These are some of the questions that were addressed at the Academy of Marketing’s 17th Global Brand Conference hosted by Edinburgh Napier University last week. This is my third time participating in this conference, which provides a vibrant environment for marketing scholars to discuss recent developments in branding research. We also enjoyed a branded whisky tour at the Johnnie Walker experience on Princes Street, and (tried) Scottish dancing at the Ghillie Dhu restaurant, which is inspired by Scottish folklore. I would say the social events were very on-brand for a branding conference! A brand can represent any entity – not just companies, organizations, services and products, but also places (like Edinburgh and Scotland), arts and culture (like the Scottish Cèilidh) or an event (like the Global Brand Conference). If you are a brand manager or researcher or otherwise interested in brands, I’d like to share my thoughts and reflections on this year’s conference theme: conscientious branding.
There was some healthy debate at the conference on whether brands can truly be conscientious, and what this even means. While many would agree that brands cannot develop a consciousness per se, it can be debated whether brands can be seen to be conscientious, for instance in the sense that the people working for the brands are acting in a responsible and diligent manner. That said, what did the people at the conference suggest brands should do to be more conscientious?
Authenticity, authenticity, authenticity – but what does it mean?
Authenticity is a word that came up many times during the conference, and for good reason: despite the best intentions from brand managers, people may perceive their efforts as hollow greenwashing or virtue signaling. One question discussed at the conference was: what does it mean for a brand to be authentic? Does it mean following rules and regulations and meeting industry standards regarding sustainability and responsibility? Or is it about meeting stakeholder expectations around these themes? These were questions touched upon in the paper by Nils Grimm with colleagues (2024), which won the best conceptual paper award. They approached authenticity as a nuanced and performative concept, suggesting that brands can be conscientious through honesty and self-disclosure rather than through meeting external standards. In this view, brand authenticity is about developing a moral compass for the brand and staying true to it.
What do stakeholders think makes a brand conscientious?
From a different viewpoint, conscientious branding also involves listening to stakeholders. In brand management, it’s typically considered relevant to analyze how well brand promises align with people’s brand perceptions. However, in reality, misalignment often occurs, and examples of this were discussed in the place branding track at the conference. For instance, discrepancies may appear when destination brand marketers present places on social media with empty pictures lacking people (Park, Roitershtein & Ironside, 2024), whereas tourists, residents and influencers may post more lively and vibrant content including people who actually live in places and visit them (Alsiyabi, 2024). Perhaps brand managers could learn something from user-generated content to not only stay more authentic, but also more conscientious in the eyes of the customers and other stakeholders? As social media influencers increasingly hold brands accountable, brand managers can look towards online content to learn what moral issues matter to people (Bao, Breitsohl and Chen, 2024).
In general, it’s also interesting to look at how technological advancements, such as AI, are impacting brands. On one hand, it has been suggested that brands can become more productive and effective in their communication if the humans behind the brands work together with AI (Kirkby, Baumgarth & Henseler, 2024). For instance, virtual influencers have been found to sometimes be effective in branding in the context of pro-social causes (Igarashi, Thompson & Bhoumik, 2024). Yet, on the other hand, it has been suggested that the use of AI in branding may alienate consumers and make the brand be perceived as exploitative and less conscientious (Barakat & Dabbous, 2024). These insights emphasize the importance of brand managers actively listening to their audiences while navigating new technologies.
Voluntary or mandatory brand conscientiousness?
Another topic discussed at the conference was how disclosure and non-financial reporting of environmental and social impact may affect brand value (Sallaku, Tarulli & Morrone, 2024; Mingione, Francesco, Anjomrouz & De Falco, 2024). An interesting question related to such disclosure is: does it matter if a brand’s reporting efforts are mandatory, or voluntary in the sense that they go beyond what is legally required? At the conference, I learned, for example, that the band Coldplay published a sustainability report due to the negative environmental impact of musical tours (Robertson, Kirsten and Foster, 2024). Such voluntary sustainability reports are not, to my knowledge, very commonly seen among cultural actors. I find it interesting to see them act similarly to companies, and it seemed that people’s responses were at least somewhat positive to the reporting. It appears intuitive that customers may want to analyze whether the people behind brands seem to be doing good things because they have to, or because they want to.
