In an era of Big Data, where every click, every preference, and every voice is supposedly captured and analyzed, there exists a curious paradox—a silent majority that neither clicks nor voices its preferences in the ways marketers and pollsters expect. As we stand on the precipice of yet another presidential election, the airwaves are filled with predictions, poll numbers, and expert analyses, each promising an accurate forecast of America’s political future. But what if the real deciders of the next presidency are those who don’t participate in polls at all?

Consider the events of 2016, a year that will forever be etched in political history for defying conventional wisdom and turning polling science on its head. Pundits were left baffled, pollsters were questioned, and the world watched in disbelief as predictions crumbled on election night. Was this a one-off anomaly, or did it expose a fundamental flaw in how we gather and interpret public opinion?

This isn’t just a question for political analysts to ponder; it’s a critical concern for brands who rely on market research to understand their audience. If the people who are truly shaping our world, be it through their votes or their buying decisions, are those who remain unheard in conventional surveys, then are we building products, brands, and campaigns on a foundation of silence?

As we gear up for the 2024 presidential election, it’s time to ask the uncomfortable question: What if the people deciding elections—and perhaps your next business move—aren’t participating in your surveys? The answers might not only redefine our political landscape but also reshape how we approach market research in an increasingly unpredictable world.

The Two Groups: Participants vs. Non-Participants

Participants

• Who are they? They are the voices we hear, the data points we analyze, and the very foundation of our modern understanding of public opinion. From the politically engaged citizen to the avid consumer, these are individuals who willingly share their thoughts, preferences, and intentions through surveys and polls.
• Why do they participate? Is it a sense of civic duty or perhaps a desire to influence the world around them? Participants in polls often feel a connection to the topics at hand, a belief that their voice matters, or sometimes, a simple attraction to incentives and rewards. They want to be part of the conversation, and they’re willing to take the time to engage.
• How representative are they? This is where the waters become murky. While participants might paint a picture of the majority, are they truly emblematic of the population at large? An underlying bias may exist within this group, one that leans towards those more comfortable with sharing opinions or those who are more engaged with particular subjects. It’s a question that both political scientists and market researchers must grapple with, and the answer is far from clear.

Non-Participants

• Who are they? They are the unseen, the unheard, and the often-forgotten segment of our society. They are not merely those who refuse to answer a survey; they represent a diverse and complex group with motivations and views as varied as the participants themselves.
• Why don’t they participate? Some see the barrage of questions as intrusive, others distrust the entities collecting the information, and still, others may simply lack the time or interest. The reasons are multifaceted, and they often intertwine with socioeconomic factors, educational backgrounds, and personal values.
• What impact do they have when unaccounted for? The silence of non-participants isn’t merely a void; it’s a profound absence that can distort our perception of reality. Whether skewing the predicted outcomes of a landmark election or leading a company down a misguided path, the failure to hear these voices can result in a world that feels out of touch with a significant portion of its populace.

These two groups—participants and non-participants—create a complex tapestry that challenges our conventional methods of understanding human behavior. The difference between them isn’t just statistical; it’s a philosophical divide that calls into question the essence of representation and inclusivity in our modern society. As we move closer to the 2024 election and continue to evolve our business strategies, recognizing and reconciling this divide isn’t just prudent—it’s imperative.

Case Study: The 2016 U.S. Presidential Election

In the lead-up to the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election, a palpable certainty permeated media outlets, dinner table discussions, and expert commentaries. The numbers were crunched, the predictions made, and the narrative set. According to polls, a Clinton victory was all but guaranteed. The only question that remained was the margin.

But as the night unfolded, a different story emerged—a story that would stun the nation and leave political analysts scrambling for answers.

Overview of Polling Predictions The numbers leading up to the 2016 election were unequivocal. Mainstream media and esteemed polling firms were unanimous in their predictions: a victory for Hillary Clinton. The polls pointed to key demographic support, favorable battleground state positioning, and an electorate that seemed to be leaning in her direction. The science of polling had spoken, and it left little room for debate.

Analysis of What Went Wrong But the unexpected happened. As the results trickled in, a gaping disconnect between the polling predictions and the reality on the ground began to surface. How could the polls have gotten it so wrong? Was it methodological flaws? Bias in sampling? Or a failure to capture the late-deciding voters?

