Brand Legitimacy- A concept beyond CSI

Article written by Greg Pfuhl and published with his permission

It is fair to say that any form of CSI initiative that assists those less fortunate at the expense of those very fortunate is applaudable. Regardless if it is harnessed as a means of creating a competitive advantage. However, in contemporary society there is the presence of the ‘Informed Consumer’; the consumer that deciphers every advertising or marketing practice before making that pivotal purchase decision. He/She has undertaken a natural learning process over time and is viably ‘streetwise’ when it comes to brands, almost impossible to manipulate. This consumer is infinitely critical and enjoys denouncing brand flaws. In line with this, the concept of CSI needs to be revisited by many companies. CSI needs to be infused with a sense of perceptive legitimacy. The outcome ideally being a concept called ‘Brand Legitimacy’; a perception of a brand that looks beyond standard CSI practices. It delves deeper into the legitimacy of the good that the organisation is truly trying to do. Ideally, it looks beyond the aesthetics of CSI and beyond those ever present charity logos or the countless pictures of employees happily digging outside a dilapidated primary school.

In an increasingly competitive corporate climate, brands have been compelled, often out of obligation more than desire, to initiate CSI initiatives. In the early days these initiatives were merely injections of excess profit. These injections housed very little thought and literally translated into financial benefit for a charity or NPO. These injections were occasionally squandered in wake of inadequate financial know-how on the receiver’s behalf. Alternatively, corruptive measures arose on the receiver’s side whereby this sudden surge of wealth offered far too much temptation. The greatest failing possibly came from the ‘givers’ distancing themselves from the ‘receivers’ post donation. They did not transfer their business acumen and assist in managing these funds efficiently. This final failing houses value far greater than the initial monetary contribution. The ‘givers’ in this case naturally did receive some form of enhanced brand equity based on the perception of ‘proactive selflessness’ and willingness to give. The authenticity of this perception is debatable, especially coupled with the cliché negative perception of a corporate; aggressive money hungry empires run by Porsche-driving profiteers.

Later down the line, these organizations saw the potential to benefit from these ‘selfless’ acts and subtly build advertising campaigns around them or merely include some form of CSI branding. This, coupled with the increasing literature on the ‘Informed Consumer’ would in theory sway the consumer away from the CSI-less competitor and into the arms of the CSI-Super King. In essence, this consumer would have his emotional strings yanked on with the thought that he may be assisting that starving pre-adolescent boy in the bottom right hand corner of the advert (that boy can very much encompass ‘aesthetic CSI’). After all, by shifting to the CSI Super King he/she would indirectly alleviate himself of a personal charitable obligation, without actually doing anything beyond altering purchasing patterns. In a theory, the company would fulfil the consumers Social Investment on their behalf if they in turn purchased their product(s).

This may all sound very cynical but I feel the sudden flood of CSI infused advertising justifies the extent to which corporate felt they could create comparative advantage, not truly fore-front a worthy cause. The pursued comparative advantage was often neutralised by all the companies jumping on the proverbial CSI-band wagon, resulting in a consumer decision based once again on quality, price and value for money (as before). It is apparent that the playing fields had levelled as a result. This levelling out meant that creativity was the core to gaining stand-out in terms of CSI and thus gaining that consumer patronage, ironically this resembles the advertising industry in general.

At this point in the cycle, CSI began to lean toward much more industry relevant initiatives. A basic example being a print media company beginning its own personalised paper recycling initiative built around creating awareness to other organisations and including them in its campaigning. This phase could be labelled the birth of Brand Legitimacy or maybe rather Industry Relevant CSI. The concept of ‘industry sustainability’ arose and essentially what your industry stole from Mother Earth needed to be replaced. Naturally, the issue of poverty would not be directly assisted by this. However, the resolution lay in the organisation, primarily the larger industrial ones, pin-pointing the communities in which their factories where situated and taking direct ownership of poverty resolution. The aesthetic CSI branding of these initiatives came in the form of ‘Thanks to ... You are now entering a socially uplifted area’ in billboard format, almost as if it were written by some random passer-by that felt compelled to praise this organisation. One thing that will never die, and if it were to die that would resemble the true prevalence of Brand Legitimacy; the inclination toward self-praise and an inherent obligation to inform everyone that they are doing good. I do suppose that is the only means of possible ROI for these organisations, but wouldn’t it be wonderful if a company did not pursue any means of advertising their goodwill. That would be sincere Brand Legitimacy, a true willingness to assist those less fortunate and make a tangible difference without anticipating some form of recognition. The ideal outcome for an organisation that deferred from the desire to ‘shout it from the mountain tops’ would be immense positive PR and word-of-mouth that inflated the brands equity well beyond its competitors – the true CSI Super King. This would not immediately result in a sudden revenue increase, rather a long-term respect and approval of the brand. A wonderful idealization one could say!

One recent example that I could offer that houses elements of Brand Legitimacy would be MTN’s 2010 TV commercial. This advert is based around motivating the nation about 2010 as well as indirectly denouncing those local and international sceptics. It blatantly persuades us that ‘We are ready’ for 2010. This aspect of the advert is not directly CSI but still manages to socially invest – invest in improving the morale of a nation. Better yet, it does not try to sell us anything or punt some product benefit. Secondly, the advert utilises South African music in the form of a very appropriate Goldfish song. This naturally has positive implications for the South African music industry if this trend is going to continue. The advert is also distinctly South African in context, offering a wide demographic split and shot on a colloquially South African landscape. This can only assist in building ‘brand South Africa’. This is not a very definitive example of Brand Legitimacy but still builds on the basic concept, essentially promoting the greater good without trying to directly bloat those profit margins.

There are undoubtedly legitimate brands out there that place values and the interest of their consumer as their core concern. It is however those brands that feel torn by a governmental and societal obligation to do good that concern me. It is also the manner how they have tried to manipulate a truly noble concept and try to use it as a secondary reason to purchase. With the growth of Informed Consumers and growing platforms for debate and discussion, the illegitimate brands will eventually be seen through and the repercussions will ideally occur.

Once again, please excuse my cynicism, especially in a nation like South Africa that craves any form of social investment. There is so much more to be gained from legitimate brands however. For instance, a brand that ushers funding in the direction of communities where their factories and labour forces reside. A brand that instils long term learning programmes in these communities. A brand that assists in the efficient management of donated funding. A brand that is willing to commit in the long term and has a true desire to see this community thrive and develop business minds and morally astute citizens. And finally, a brand that does not seek reward for this goodwill beyond the mere satisfaction of knowingly improving the lives of many. If this could occur and spill over throughout South Africa, imagine what the collective outcome would be.