*Brands like Liquid Death have been deliberately divisive in order to succeed, but decades of research on buyer behaviour suggests you don’t need to polarise to win. *
Some marketers and commentators say that a brand needs to polarise people, or that it needs to repel some buyers. For example, one LinkedIn contributor said recently: “If you want to create a brand that truly resonates, it might be time to draw your line in the sand and embrace the power of polarisation.”
Another said: “What if having haters became a worthy goal? […] if you’re worried that your brand is becoming ‘too polarising’, I’d likely tell you that you just might be onto something.”
Then there’s this from marketing professor Americus Reed: “Create and celebrate your haters in the marketplace. Give them as much airtime as your devoted brand followers. The in/group out/group polarisation effect creates a powerful ‘identity signal’.”
Indeed, the idea of polarising or repelling some buyers was a consideration at Cannes Lions this year, with one creative describing “a backdrop of cultural polarisation”. He said: “Creativity is no longer neutral, it’s taking sides… Cannes-worthy work won’t try to please everyone. It will plant a flag, speak to its tribe … [brands must be] very clear about which camp they sit in.”
But is this whole ‘polarisation’ idea correct? Does your brand need to be polarising to be successful?
An important fact about all this is that the whole polarisation/repel some buyers idea is based on opinion, not evidence. It’s also worth noting that some people who commentate on topics like this are more interested in building their own public profile, often with intentionally dramatic content, rather than being concerned with whether their advice is sound.
Read the full article in Marketing Week.