The post-mortem analysis of the 2016 election revealed a complex web of errors, ranging from underestimating certain demographics to misreading voter enthusiasm. However, one factor stood out as particularly glaring: the silent majority, those who didn’t participate in the polls, had made their voices heard in the most profound way possible.

The Theory That Non-Participants Were a Significant Factor in the Election Outcome It’s a theory that goes beyond mere speculation. Some studies have suggested that many potential Trump voters were unwilling or unlikely to reveal their true voting intentions in pre-election surveys. Whether it was a distrust of the media, a fear of social backlash, or a broader disengagement from the political process, these non-participants skewed the landscape in ways that traditional polling methods failed to capture.

This isn’t just a historical curiosity or a political anomaly; it’s a seismic shift in our understanding of public opinion. If the unheard voices can decide the fate of a presidency, what else might they be influencing in our world? And how might this silent force be at play in market research, steering products and brands in directions we are yet to comprehend fully?

The 2016 election is not merely a case study; it’s a stark warning. It reminds us that in our zeal to quantify, predict, and control, we may be overlooking the very forces that drive the heart of our society. As we approach 2024, the lessons of 2016 must not be forgotten; they must be a call to reevaluate, recalibrate, and truly listen. Only then can we hope to understand the complexities of a world that refuses to fit neatly into our predictive models.

The Business Implication: How It Affects Market Research

If the consequences of overlooking non-participants could turn a political election on its head, the business world must heed this lesson with equal gravity. In an age where customer-centricity is not merely a buzzword but a lifeline, companies increasingly depend on surveys and market research to shape their products, branding strategies, and market positioning. But what happens when a significant portion of the audience remains silent?

How Companies Rely on Surveys for Product Development, Branding, etc. From multinational corporations to fledgling startups, surveys and polls have become essential tools for understanding customer preferences, forecasting trends, and gauging market reactions. They influence everything from the color of a new smartphone to the tagline of a global advertising campaign. In this data-driven environment, a clear and representative insight into consumer sentiment is not just valuable—it’s vital.

The Risks of Ignoring Non-Participants However, the ghost of the 2016 election looms large over the business landscape. Ignoring the silent majority in market research can be as catastrophic as misunderstanding a political constituency. If a company’s surveys only capture the voices willing to be heard, what valuable insights are being lost from those who choose to remain silent? It’s a blindspot that can lead to skewed data, misguided strategies, and, ultimately, commercial failure.

Real-World Examples Where Ignoring This Segment Led to Business Failures or Successes The stories are as varied as they are telling. Consider the once-prominent smartphone brand that missed shifting consumer preferences by focusing too narrowly on tech-savvy early adopters, ignoring the wider, silent customer base that craved simplicity. 

Or the breakthrough success of a food brand that went against conventional wisdom to target a previously overlooked demographic, finding a loyal customer base that competitors had ignored.

These examples are not mere anecdotes but emblematic of a truth that transcends industries and markets. The unheard voices, the silent preferences, and the unspoken needs of non-participants can make or break a business endeavor.

The implications are clear: In a world that values connectivity and engagement, we cannot afford to overlook the silent majority. Whether in the political arena or the marketplace, the voices not captured by traditional means are not just a statistical inconvenience but a hidden force shaping our world. Companies must learn from the lessons of the past and strive to understand this elusive segment. 

In doing so, they may unlock the key to innovation, resonance, and lasting success. The warning of 2016 is not just a political tale; it’s a business imperative. The question is, are we listening?

Strategies for a More Inclusive Approach

The revelation that the silent majority might hold sway over elections, products, and branding is not merely a challenge; it’s an opportunity. By finding ways to understand and include those who typically remain unheard, we can build a richer, more nuanced picture of our world. But how can this be achieved? What tools, ethics, and innovative methods can we employ to reach beyond the usual suspects?

How to Identify and Reach Non-Participants 

Reaching the silent majority begins with recognizing their existence and understanding their motivations. It involves looking beyond traditional survey channels and finding ways to connect with people where they are rather than where we expect them to be.

• Engage in Community Outreach: By interacting with people in their communities and at local events, a more diverse perspective can be gathered.
• Utilize Social Media and Non-Traditional Platforms: These channels can often reach those who may not typically engage with traditional surveys.
• Invest in Qualitative Research: In-depth interviews, focus groups, and ethnographic studies can uncover insights from those who might otherwise remain silent.

Innovative Methods and Tools for More Representative Sampling

Innovation in market research is not just a catchphrase; it’s a necessity for bridging the gap between participants and non-participants.

