Note: This is part 7 of a slightly deeper blog series that challenges marketers to improve by gaining a better understanding of the implications of new brain research.
Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs (adapted from 'Motivation & Personality' ©1970) Source: Wikipedia Commons, ©2010, used with permission
[A] study of one very modern behavior, fairness…suggests it evolved recently, and is rooted in culture rather than biology.
Brandon Keim, Wired
(In reference to “Markets, Religion, Community Size, and the Evolution of Fairness and Punishment.” Science, Vol. 327, No. 5972, March 18, 2010)
What’s more important?: money or being treated fairly?…What makes us more upset?…going without food for a day or being taken advantage of?…The answers might surprise you! Come along and explore the brain from a marketing perspective.
In this post, I conclude our comparison of David Rock‘s SCARF model of human motivation (Status Certainty, Autonomy, Relatedness and Fairness) introduced in part 1) to Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, including implications and examples.
Life isn’t fair
Fairness—the brain’s desire to be treated with evenhandedness—is addressed in Maslow’s Self-actualization level as morality and in the Preconditions for the Basic Needs Satisfactions, where he says “justice, fairness, [and] honesty…are examples of such preconditions.”
Marketers sometimes target fairness through pricing, such as cooperatives like credit unions; through ethical considerations, such as fair-trade coffee; or through a consistent mission with slogans like “We’re on your side.”
Studies show that fairness is more important to the brain than money. This phenomenon is known as inequity aversion. Some researchers now believe that the strength of the brain’s desire for fairness evolved in the context of more modern culture as opposed to more primitive biological factors.
David Rock says, “Fairness doesn’t intuitively feel like it is of the same importance as food. Because of this people don’t value fairness highly enough, and, as a result, are blind-sided by the intensity of a fairness response.”
Let’s take a look at the implications of fairness…including examples. (Note: This post contains considerations for practitioners of public relations, as well as for marketers.)
Just the facts, please
Fairness implication #1: The Internet makes it possible to confirm facts quickly, sometimes in real time.
Marketers have a reputation for overstatement. But understanding how the brain works helps to explain how this tactic can backfire.
Take-away: Avoid claims that cannot be substantiated; use the voice of customers to make strong statements; and focus on preparation, quality and flexibility to withstand scrutiny.
Example: Putting on an annual conference used to be about organizing speakers, holding sessions and getting testimonials for next year’s promotion. That was before the backchannel—participants who maintain real-time, online conversations during presentations. Now imagine you’re putting on one of the largest social media conferences in the country. Jay Rosen, who prepared a panel discussion entitled The Future of Content at the recent South by Southwest event, says, “The backchannel…has empowered those in the audience to compare notes and pool their dissatisfaction during a performance that misfires…, raising the bar and increasing the risk for speakers who walk in unprepared.” He presents updated strategies in How the Backchannel Has Changed the Game for Conference Panelists.
A peaceful assault
Fairness implication #2: Small groups—even one angry customer—can raise emotions and create viral communications that cause significant damage to the reputation of a company.
Don’t expect a fair trial when you’re up against a fairness response. The old rules of PR say to ignore bad news and let it go away. Today this approach can lead to disaster.
Take-away: Seek to be trustworthy and evenhanded in marketing and business practices. If faced with a fairness response, be upfront and respectful, avoid defensiveness, engage in authentic conversation to draw out interpretations of the situation, apologize if appropriate; and plan for scenarios by establishing policies that communicate values, tone, desired message, designated spokespersons and escalation procedures.
Example: Here’s a case study in how not to handle a fairness response: Nestlé’s Facebook fan page recently turned into a liability as it was the target of a coordinated assault by Greenpeace over a perceived unfairness regarding environmental issues and sources of palm oil. Nestlé was slow to react to the criticism and “added fuel to the fire” when the moderator of Nestlé’s Facebook fan page, posted this comment: “Thanks for the lesson in manners. Consider yourself embraced. But it’s our page, we set the rules, it was ever thus.” The company has since posted a statement listing a timeline for making changes to its business practices, but much of the damage is already done.
It’s hard to recall
Fairness implication #3: The neurochemistry of expectations is, well…unfair to marketers, resulting in either a little boost—or a big letdown—in the minds of customers.
