generalized guidance for what you can eat, and that secularized substitute is nature.”

Levinovitz has observed that many of the public comments on the FDA case to define the word “natural” take a religious tone, hundreds going so far as to refer to Mother Nature or God directly, with arguments such as, “Natural is as Mother Nature intended. No manipulation or addition by man” and “If it has anything other than what God intended then it is NOT natural”. 

It seems that defining what “natural” means, then, would be the same as understanding God’s own will.

Knowing what to eat has indeed become a godly quest. When we talk about food, we talk about “good” and “evil” foods, “clean” and “dirty” foods, “pure” and “impure” foods, and so on. (Even the Q Shaman refuses to eat non-organic food in jail, citing his religious beliefs.)

Whole Foods, La Croix and Snapple didn’t misuse the word “natural”. They leveraged it to tighten the vice in a very loose culture. They understood and surfaced what people were already starting to believethat food is not about sustenance. It is about righteousness.  

Today, highly popular brands like Lesser Evil snacks, Ezekiel 4:9 and Genesis 1:29 breads, and Garden of Life food supplements do the same thing, starting with their thinly veiled biblical brand names. True, their products may be great, but they have done the incredible task of creating a signal in the noise. They broadcast tight norms in the normless world of food, saying “Eat what is Godly.” And there are few cultures tighter than that of godliness.

If food is a religion, then diet culture is a cult (I write that figuratively but in some cases, it’s literal truth). As Ellen from Tucson can attest, Keto, Paleo and veganism have very little room for breaking the rules, even during Thanksgiving. 

Both Paleo and Keto are actually reboots of the 1960s fads of Atkins and the back-to-the-land movement respectively. 

They also both purport to be the natural way for humankind to eat (a paleo diet limits foods that became common when farming emerged about 10,000 years ago), and trace their validity back to our ancestors. Countless blogs and Reddit posts claim that a ketogenic diet was how our forebears ate for the majority of the year. An equally countless number support Paleo with the same argument. 

Both aim to take us back to some natural, purer state we’re meant to be in, and the brands in this space, like Primal Kitchen, Hu Kitchen (short for Human) and Epic Provisions play with this notion. The brand belief here is that the truth about food exists in the limited scope of the past, when we were restrained creatures, closer to Mother Nature.

To be Keto or Paleo, to eat bread from the bible, to have a pure palateeating is no longer about the chaotic world of nutrition but about the narrow confines of moral superiority. 

The looseness or tightness of a culture in a category is tied to its norms, or lack thereof. Simply having an abundance of choices doesn’t mean the category is loose. What matters is whether among those choices there are clear, culturally agreed-upon rules and guideposts that help people consistently move forward with confidence.

We’re imbuing food with incredible meaning because we don’t know which way us up. We crave these rules, subscribe to them, fall in and out of belief, but always come back to them as a source of comfort. 

It’s consistent with the reality that people buy with emotion, not logic. 

Tight brands like the ones we’ve surveyed here raise the emotional stakes for their users. They create emotionally provocative norms so that we don’t just know the rules, but feel them deep in our bones.

The Branded Plight of Family and Parenting

The American family in the American home can be such a clear image from afar, and yet a mirage of confusion up close.

It’s been well documented that the nuclear family was a lie, and statistically speaking, only existed in the majority of homes for about 15 years, from 1950 to 1965. But like most social constructs, the lie held a normative value that was especially important in America, a country that arguably has very few proven norms around the meaning of the home, the structure of the family, or the rules of parenting. 

There are no strong social codes that tell us how to parent in the US as we might find in other countries. In Norway, it’s understood that kids go to school at one year old and should be learning in fresh, outdoor air. In Japan, toddlers run errands around town unattended, and was an adorable sight that had us on the edge of our seats in Netflix’s Old Enough! In Spanish and Iranian cultures, it’s not uncommon for little ones to stay awake until 9 or 10pm because it is in the evening that the family socializes and forms bonds.