• Adaptive Sampling Techniques: By continually adjusting the sampling method based on initial responses, a more balanced view can be obtained.
• Gamification of Surveys: Making surveys more engaging and less formal might entice participation from those who usually shy away.
• Utilizing Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning: These technologies can help predict and understand the silent majority’s preferences, even when explicit responses are lacking.

Ethical Considerations and Building Trust with Respondents

 At the heart of this endeavor lies trust. If non-participants are to become participants, they must believe that their voices will be heard, their privacy respected, and their opinions valued.

• Transparency in Data Usage: Being clear about how the information will be used can foster trust.
• Respecting Privacy and Confidentiality: Protecting personal information builds confidence in the process.
• Fostering Genuine Engagement: More than mere data points, respondents should feel that their insights contribute to something meaningful, whether it’s shaping a product or influencing a societal change.

The quest to include the unheard is not simple, nor is it without its pitfalls. But in an increasingly complex and interconnected world, it’s an undertaking worth pursuing. Whether we’re predicting the next president or designing the next must-have gadget, a more inclusive approach promises more accurate insights and a more empathetic and authentic connection with the very people we seek to understand and serve. It’s a path that demands creativity, ethics, and courage, but the rewards might just redefine how we see our world.

We find ourselves at a crossroads in a world inundated with data, voices, opinions, and predictions. We have at our fingertips the means to reach into the very psyche of our society, to understand desires, fears, hopes, and convictions. But in our pursuit of knowledge, we are confronted with a haunting paradox: the more we seek to know, the more we risk overlooking those who choose not to speak.

The silent majority isn’t a mere demographic or a statistical hiccup; it’s a philosophical challenge. It demands that we question our assumptions, rethink our methodologies, and embrace a humbler, more nuanced approach to understanding our fellow human beings. Whether in politics or business, the unheard voices are not simply missing data; they represent a missed opportunity—a chance to engage, innovate, and connect on a deeper level.

The lessons of the 2016 election are not confined to the political arena. They are a mirror held up to all of us, reflecting our ambitions, oversights, and willingness to truly listen. As we approach the 2024 election and forge ahead in our business endeavors, we must ask ourselves: Are we content with the surface, with the easy answers and predictable narratives? Or are we willing to venture into the unknown, to seek out the silent, to hear the unspoken?

In this challenge lies our opportunity. In our willingness to listen, we find our strength. The voices are there, waiting to be heard. The question is, are we brave enough to listen?

Stay ahead

Get regular insights

Keep up to date with the latest insights from our research as well as all our company news in our free monthly newsletter.

• First Name*
• Last Name*
• Business Email*

Gender equality has been a hotly debated issue for years, and brands have been front and center in helping drive meaningful change. And although there has been much progress in dismantling gender stereotypes in advertisements and media, especially with ads that break gender stereotypes gaining attention, much work still remains to be done.

Notable examples of progressive campaigns include Heineken’s commercial promoting gender inclusivity, Mohey’s wedding campaign—one of several standout ads that challenge gender norms in India—and Korean beauty brand SK-II’s “Change Destiny” campaign, which contests conventional beauty standards.

These ads that break stereotypes not only resonate with modern audiences but also demonstrate how brands can lead societal change. When advertisers confront gender norms directly, they gain both cultural relevance and commercial advantage. Gender stereotypes in advertising—when left unchallenged—can alienate audiences, but progressive messaging often sparks stronger brand affinity.

Advertising can be used to promote gender equality and challenge gender stereotypes. Studies have shown that media images are more impactful than books on gender equality. Advertisers can showcase their customers’ diversity in their communications and ultimately help create an environment where all genders are respected, accepted, and valued.

Breaking gender stereotypes in advertising doesn’t mean abandoning brand identity—it means evolving with the audience. Consumers today expect brands to mirror modern values. Inclusive advertising that acknowledges gender diversity not only earns goodwill but also strengthens a brand’s strategic positioning in competitive markets.

Today’s consumer increasingly expects to see the reality of their lives and gender equality from the brands they engage with. It is, therefore, a win-win situation for brands showcasing gender equality.

Gender equality in advertising is more than a visual checkbox. It’s about reshaping brand storytelling to eliminate outdated roles and stereotypes. Successful campaigns now lead with intention, ensuring their creative reflects the diversity of real-life identities, families, and experiences. As gender roles evolve in society, advertising must evolve in parallel—or risk cultural irrelevance.

