We love to see upstarts win. Whether we’re rooting for our favorite team that finally makes it to the Super Bowl; watching a favorite underground band that has become known; or choosing an up-and-coming vendor over the industry standard, there’s something in us that pulls for the underdog.
Professor Anat Keinan at Harvard has presented the first of her findings on the trend for consumers to gravitate to what she terms "underdog brand biographies." The full article will appear in February’s edition of Journal of Consumer Research. Upstarts and their stories are the heart and soul of Killing Giants: 10 Strategies to Topple the Goliath in Your Industry, so I’m always fascinated to hear different approaches to this subject.
Professor Keinan’s findings reinforce our love of giant-killer brands---and also point out a pitfall to the unwary.
The Hero’s Journey Resonates
“The common themes that link these brands' underdog biographies are a disadvantaged position in the marketplace … and tremendous passion and determination to succeed despite the odds,” Professor Keinan explains in Harvard’s Working Knowledge. “The underdog's external environment is largely negative. Underdogs start from a disadvantaged position and hit obstacles along the way … The underdog's internal characteristics are largely positive … perseverance in the face of adversity and (resiliency) even when they fail, staying focused on their end goal … They defy others' expectations that they will fail. They are more passionate than others about their goals, which serve a central role in defining the meaning of their lives, and they remain hopeful about achieving them, even when faced with obstacles.”
A quick trip through Joseph Campbell’s research in comparative mythology reminds us that this universal story---the hero’s journey---exists in cultures from the Eskimos to the rain forests to the Plains Indians, and everywhere in between. There’s no mystery in why we love these stories! We’ve been hearing them since the day we were born, in nursery rhymes, cartoons, and movies.
The Fight in the Dog vs. the Dog in the Fight
“Given that psychological research has shown that people want to associate themselves with winners (and therefore with winning brands), we thought it was interesting that brands would try to position themselves as underdogs because the underdog is the one expected to lose.”
I think there's a nuance here that needs exploring, namely the critical difference between also-rans and upstarts. We don’t pull for small brands just because they’re small---we gravitate to those brands that show us, by their actions and words, that they’re willing to make the journey and fight the fight against bigger, stronger opponents. We love winners, and we despise those who are unwilling to fight at all. Perennial second-class brands that wallow in last place don’t get our respect.
One Reason Why Being Seen as an Underdog Isn't Good
Professor Keinan ends with an exhortation to avoid forcing this cultural ideal on brands where it doesn’t fit. “Brand managers need to consider the credibility of the underdog narrative for the firm. Many brands emphasize their underdog roots, but if they are later acquired by large corporations, it diminishes the credibility of their underdog brand biographies. Brands, such as Ben & Jerry's and Snapple, have been criticized by consumers once they were acquired by large corporations. Additionally, there may be product categories for which consumers reject underdog brand biographies. With hospitals, consumers believe that being externally disadvantaged jeopardizes quality and safety.”
There are times where the story just doesn’t fit. Sometimes, brands outgrow their upstart narrative. And there are times when being an underdog isn’t a good thing at all.
