Will the Middle East Democratization Spread to Your Brand?

With the waves of protests and upheaval spreading throughout the Middle East, getting on the bandwagon of democracy has been as visible as during the late 1700’s with the American and French Revolutions.  If we look closer at some of the reasons for this rapid democratization, we can ascertain a number of factors which lay the groundwork for this movement, including perceived abuse of power, education, and organizational capacity.

Rather than turn this into a political diatribe, however, I thought I’d take a look at each of these factors as it relates to the well publicized ‘democratization of brands’ – you know, how every brand is ceding control of their brand over to consumers – and ask if the potential exists within a brand for ‘violent upheaval’.  ‘Violent upheaval’ in a brand context probably does not involve lynching the brand manager, or storming corporate HQ with an angry mob.  More likely it means nasty tweets and Facebook postings, unpleasant blogs, pressure on partners or distributors to disassociate, lots of negative PR, and/or, probably worst of all, declining sales.

So is your brand susceptible to violent upheaval?  Let’s see if any of the political/sociological factors apply:

1.  Perceived abuse of power – In most of the cases of the Middle East where democratic protests or revolutions are occurring, the ruler is often perceived as ‘out of touch’, abusive, tyrannical.  This ‘rallying cry’ against an established power who is seen as abusive often acts as the catalyst for violent overthrow.  Witness the Iranian Revolution in the 1970’s to overthrow the Shah.  Witness the French and American Revolutions in the 1700’s to over throw ruling autocracies or foreign nations.  The parallel to brands is also true – the potential for ‘violent upheaval’ as defined earlier is greater in situations where a brand or company is perceived to be either abusive or overly dominant.  Witness the banks during the recent financial crisis, and the hammering they took in the news and through views expressed in books, blogs, tweets, and postings.  Witness the questions raised of monolithic, powerful brands like Microsoft and Intel in the 1990’s, or Google, Apple, and Facebook in the 2000’s.  Witness the continued criticism of health insurance providers, big pharma, cable, mobile phone service providers, or utilities who enjoy a huge market share in their respective markets, but who are more susceptible to social media ‘action’ by their constituency.  When these markets open up to more competition, or where monolithic brands falter and fail to keep up with market changes, the response from consumers can be swift and merciless.  

 

2.  Education – The more educated the nation, especially in ‘Western’ values, the more likely democratic principles will take hold.  More educated nations tend to have more liberal policies and encourage various human rights such as freedom of assembly or speech.  More illiterate nations tend to support populist rulers, allowing for dictatorships or authoritarian regimes to gain a foothold of power.  In the case of brands, it’s clear that the better educated its consumers are on the policies of that brand, the greater the likelihood for democratization.  Protests such as the Nestle baby milk protest or Nike foreign working practices would undoubtedly not have happened thirty or forty years ago, as such policies and practices would not have been readily publicized, leaving the consumer in the dark.  With more transparency, and 24/7 coverage of companies, together with more established mores on socially responsible corporate practices, it’s clear that the consumer today is better educated on many of the issues than in previous generations.  So yes, brand democracy is more likely to happen with an educated (defined as knowledgeable, not degree-holding) consumer base.  It is likely to continue to grow, as subsequent generations learn more about brands, companies, and what is/is not socially acceptable. 

3.  Organizational capacity – In the case of nations moving towards democracy, having the means to organize – such as unions, pressure groups, or political parties – is essential to broaden a democratic movement.  It has been well publicized regarding the role of Facebook in supporting the Egyptian revolution.  The power of such organizing vehicles cannot be underestimated where brands are concerned.  In fact, probably the largest single driver of brand democratization has been the ease and speed in which consumers can voice their views and opinions about a brand to others.  This genie will not go back in the bottle.  Brands which lack a coherent social media strategy, who choose to ignore or dismiss it, run the risk of ‘violent upheaval’ should information leak out about a misdeed or service failure.