TIME, August 17, 2022

Norway and Japan’s parenting norms make sense because both cultures have agreed that childhood should be spent developing a sense of independence. Spain and Iran’s cultures hold firm conviction that childhood is instead about interpersonal relationships. And parenting norms in all of these cultures are accordingly defined. 

It’s hard to think of a single, widely accepted American norm that can be added to this list. Despite being popular and running in Japan for over 30 years, the mixed American backlash to Old Enough! revealed just how confused we are in this country, and yet how dogmatic we can be about that confusion.  

This all illustrates Amy S. Choi’s point that, “The crisis of American parenting, as anyone who has looked at the parenting section of a bookstore can attest, is that nobody knows what the hell they’re doing.” Indeed, parenting advice is a booming industry built on mountains of information cut by valleys of uncertainty.

Intimate portraits of the home reveal even more family dynamism. 

IKEA’s annual Life At Home Report shows a steady decline of comfort, trust and meaning in the idea of home. In 2016, people longed for more privacy in their own homes. In 2018 a whopping 1 in 3 people said there were places where they felt more at home than the space they lived in. In 2019 only 48% of people felt a sense of belonging in their own home. In 2020, while in the throes of Covid, 42% of people felt uncomfortable negotiating space for themselves in the home (which is probably why in that same year 38% of people found the bathroom the best place for a quiet moment of reflection.)

That’s provided that home even is home anymore. 

People are using Airbnbs as part-time housing, others are trading in homes for the #vanlife or #expatlife, and at least one couple is living from cruise ship to cruise ship because it’s more affordable than the American dream.

And all of this is underscored by a family structure that is evolving. As of 2014, America ceased to have a dominant family structure (what many of us used to imagine as two parents with 2.5 kids). Diversity and fluidity have shot up, driven by cohabitation, divorce, remarriage and non-marital recoupling. In one study over a three-year period, about a third of kids who were younger than six years old had already experienced a major structural shift brought on by divorce, separation, marriage, cohabitation or death.

Chaos abounds in this wide and relatively new space. That chaos has also ushered in tight, norm-building brands that offer rules for getting our bearings straight. 

There are currently over 5,000 Montessori schools in the US, and they are growing. 700 of those Montessori schools are public, and of those public ones, the vast majority were opened in the last 20 years even though Montessori came to the US over 100 years ago. Montessori is an alternative school format that talks about all the things parents wantsocial skills, independence, communitybut quickly moves into ideology. 

My own children go to a Montessori school and I can see a prescriptive ideology in nearly everything they do, especially when it comes to how things are described and labeled. 

Play is called “work” because founder Maria Montessori believed that a child’s play should be elevated and respected, and was in fact work that required concentration and large blocks of free time to explore independently. When kids are done with an activity they are asked to make it “beautiful” again, meaning to clean up and put things back in order. 

Classrooms only contain objects and toys made of natural materials in calming huesno plastics, logos or characters. Kids partake in practical life exercises that “resemble the simple work of life in the home: sweeping, dusting, washing dishes, etc. These purposeful activities help the child adapt to his new community, learn self-control and begin to see himself as a contributing party of the social unit.”

Montessori schools across the US post their doctrines on their websites, and it’s easy to see that this is not just a mode of education. Instead, this is a clearly defined philosophy of child raising. 

Even your neighborhood preschool is likely to have a manifesto posted somewhere, and it’s likely to read like a charter for a new parenting movement. Oakwood School in Los Angeles offers an incredible curriculum for their students, but more importantly, their philosophy goes far beyond education, calling out moral obligations, social change and the need for kids to understand “the nature of the world”.

Oakwood School – August 12, 2022
Oakwood School – August 12, 2022

It’s no wonder that Montessori is flourishing, along with other highly ideological school formats like Waldorf, Reggio Emilia, forest schooling, worldschooling, and many, many others. 