The role of social media in challenging gender stereotyping 

Social media has transformed how brands are held accountable for gender stereotyping in advertising. Where once consumers had limited power to respond to outdated portrayals, they now have a platform to call out brands in real time. Public critique has shifted the power dynamic—brands can no longer afford to rely on traditional gender roles without risking backlash.

This visibility has raised the standard for inclusive advertising. Consumers increasingly expect campaigns that reflect authentic stories, diverse identities, and a departure from reductive gender norms. Brands that meet this expectation are rewarded with engagement and loyalty. Those that don’t risk irrelevance.

Social media’s algorithmic reach has also accelerated this shift. A single tone-deaf ad can trigger backlash that spreads across platforms in hours. Brands like Dolce & Gabbana, for example, faced global criticism when their ad was perceived as racially and culturally insensitive. On the flip side, viral praise for ads that break gender stereotypes—such as Pantene’s “Labels Against Women”—demonstrates how inclusive advertising can win both headlines and hearts.

A legal shift: UK bans gender stereotypes in advertising

In 2019, a significant development took place in the United Kingdom when the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) banned harmful gender stereotypes in British ads. The new rules required advertisers to eliminate depictions that reinforce traditional gender roles, such as portraying women solely as caregivers or men as inept in domestic roles. The goal: promote a more inclusive and realistic portrayal of gender.

The ASA’s move recognized advertising’s powerful role in shaping cultural norms. By tackling gender bias at a structural level, the UK encouraged other nations to assess their own practices and reinforced that inclusive advertising is not just ethical—it’s necessary. a significant step towards fostering more inclusive and equitable advertising practices. It signaled the recognition of the influential role of advertising in shaping societal perceptions and aimed to create a more diverse and empowering representation of gender in the media.

This regulatory shift reflects a broader movement calling for brands to rethink how gender stereotypes in advertising influence public perception. When ads reinforce gender norms—whether intentionally or not—they shape attitudes that persist beyond the screen. Eliminating harmful tropes isn’t just about compliance; it’s about aligning brand values with a changing cultural landscape.

Why inclusive advertising delivers ROI

Studies show progressive advertising improves brand performance. Inclusive campaigns:

Drive advocacy: Representation fosters pride, prompting customers to share and recommend the brand.

Target a wider audience: Brands connect with a broader, more diverse consumer base.

Build loyalty: Consumers identify with brands that share their values, driving repeat purchase.

Enhance reputation: Inclusive messaging positions brands as forward-thinking and socially responsible.

Improve brand recall: Ads that break stereotypes are more likely to be remembered, talked about, and shared—amplifying their impact far beyond initial exposure.

Brands that invest in gender-equal advertising also benefit from increased relevance across generations. Gen Z and millennials, in particular, are more likely to reward companies whose marketing reflects inclusive values. Inclusive advertising campaigns that reflect a wide spectrum of gender identities are more likely to be shared, remembered, and acted upon.

Gen X consumers—often overlooked—also respond positively to inclusive messaging, especially when it reflects the shifting gender dynamics in workplaces and households. While younger cohorts may drive the conversation, Gen X holds significant purchasing power and expects advertising to acknowledge their evolving roles as caregivers, professionals, and decision-makers. Recognizing this group helps brands widen their impact and stay relevant across life stages.

9 Ways advertisers can promote gender equality.

1. Challenge gender stereotypes
Avoid defaulting to outdated tropes. Use research and insights to rethink how gender is portrayed. The Always “Like a Girl” campaign succeeded by transforming a dismissive phrase into a powerful message about confidence and capability. Brands that challenge the status quo often spark conversation—and redefine expectations.

2. Feature diverse body types
Consumers expect to see themselves reflected in advertising. Dove’s long-standing Real Beauty campaign challenged the narrow standards of beauty by showcasing real women of all sizes, ages, and skin tones. This kind of visibility builds trust and shows that the brand values authenticity over perfection.

3. Use inclusive language
Gender-neutral terms such as “they” help avoid assumptions and make space for non-binary and gender-diverse individuals. But language must be consistent across the brand experience. That means auditing product descriptions, surveys, chatbot scripts, and customer service replies. Every interaction is an opportunity to reinforce inclusion.

4. Promote equal opportunities
Representation goes beyond visuals. Advertisers should highlight leadership, talent, and potential across all genders, showing individuals in roles of authority, innovation, and expertise. Breaking stereotypes means showing women in tech, men as caregivers, and non-binary people leading teams or solving problems.

