Strat House Co-Founder, Rachel Clarke, explores the demands Gen Z are making of brands.

In The House

Innovations and initiatives from Strat House clients and partners.

• Unilever helping women farmers to grow pineapples and their incomes
• Adidas takes on Samsung’s controversial ‘Night Owls’ ad in women’s safety campaign
• Unilever Study Reveals Influence of Influencers in Sustainable Behavior Change
• Dove are standing up for #KidsOnlineSafety
• Gong cha named best food & drink franchise at the 2023 Global Franchise Awards
• Find out why LinkedIn And Dove Are In It Together To Help End Hair Discrimination

To ‘do’ or not to ‘do’?

Any conversation or exploration of Gen Z will, pretty quickly, surface the observation that they are purpose-driven in their choice of brands. And of course they. But in my view it’s this plus so much more. Their demands on the brands they favour are tipping marketers into a requirement for action, and their influence on global attitudes across all generations is real and long-term. 

Do a quick Google search on purpose / Gen Z and the results will show many similar brands – Patagonia and Lush seem to be the most common – and a lot of similar stats – 54% of teens say they have purchased products based on ethics; 63% buy from companies that support causes and charities that are important to them; 85% think brands should minimise environmental impact and 71% think brands should give back to society. Every study backs up the truism that Gen Z expects companies to have a purpose and live up to that purpose. 

However, I see this as just the tip of the Gen Z iceberg. They are a brutally honest generation, unafraid to call out companies and brands who don’t live up to expectations or the promises they make – and to call them out on a public stage. They are lifting the curtain on ‘pledges’ and ‘targets’ and demanding action. Gen Z are naturally suspicious of companies, with 69% thinking brands overstate their actual support and activity. In short, that brands and companies talk too much and do too little.

For many businesses, it’s not just that Gen Z is now a priority consumer segment …it’s also that Gen Z’s attitudes have proven to be incredibly influential. They impact all generations. And this in turn is causing a significant shift in expectations of mainstream brands. These expectations go beyond communication of purpose itself and veer into ‘brand activism’. Brands are now having to address the credibility gap between comms and action, and doing so demands more than a messaging strategy – at the extreme it can mean changing the whole company approach. 

At Strat house we see this being reflected in the evolving model of our ‘brand journey’ framework: the development of how a brand thinks and acts. There has been a clear shift, and we work with marketers who are feeling far more pressure to move towards the right, towards purpose and even brand activism.

The brand journey is evolving in the same way as many cycles – what was previously seen as an advanced development now becomes hygiene. In our client conversations, we say that for some brands, having a product or consumer-focused approach is enough, but what that means now has changed and both should run as a strategic thread through the business.

However with a consumer-focused brand, it’s often necessary for a company to establish the emotional benefit of the brand on its own and to draw on the positive impact of the parent company, whether that is in sustainability, diversity or another cultural and societal impact.  

A recent example of this could be Innocent Drinks, a brand celebrated for years as a great example of being consumer-focused, relevant and relatable. But a pushback has started. Comms promoting the need for recycling led to complaints from advocacy group Plastics Rebellion that the brand was greenwashing. It’s a salutary lesson that when you’ve set the bar high for years, ‘saying’ may no longer be sufficient. You may well be expected to offer more transparency, and more evidence of the actions you are taking. 

How many brands will be sending out comms in October regarding Black History Month but not demonstrating their commitment through a systemic change in hiring and promotion approaches? How many will say they have a brand purpose, but not take internal action to address the cultural issues they believe are important? The answer is still ‘too many’.

As a strategy practice, we don’t help with internal changes of course. But I am a fan of borrowing Ron Tite’s “Think. Do. Say.” to start looking at the issue. Think about whether and how you evolve – what you should DO about your brand purpose …and whether and how you adjust your brand foundations to ensure you can Say consistently and clearly. It’s not rocket science. But it is a sensible way to sense-check if what you’re doing is the best way to connect with your consumers, whether they are Gen Z or beyond.