These schools focus the chaos of parenting into something manageable, tightening the vice of parenting and family with heavy norms. They know their job is not to merely educate, but to promise order in the storming mind of the mother and father. There are heavy rules to tell you when you are on the right track, and when you are not.

But parents feel the storm long before their children go to school. 

Once the Meta or TikTok algorithm figures out you’re expecting a baby, you’ll be deluged with parenting experts offering bite-sized pieces of advice up and down your feed. And you will undoubtedly learn about two schools of thought: attachment parenting and gentle parenting. 

Attachment parenting is an approach that preaches extremely high amounts of physical contact between parent and baby throughout the day and night, and high responsiveness to a baby’s needs in the form of on-demand feeding and co-sleeping, because “babies learn to trust and thrive when their needs are consistently met by a caregiver early in life.”

Gentle parenting is “a means of parenting without shame, blame, or punishment. It is a partnership between parties and both parents and children have a say in this collaborative style… a softer approach to parenting, and parents and caregivers that practice gentle parenting do so by guiding their children with consistent, compassionate boundaries—not a firm hand.”

Both brands of parenting have created incredibly tight cultures and communities, and both are arguably ideologies with strict norms and articulated principles. 

The tightness of these brands, however, really comes through in influencer content. People like dr.siggie, themompsychologist and biglittlefeelings slowly indoctrinate viewers into the world of their practices, so that they quickly become familiar with insider language like, “holding a boundary” or “connect before you correct” and begin to understand that each parenting philosophy is not simply a way to raise children. It is a way to signal your specific set of values to the world. 

People like Dr. Becky, who consults parents on modern parenting techniques including gentle parenting, talks openly about how if CEOs and athletes can have coaches and consultants that help them do their jobs better, then parents should have them, too.

@drbeckyatgoodinside

PSA: Parents deserve support. Let’s take a deeper look at this narrative in the media and start a different one – one that elevates parents so they are seen for the critically important job they are doing. How can you join this movement? Share this video. Share what you know in the comments about how much your role as a parent MATTERS.

♬ original sound – Dr. Becky | Psychologist

I do not disagree with Dr. Becky, who has personally taught me a lot. She is right in saying how we value parenthood is revealed in how little value we assign parenting experts. But what is really interesting is how she, and the vast number of people like her, are beginning to institutionalize tight norms in such a loose culture. In their online courses, membership communities, podcasts, books, practices, and social content one can see a growing tightness emerge.

They know that building normative structure around something that feels so chaotic is critical to the success of brands in this space.

Note that gentle parenting and attachment parenting come to the same ultimate benefit, but from two different angles. One can tend to induce more guilt while the other embodies a greater spirit of forgiveness. 

Don’t fall into the trap of thinking that tight brands need to create negative feelings like fear, shame or guilt, as we’ve already seen with other brands. It is a strategy, but a weak one.

I have written before that in branding, relief beats guilt, and reward beats fear. In parenting, and in other highly emotionally charged categories like climate change or even war, relief and reward will nearly always enjoy outsized gains. 

But be sure that you first understand the mechanics of tightness and looseness in your space.

There is an excess of choice in the world of sports, but our collective norms around sport and athleticism are both strong and widely understood. Personal finance is similar. There are a million apps for saving and spending, but in America we have strong norms around credit and consumerism (even more so in most other countries). 

Creating tight brands in tight categories will do little other than to reinforce a culture that is already there and accepted. Looser categories like politics, cannabis or end-of-life, however, create opportunities for tighter brands. 

But don’t just look at a category with a narrow lens. Personal finance may have strong norms in a world of abundant choice, but if you zoom out past credit and consumerism to tangential behaviors like investments and wealth, things start to change. 

We have begun to reconsider what wealth even means anymore, and as such, have begun to qualify investments with the strong “feeling that the economy is changing in ways that reward the crazy and punish the cautious”. The steadfast norm of being rewarded for working hard is starting to disappear, and in its place we see a new appetite for risk. 