5. Address women’s issues
Ads that tackle gender inequities—like pay gaps, workplace discrimination, or underrepresentation—can be powerful. But the approach must be intentional. Token gestures often draw criticism. The strongest campaigns pair messaging with action: internal diversity policies, partnerships with advocacy groups, or support for systemic change.

6. Celebrate women’s achievements
Spotlighting accomplishment is more effective than making appeals to empowerment alone. Nike’s “Dream Crazier” campaign honored athletes who defied expectations—turning criticism into fuel. Celebrating resilience and success in real-world contexts adds both emotional depth and commercial impact.

7. Partner with women creators
Authenticity matters. Involving women directors, photographers, writers, and strategists helps ensure campaigns reflect real perspectives—not assumptions. This also contributes to gender equity in the creative industries and brings richer, more relevant storytelling into the brand voice.

8. Advocate for empowerment
Empowerment should be more than a tagline. It’s about portraying confidence, strength, ambition, and joy across all identities. Campaigns that show people owning their decisions, asserting themselves, or redefining norms create stronger emotional resonance—and cultural relevance.

9. Promote self-care and well-being
Mental health and emotional resilience are universal. Brands that offer self-care narratives without relying on gender clichés stand out. The goal isn’t to paint over problems with pastel—it’s to create space for honesty, growth, and support across the spectrum of identity and experience.

Effective ads that break stereotypes don’t just focus on visuals—they’re built on authentic messaging and insight. Brands must challenge gender roles not only by showing diverse faces, but by telling different stories. The most compelling campaigns highlight real struggles, joy, leadership, and complexity across all gender identities.

The most successful gender-equal advertising campaigns focus on lived experiences. They avoid caricatures and instead show everyday people navigating real choices, emotions, and achievements. These narratives build emotional credibility—and emotional connection drives conversion.

The Role of Market research in inclusive strategy.

Inclusive advertising starts with inclusive insight. Brands that truly understand the lived experiences of different genders are better equipped to dismantle outdated roles in their creative campaigns. Market research plays a foundational role in identifying the unconscious biases that still linger in messaging and concept development.

Brands that want to break gender stereotypes need more than intent—they need insight. Market research helps uncover cultural beliefs and consumer values that shape how gender is perceived.

Always used consumer research to create its powerful “Like a Girl” campaign, shifting a phrase once seen as an insult into a symbol of strength. H&M learned male shoppers felt limited by traditional masculinity, prompting a gender-neutral fashion campaign fronted by David Beckham.

These examples show how ads that break stereotypes often begin with research that challenges outdated assumptions. Without deep consumer understanding, even well-intentioned campaigns can fall into the trap of tokenism. Market research uncovers the nuances in how gender roles are viewed across different cultures, regions, and demographics. It provides the clarity brands need to avoid surface-level diversity and instead produce inclusive advertising that genuinely connects.

Inclusive advertising, around the world

Apple’s “Behind the Mac”: Real stories of women using tech to pursue creative goals.

Nike’s “Dream Crazier”: Celebrates female athletes and defies limits imposed by outdated norms.

John Lewis’ “Man on the Moon”: Focused on empathy, loneliness, and emotional connection, not gender.

Tanishq’s “Ekatvam”: Bridged interfaith divides in India, sparking inclusion conversations.

DBS Bank’s “SPARKS”: Tells stories of achievement and diversity from across Asia.

IKEA: Consults experts to ensure its household ads break down gender roles in parenting.

Levi Strauss: Promotes equity in the workplace and features all genders in leadership.

L’Oréal’s #WomenNotObjects: Moves away from objectification to empowerment.

Ads that challenge gender stereotypes don’t follow a template—but they do share common traits: cultural awareness, audience insight, and bold creative execution. From Asia to Europe to the US, the most successful campaigns focus on inclusion not as a marketing hook, but as a core brand value. This global movement toward more inclusive advertising is reshaping how brands communicate—and how they’re remembered.

Industries making strides—and those lagging behind

Retailers like Target, Amazon, and Disney have embraced gender neutrality in signage and product categories. The beverage industry, by contrast, still clings to outdated ideas of masculinity to sell products like energy drinks.