The way our brains are “wired” means that when our experiences outperform expectations, we get a pleasant surprise with a release of dopamine, a chemical associated with interest and happiness. But the nature of our brains is such that this boost is relatively short and mild. When our expectations are not met, a downward spiral that is stronger and longer occurs; this is one of the worst scenarios a marketer can face.
As expectations increase, it becomes harder to gain large improvements in satisfaction but easier to have a negative situation send opinions crashing. Our brains unconsciously assign personality traits to organizations and brands, so this downward spiral in the brain can evoke feelings of betrayal in situations where trust has been built.
Take-away: I don’t really have a take-away for this one other than the obvious: try to avoid setting unrealistic expectations and getting into negative situations. Rocket scientist?!… But I am interested in your thoughts on how marketers at Toyota can overcome a fairness response resulting from the company’s recent vehicle recalls.
Example: Case in point…Toyota…Although this product and its alleged problems represent a much more emotionally charged environment than most marketers could ever imagine facing, in some ways, the company is a victim of its own success. For years, the company has been a leader in quality and satisfaction—but also in customer expectations.
I recently read that Toyota suffered a 10-percentage-point drop in the number of its customers who said they would buy another Toyota. If this statistic is true and lasting, it represents financial disaster for a company that spent years building a solid reputation. (For the record: I claim no knowledge about the actual level of quality of Toyota vehicles or the company’s intent. I am discussing customer perceptions and feelings of betrayal in hypothetical terms.)
Should Toyota have been more upfront and entered the conversation earlier? In a perfect world: Yes. At a minimum, the company could have done more to reinforce its commitment to quality and customer safety. The reality: Attorneys and concerns over costs probably factored into the timeline of decisions.
Did the public apology make the situation worse? I think it was the right move, but it took too long and felt like it was more of a response to pressure rather than a genuine act.
What is the best strategy for Toyota’s marketers moving forward? There’s no quick fix: Time and consistency are necessary to rebuild trust. The company seems to be targeting a mix of relatedness—appealing to loyalty through video testimonials of customers and employees who drive the cars that they build—limited-time discounts and complimentary extended maintenance plans.
- I agree with the relatedness tactic, but could it feel more genuine? What about a strategy that brings owners into local dealers to enhance the personal relationships they already have with drivers?
- The discounts are a short-term strategy that appeals to people who need a car now and are “on the fence” in their opinion of the company, but it shifts the price anchor point in the minds of consumers and may have long-term implications.
- The extended maintenance coverage should increase certainty but the limited timeframe of the offer doesn’t seem appropriate to the level on unfairness felt by long-time customers who don’t need to replace their vehicles by April 5th.
Today I clicked on an online ad for the Toyota Customer Loyalty Program. A headline appeared, “This is the opportunity you’ve been waiting for.” (Their boldface, not mine…) In the context of a fairness response, I would have worded it differently…
UPDATE: Since I posted this last week, Toyota has begun running ads entitled Experts Disprove Critics of Toyota Electronics: Get the Truth, where the company tries to turn the tables on a fairness response by having a series of speakers state that claims made in a Congressional hearing and covered in news reports are misrepresented and unfair.
What marketing and PR strategies would you use to counter a fairness response?
You might also like…
What motivates us: new marketing and brain research (part 1 of 10)
NEW brain research part 2: Setting the record straight on Maslow’s theories
NEW brain research part 3: Become a marketing status symbol
NEW brain research part 4: Nothing’s certain but death, taxes and marketing
NEW brain research part 5: Autonomy and irrational decision-making in marketing
NEW brain research part 6: Can you relate to marketing?
NEW brain research part 8: The marketing implications of Maslow’s hidden levels
NEW brain research part 9: Book review: Bob Gilbreath’s Marketing with Meaning
NEW brain research part 10: Book review: David Rock’s Your Brain at Work
Nurture marketing: a strategically superior alternative to drip marketing
The 10 golden rules of marketing white papers
Don’t want to miss part 8 of this series? Register on the End Result Marketing Website for free presentation downloads and email updates, sign up for RSS feeds or email updates of new blog posts or follow us on Twitter. We understand what makes people tick.