Peter Zeihan, geopolitical strategist and one of my favorite thinkers, has recently raised the point that the underpinnings of the economy have broken apart. Indeed, what happens when our measurements of the economy (inflation) are no longer accurate, and our tools for controlling the economy (interest rates) no longer work?

When measurements change, rules change, and things get loose, not only in the market but in people’s behaviors and belief systems. 

A Snug Fit 

The strongest norms, in the tightest cultures, that best wield the power of branding tend to be the ones that elevate meaning so that school is about more than school, food is about more than food, and so on. 

Nearly every industry is expanding or contracting right now, and it’s worth understanding whether or not your space is loosening to the point of cultural normlessness. 

Look not only at the industry as a whole, but the constellations of businesses forming around it. 

Traditional education is a very noisy space but also highly normative. For the countless startups that have tried to sell into the school systems of the US, a very tiny fraction ever make any headway. Cultural norms at the district, school and classroom levels are so deeply entrenched, even the most obscene amounts of branding investment and innovation often fail to upend incumbent brands. 

But if you zoom out to homeschooling, supplemental education, private institutions, and perhaps even edutainment, the story is changing. As we lose trust in the institution of education, we also see a proliferation of viable options that move us toward normlessness.

Relationships and dating, wellness, and media are also categories where we see the same thinga loss of trust in institutions that leads to a newfound looseness. In some cases things may not be loose enough yet. In other cases, the looseness is already beginning to feel uncomfortable. 

Loose cultures tend to create a signature set of emotions: usually stress, fear and uncertainty. That is because threat and chaos run together, and as Michele Gelfand said in a conversation I was fortunate enough to have with her, “When people feel threat, whether it’s perceived or it’s actual, then it makes sense that they want stricter rules and stricter leaders who are going to deliver that kind of structure.”

Your goal is to create tension that forces people to move, not to create a panic that causes people to react. Although we’ve surveyed some fear-based brands in this discussion, it’s still very much a limited approach. It may produce clicks, but it doesn’t create long lasting loyalty.

Tighten the vice so people feel snug, not strangled. Find ways, either through context, belief systems or vision to tether all of the chaos down to something that makes sense of the world, that creates tension against the looseness. 

When a brand creates tension, it forces the user to act. They must either follow that brand or walk away from it, but the one thing people cannot be in the face of a tension-making brand is apathetic. 

Tight brands in loose cultures work much the same way. They force people to choose between the chaos and freedom of normlessness or the comfort and limits of a narrow set of rules. Neither one is universally right, but for an individual, the right choice is usually clear. 

That’s the magic of forcing tightness in loose places. It expedites our decision making, producing brand converts and defectors much quicker. 

With so much new dynamism coming into the markets and our lives in general, being attuned to tight and loose cultures is a meaningful way to understand how people are moving. Consider where tightness or looseness is headed in 35 years, and how the rules of today may not be enforced tomorrow. 

When things tighten or loosen, behavior begins to flow, and new behaviors mean new brand opportunities that may not have existed before.

Categories
Culture Featured

D2C Anti-Capitalism: The Red Herring of Consumerism

Gone are the highfalutin ideals, goals, and visions that guided corporate social responsibility (CSR) since it became a strategic imperative in the early 2000’s. While initially innovative, it became easy for consumers to call this kind of CSR greenwashing, wokewashing, pinkwashing, etc. If you could name it, you could wash it.

At its most cringe, this era of CSR produced a cottage industry of “cause marketing fails” listicles where we could all get a laugh out of brands attaching themselves to causes they had absolutely no business being affiliated with, just so they could try and signal a higher purpose. Kentucky Fried Chicken’s buckets for the cure for breast cancer, Fleshlight’s celebration of the heroes of 9/11, and Pepsi’s infamous Kendall Jenner debacle come to mind.