How Gender Stereotypes Shape Global Brand Perception

Gender stereotypes in advertising don’t just affect individual campaigns—they shape how entire industries and brands are perceived across markets. In some countries, portrayals of traditional masculinity still dominate automotive, sports, and alcohol ads, perpetuating narrow ideals of success and identity. In contrast, markets like Sweden, Canada, and South Korea have seen a rise in gender-equal advertising regulations and consumer demand for inclusive messaging. Brands operating globally must navigate these nuances carefully to avoid alienating audiences or violating local norms.

Why Gender Equality in Advertising Still Matters

Despite the progress made, gender equality in advertising remains an ongoing challenge. Many ads continue to reinforce outdated norms or miss the opportunity to represent real diversity. Addressing this imbalance through gender-equal advertising strategies is more than an ethical imperative—it’s a strategic one.

Advertising can shape social expectations. When brands reject gender stereotypes and champion diverse roles, they not only win consumer trust but also build a more inclusive world. And consumers are noticing.

If your brand is ready to break free from outdated gender norms and make inclusivity more than just a message, we can help. Request a proposal to learn how Kadence uncovers the insights needed to build more representative campaigns and drive lasting cultural relevance.

Stay ahead

Get regular insights

Keep up to date with the latest insights from our research as well as all our company news in our free monthly newsletter.

• First Name*
• Last Name*
• Business Email*

Bud Light recently found itself embroiled in controversy, demonstrating the potential pitfalls brands may encounter when they strive to align with an array of progressive causes, from gender identity to climate change.

The contention surrounding Bud Light underscores the precarious position companies can find themselves in when they strive to resonate with ‘woke’ culture. 

It serves as a stark reminder that while supporting progressive goals can reflect positively on a brand, tackling too many issues simultaneously can lead to criticism and potential damage to the brand’s reputation. For every cause or belief system, segments of the community feel the opposite. This can lead to polarization and potential damage to a brand’s reputation.

A marketing campaign featuring a transgender activist sparked conservative backlash, thrusting Bud Light into a contentious debate surrounding corporate engagement with ‘woke’ culture. 

What was once merely a beer selection has now become a symbolic stand in the discourse over the role and responsibility of corporations in societal issues.

So how did Bud Light’s seemingly simple choice of beer get dragged into a complex cultural controversy, and more importantly, what can brands learn from it?

In this digital age, the line between brand identity and social consciousness is increasingly blurred, with more consumers—particularly Millennials and Gen Z—expecting brands to take a stand on pressing societal issues. 

However, authenticity is key. ‘Woke-washing,’ or feigning interest in social causes for commercial gain, can be sniffed out by savvy consumers, often leading to more harm than good. This post explores the delicate dance of being a ‘woke’ brand, the potential benefits and pitfalls, and why purpose is becoming a powerful currency in the business world.

The Appeal of the Woke Brand

It’s undeniable that ‘woke’ brands can resonate with consumers. When executed authentically, aligning with social causes can lead to positive outcomes.

Consider Patagonia, an outdoor apparel brand. Their dedication to environmental activism is woven into the very fabric of their corporate identity. They’ve pledged 1% of sales to environmental groups, led a high-profile lawsuit over national parklands, and invested in sustainable product design. Their ‘activist’ stance is far from superficial—a commitment that echoes through every level of their operation.

Younger generations, like Millennials and Gen Z, heralded as socially conscious and action-oriented, are particularly attracted to purpose-driven brands. According to a 2022 Edelman report, 73% of Gen Z members surveyed buy or advocate for brands based on their beliefs and values.

Is being woke a double-edged sword?

We live in an era defined by hyper-awareness and the pursuit of social justice, and ‘being woke’ has emerged as a buzzword that brands are quickly embracing. 

However, it’s important to remember that for many, being ‘woke’ isn’t merely a trendy label but a commitment to recognizing and challenging systemic injustices. 

For brands, the decision to engage with ‘woke’ culture can be a double-edged sword, potentially offering a competitive edge while also risking backlash if handled insensitively.

In 2020, Nike, for instance, continued their tradition of bold socio-political stances with their “For Once, Don’t Do It” campaign in response to the Black Lives Matter protests. Flip-flopping their iconic slogan, this message was lauded for its relevance and empathy. On the other hand, Pepsi’s 2017 ad featuring Kendall Jenner appropriating the imagery of protest movements for a soft drink commercial was met with widespread criticism, seen as trivializing genuine struggles for justice.