From an internal branding lens (King, Xiong & Murillo, 2024), it is further relevant to consider if a brand’s employees stand behind the promises and narratives too, and how they interpret the brand’s efforts toward conscientiousness. While brands may want to avoid making grand promises that they can’t keep, they may also want to show in concrete ways that they are going beyond the bare minimum. In this view, brand managers may ask themselves what voluntary actions they could take to make the world a better place. Perhaps they would even dare to take stronger stances about societal issues as brand activists (Johansen, 2024)
In conclusion, my three suggestions for brands based on discussions at the 17th Global Brand Conference are:
- Set a moral compass for your brand and stay true to it
- Listen to what issues are important to people involved with the brand
- Focus on doing voluntary good beyond the bare minimum
These were only some of the topics discussed at the conference (there were almost one hundred presentations, after all), so I hope the themes sparked some thoughts for you! I’m at least already looking forward to the 18th Global Brand Conference in Porto, which will focus on the theme of Brand Purpose ✨
PhD Sonja Sarasvuo
Postdoctoral researcher associated with Hanken School of Economics
CERS Centre for Relationship Marketing and Service Management
References
Alsiyabi, N. (2024, April 22-24). Social media influencers as national brand identity stakeholders. [Conference presentation]. The 17th Global Brand Conference, Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.
Bao, Z., Breitsohl, J. & Chen, B. (2024, April 22-24). A call for conscience – Analyzing influencers who hold brands accountable on social media. [Conference presentation]. The 17th Global Brand Conference, Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.
Barakat, K. A. & Dabbous, A. (2024, April 22-24). The impact of AI use on conscientious brand equity: A customer perspective. [Conference presentation]. The 17th Global Brand Conference, Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.
Grimm, N., Sahhar, Y., Moss, C. & Henseler, J. (2024, April 22-24). Towards true authentic corporate brands: an existential view. [Conference presentation]. The 17th Global Brand Conference, Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.
Igarashi, R., Thompson, J., & Bhoumik, K. (2024, April 22-24). Is it effective for brands to use virtual influencers for promoting pro-social cause? [Conference presentation]. The 17th Global Brand Conference, Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.
Johansen, T. S. (2024, April 22-24). Activist brand legitimacy as networked social media narratives. [Conference presentation]. The 17th Global Brand Conference, Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.
King, C, Xiong, L., & Murillo, E. (2024, April 22-24). The coming of age of internal brand management research: a bibliometric analysis. [Conference presentation]. The 17th Global Brand Conference, Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.
Kirkby, A., Baumgarth, C. & Henseler, J. (2024, April 22-24). Have you changed my life as a brand professional? Drivers and barriers of the integration intensity of generative artificial intelligence for brand voice. [Conference presentation]. The 17th Global Brand Conference, Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.
Mingione, M., Francesco, L., Anjomrouz, E. & De Falco, S. E. (2024, April 22-24). Linking brand value to ESG performance. [Conference presentation]. The 17th Global Brand Conference, Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.
Park, E., Roitershtein, A. & Ironside, R. (2024, April 22-24). Orkney as place: a comparative study of community perceived sense of place and digital place branding in a cold-water archipelago. [Conference presentation]. The 17th Global Brand Conference, Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.
Robertson, J., Kirsten, M. & Foster, T. (2024, April 22-24). The sustainability b(r)andwagon: Exploring media representation of a greening music entertainment industry. [Conference presentation]. The 17th Global Brand Conference, Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.
Sallaku, K., Tarulli, A. & Morrone, D. (2024, April 22-24). What makes it valuable? The role of non-financial disclosure on brand value. Harvesting the benefits of sustainability by exploring how firm’s accountability affects brand value. [Conference presentation]. The 17th Global Brand Conference, Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.