Today, however, the green shoots of a new era are emerging as CSR is rapidly being productized and sold back to consumers as “D2C anti-capitalism.” In D2C anti-capitalism, solutions to the societal and environmental problems generated by capitalism are being sold back to consumers as products for purchase. Levi’s, Oatly, and Viking Cruises are standout examples, each expressing a different aspect of D2C anti-capitalism.

Levi’s

“When we buy better, we can wear longer. When we wear longer, we can waste less. When we waste less, we can buy less. When we buy less, we can change the world.” Notice the shift in emphasis here. Rather than Levi’s raising awareness for their CSR initiatives, the brand is inviting consumers to take charge and be the solution themselves. So the next time someone purchases a pair of 501’s, they’re given permission to feel like a forward thinking change agent helping end the scourge of fast-fashion and better the planet.

Oatly

Oatly has consistently fashioned itself as the anti-corporation, corporation. They know we know all about “washing,” so they’re explicit about not even trying to go there. Oatly is saying to consumers, “Hey, look, we get it. You’re tired of being lied to and sold to, so we’re not going to try and manipulate you and sell to you. We’re going to be self-deprecating so we’re in on the laugh with you.” Oatly knows how cynical modern consumers are, and how jaded we’ve all become by the overt sale in our nascent era of relatability. Anti, then, is their strategy.

Oatly has truly doubled down on this form of D2C anti-capitalism. Their widely panned 2021 super bowl ad set out to fail. They wanted to be annoying. They wanted to be a failure. They knew we would hate it, so they were ready to sell us T-Shirts that said “I totally hated that Oatly Super Bowl commercial.” Oatly has clearly imbibed Oscar Wilde’s famous adage that “the only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about.”

Yet it’s difficult to deny their appeal. The anti-corporation corporation has been a runaway success. Oatly has established a fervent cult following – replete with merchandise – while becoming the oat milk of choice at Starbucks.

Viking Cruises

Viking Cruises, like Levi’s, is inviting consumers to become part of the solution to the climate crisis. Viking has recently begun to market their new Arctic “expeditions” as “vital planet saving research and discovery.” Their new Arctic ship is chock full of scientific activities that enable cruisers to feel like they’re actively helping to solve the climate crisis. Cruisers collect water samples, measure ocean acidification, analyze specimens under microscopes, and make personal climate pledges – all on multi-thousand dollar vacations with astronomical carbon footprints. With this move, Viking is selling the feeling of climate contribution.

Beatniks in The Boardroom: The Growth of Shareholder Activism

D2C anti-capitalism is a natural outgrowth of major shifts in CSR. Shareholder activism and social pressures have caused the scope of CSR to continually widen to encompass more and more issues that previously fell outside the remit of business. By April 2022, 576 proposals concerning social and environmental issues had been filed by investors, which is already up from the 499 filed in all of 2021. Proposals on environmental issues specifically are up 42% year-over-year in 2022. Shareholder proposals aimed at social and racial equity are also up in 2022.

The Economist has called annual shareholder meetings the new frontline in the battle for corporate purpose. Together with D2C anti-capitalism, shareholder activism reveals a growing understanding of the power of business to produce social outcomes, desirable or otherwise.

Clearly, this is a marked shift. In the 19th century, economists coined the term ‘externalities’ to describe how business imposes unpaid costs on society. Until recently, externalities tended mostly to be environmental pollutants. But the rise of an ever diversifying set of investor proposals reveals that shareholders (and society) are beginning to see racial injustice, economic inequality, and LGBTQ+ rights as externalities, as costs imposed on society by conducting business as usual.

Engine1 is an investment firm designed to hold businesses accountable for the total value of their impact on society. Engine1 pools investors together to buy corporate shares and then engage in shareholder activism. Their “total value framework” is meant to align economic value with positive social value. Engine1 is attempting to put a dollar value on the total impact a company has in order to give capital allocators and financial analysts a new way to value companies.