These examples highlight the two edges of the ‘woke’ sword. When executed with authenticity and sincerity, brands can tap into the zeitgeist, connecting with consumers on a deeper level. 

However, if ‘wokeness’ is merely exploited as a marketing gimmick without understanding or respect for the underlying issues, it can lead to alienation and damage to the brand’s reputation.

So, how can brands effectively engage with ‘woke’ consumers, who are often at the forefront of these discussions? Here are some dos and don’ts:

DO:

• Educate Yourself: Understand the social issues that resonate with your audience. Authenticity comes from knowledge, so it’s crucial to stay informed about the conversations taking place within your demographic.
• Live Your Values: Consumers, particularly Gen Z, have a keen eye for inauthenticity. If your brand claims to stand for something, ensure those values permeate every aspect of your business, from supply chain practices to employee treatment.
• Partner with Relevant Organizations: Actions speak louder than words. Collaborating with NGOs or nonprofits that align with your brand’s values can demonstrate a tangible commitment to social causes.
• Appoint a crisis communications expert.

• Publish a transparent, honest Sustainability Report.

DON’T:

• Jump on Every Bandwagon: Not every social issue will be relevant or appropriate for your brand to comment on. Avoid tokenistic engagement with causes not aligning with your brand values or business area.
• Exploit Sensitive Issues: Consumers can spot when a brand is capitalizing on a social issue purely for profit. Always approach sensitive topics with care, respect, and a genuine desire to effect change.
• Ignore Feedback: If you face backlash, don’t disregard it. Apologize sincerely if needed, and use it as an opportunity to learn and grow.

Navigating ‘wokeness’ can indeed be a double-edged sword for brands. However, when done sincerely and thoughtfully, engaging with social issues can deepen connections with consumers, particularly younger ones, who value brands that stand for more than just their products or services. 

Ultimately, it’s about fostering a genuine commitment to social progress and reflecting that in all aspects of your brand.

The Danger of Woke-Washing

Appropriating social causes without genuine commitment can backfire, as Pepsi found out. This superficial display of ‘wokeness,’ often termed ‘woke-washing,’ can lead to consumer skepticism, negative press, and a damaged brand reputation.

Take H&M, for example. In 2018, the brand was accused of hypocrisy for promoting a feminist ad campaign while being linked to exploitative labor practices, including employing women in Bangladesh at low wages. This discrepancy between their outward messaging and business practices led to public outcry and boycott threats.

Purpose is a New Form of Conscious Capitalism

Increasingly, industry experts argue that purpose is becoming the new form of capitalism. Brands like Unilever and Ben & Jerry’s have championed this notion, embedding social responsibility into their business models.

Unilever has taken strides to reduce environmental impact and enhance societal value across its portfolio of brands, including committing to a deforestation-free supply chain by 2023. Similarly, Ben & Jerry’s has long championed various social causes, from climate justice to refugee rights, and has frequently used its platform to raise awareness and stimulate conversation around these issues.

In fact, in the early 1980s, as Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) was beginning to gain traction, the term “Caring Capitalism” was coined by Ben Cohen. Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield have become esteemed figures worldwide for their significant community activism. Their efforts have served as a beacon, inspiring countless brands over the past four decades to strive towards greater social responsibility.

Such purpose-driven business models can yield substantial returns. Harvard Business School found in a 2020 study that ‘firms of endearment,’ or those that focus on purpose beyond profit, outperformed the S&P 500 by 14 times over 15 years.

However, the purpose-driven brand isn’t a one-size-fits-all solution. Not all attempts to ‘get woke’ will pay off. Brands must demonstrate consistent commitment and action towards the causes they align with or risk losing consumer trust. Companies need to back up their words with actions, showing consumers, they’re serious about making a difference.

As we navigate an increasingly conscious consumer terrain, the call for brands to ‘wake up’ and align with social causes becomes louder. 

Yet, brands must understand that ‘wokeness’ is not a marketing tactic but a commitment. It’s not about jumping on the latest cause to sell products but about integrating purpose into the core of business operations, ensuring actions align with words. 

The rewards for companies that can strike the right balance are clear: deeper connections with consumers, a stronger brand reputation, and the opportunity to make a genuine difference in the world. As capitalism continues to evolve, it’s clear that purpose is more than just a trend—it’s becoming a new way of doing business.

Stay ahead

Get regular insights

Keep up to date with the latest insights from our research as well as all our company news in our free monthly newsletter.

• First Name*
• Last Name*
• Business Email*