What’s new here is that previous activist firms have decided not to own shares of the most offending companies, but Engine1 believes you don’t run from the fire. Instead, you try to create positive social value from within.

Why This? Why Now?

It’s easier to imagine the end of the world than to imagine the end of capitalism.
Fredric Jameson, Political Theorist

Consumers today are the most educated they have ever been. The average consumer increasingly understands the connections between capitalism, culture, society, and individual psychology.

Let’s wade for a moment into the tensions the average college educated consumer reckons with these days. They want to go to the grocery store and be guaranteed to find fresh scallops, avocados and tomatoes at any time of year, no matter the location, even though they know it’s not natural or very good for the planet. They want to deepen their engagement with the world through travel, even though they’re aware of the climate costs (unless you’re cruising Viking). They want an iphone while also knowing Apple has questionable labor and environmental practices, and the jury is still out on the whole data privacy thing, too. And they’ve grown accustomed to cheap and immediate delivery from Amazon while knowing its workers are injured at a rate double that of other companies.

D2C anti-capitalism offers a way out of these tensions through the assuaging salvation it promises. And shareholder activism tries to get business to account for its effect on society. Yet still, these are half-measures, and consumers are feeling stagnant and ineffectual.

Generational nihilism has been proffered as a catchall descriptor of the malaise Americans feel today. It’s not exactly the classic “smoke em if you got em because we’re all going down so who really cares” brand of nihilism, though. It’s something else.

In a fascinating 2021 article called “How Nothingness Became Everything We Wanted” in the New York Times, Kyle Chayka asserts that “numbness beckons when life is difficult, when problems seem insurmountable, when there is so much to mourn.” Indeed, such widespread feelings of ineffectuality are exactly what D2C anti-capitalism is soothing.

Our problems do seem insurmountable, like we can’t do anything to fix society. That no one can. And social inequalities, the isolation of Covid-19, rancorous racial tumult, inescapable gun violence, and the ever-present titillations of partisan outrage porn that drive the click economy have combined to give us a lot to mourn. Lacking the ability to create real change, it makes sense that consumers are buying productized solutions to social problems. And it makes sense that activist investors continue to expand the horizons of corporate social responsibility.

D2C Anti-Capitalism: Future Force or Fleeting Fad?

At Concept Bureau, we focus on outlying signals of change that provide clues about the possible direction of our cultural and social futures. A central notion of futurists is that the “future is already here, it’s just not evenly distributed.” With that, the question then becomes, is the emergence of D2C anti-capitalism a signal of the future of CSR and branding? Or, will it be a passing fad, replaced by other, stronger signals of the future?

If we agree that D2C anti-capitalism is a reaction to our current cultural malaise in which Americans feel ineffectual and lack the agency necessary to create change, it’s reasonable to assume that, so long as the current cultural climate remains, the appeal of anti-capitalist branding will remain as well.

However, a growing chorus of cultural commentators are signaling that a vibe shift is underway.

The concept of the “vibe shift” is meant to capture cultural change, i.e. changes to the values that guide cultural production and the expression of our individual identities. No doubt, while it’s easy to feel the vibe shift in American culture right now, the concept isn’t deep enough to capture the magnitude of change that is beginning to be set in motion. Rather, what’s happening today is more akin to plate tectonics – a tectonic shift versus a vibe shift – because it’s happening at the level of our foundational institutions.

It’s not hyperbole to assert that over the next two decades, society will massively reinvent and reground itself on a different set of priorities from those of the past.

In this world, the personal agency to create what comes next is the highest form of cultural value. Indeed, people are already creating the worlds they want to live in – they’re “being the change they want to see in the world” as the Dalai Lama has famously put it. Let’s look at some examples of future signals that bear this direction out:

  • The rise and diversification of ideological communities that essentially opt out of mass, global, and universal society in favor of more ancient, tribal modes of living amongst like-minded individuals. Such as parrothead retirements, anti-vax “Burning Man” utopias, Central American crypto cities, and micronations.
  • The Great Resignation has large numbers of people leaving jobs in which they feel like cogs for jobs that are more personally meaningful. According to Google data, eight of the top ten most searched “how to become” jobs in 2021 were all jobs that provide ample amounts of agency and control: therapist, electrician, real estate agent, personal trainer, psychiatrist, firefighter, and pilot. These are jobs rich in human skill.
  • The growing normalization of polyamory, open relationships and thruples signals an agentic reclamation of relationships, one that puts individual people, rather than social marriage norms, in control. Vogue reports that 22% of couples are already experimenting with various forms of consensual non-monogamy.
  • The current explosion of interest in psychedelics, meditation (tripled in the U.S.A. since 2012), and Eastern spirituality loudly signals a desire to control our minds and “let in” things that were taboo for Americans in earlier eras. It’s hard to see these trends as anything other than agentic reclamations of holistic wellness and mental health.
  • The astonishingly fast rise of cryptocurrency, DAO’s, and NFT’s suggests a desire for newfound collective control amidst the collapse of trust in old institutions.
  • The rise of homeschooling, along with ideological attacks on public schools more generally, suggest a desire for tighter, more homogeneous communities. The rate of homeschooling shot up 63% in 2020, before only falling 17% from there in 2021.

Taken together, these signals point toward a future that is more decentralized, more ideological-collectivist and tribal, and less coherent and unified. In short, we’re using agency to create the worlds we want to live in, within “the current thing,” as Marc Andreessen has put it.

That world is being built today, it’s just not evenly distributed yet.

What Defines Brand Success In This Future?

D2C anti-capitalism exists today because it’s a soothing assuagement of the symptoms of social sickness, chiefly an ineffectual lack of personal agency.

CSR has gone from vision to product to enabling consumers to feel like they are a part of the solutions they’re seeking, and for which they have no recourse otherwise. Yet as the outlying future signals above suggest, individuals who are the most enlivened with agency today are using that power to create new social formations founded on different values: decentralization and community.

There are three main ways for brands to succeed in this future:

1. Be a Co-Creator of The Future Along With Your Customers

Are you in a category that can credibly help create what comes next? If so, lean into the restlessness of the moment and do all you can to signal you’re a co-creator of the future. Your values and brand actions are essential in this capacity. They’re what will signal to fellow change agents that you’re a brand on their side. That you, too, desire new social formations founded on the emerging values of decentralization and community. The worst thing your brand can do is signal that you’re anchored to the here and now, to the way things are today. To do that is to risk your customers moving into their futures without you.

2. Enable People To Create Their Future

If your brand is not in a future creation category, that’s okay. You can still enable people to pursue new worlds themselves, you just have to pick a lane – which is to say a community – and support them in the future they’re building. Your brand can’t be for everybody, so figure out the future vision that your people want. Then, do everything you can with your branding, messaging, and thought leadership to help your community of people bring their better future into being. This means having a strong POV and culturally resonate narratives that allow your customers to use your brand as a signal of change, as a signpost of meaning in society.

3. Create Communities

It’s our strategic conviction at Concept Bureau that we’ve left the era of weak ties and entered the era of strong ties in which communities are the new brands. Any brand is capable of creating new communities, or nurturing and uplifting existing communities. The key here is to understand what those communities want, and how you can help achieve that with your brand actions. Communities have always been vehicles for agency and action, and this will only deepen in the possible future laid out here. If your brand can become a valued member of a community, you’ll lessen the risk that your brand won’t be participating in that future horizon with them.

People can remain mired in nihilism, but societies never do, especially not dynamic capitalist societies. The winning brands of the next decade will be ones that first understand the emotional and cultural currents that are pulling people into their futures, and then armed with that knowledge, help them sprint toward it.

Think With Us:

Strategy In Your Inbox

Join over 20,000 strategic thinkers.