A recent trip to Scotland got me thinking; it seems unjust that a countries’ perceived identity is so often defined by a clichéd collection of stereotypes. Look at Scotland – for some the home of Irn Bru and battered chocolate bars. Of course for others it’s also the home of countless areas of outstanding natural beauty, has one of the most vivid, fascinating histories – and is a land with a truly compelling story. The same story is true of some of the most famous brands. Despite all efforts to the contrary, these brands are consistently linked to unwanted stereotypes, with potentially damaging effects.
Take Stella Artois, defined by its marketing segmentation as a “premium” lager, and yet it has seen its “reassuringly expensive” heritage tarnished by negative stereotypes. One where it’s potency is not an indicator of quality, but excess – one where UK consumers refer to the drink as ‘wife beater’. This negative imagery prompted a large scale re-positioning exercise. InBev (the producers of Stella Artois) released Stella Artois 4%, a product with a lower alcohol volume in silver packaging, aiming to quash perceptions of the brand as a super strength drink resembling sleeveless shirts called ‘wife beaters’. The repositioning was initially successful, with the product being the most successful grocery product launched in 2009. However, how much damage was done beneath the surface? How much damage to the brand’s heritage has already been done, not to mention the cost of the repositioning to InBev?
Assuming that negative stereotypes can be detrimental; does this also mean that positive stereotypes are beneficial? The answer is not always a simple yes or no. Looking at Apple, this becomes apparent. Yes, Apple is widely perceived as an extremely innovative brand – undoubtedly a position many brands envy and desire. However, this stereotype carries huge expectation where the response bar is very high and consumers are consistently speculating over the whys and wherefores of the next iPhone and iPad(s). If speculation is met by a delayed release date or under delivery, brand affinity may be compromised. The bigger picture of concern for Apple is that now the ‘innovative label’ has been placed on them, the onus exists for them to continually release new, ground breaking products. If we believe that innovation is a potentially finite resource in the world of electronic consumer goods – AND your brand is built on an innovation proposition, will this limit its longevity?
If social media is a brand’s new best friend, stereotypes may be a brand’s oldest adversary. Negative stereotypes can force unexpected, potentially expensive, brand repositioning and positive stereotypes can cause extremely high consumer expectations – immense challenges for brands to meet, especially given the crowded marketplace and increased consumer power in the 21st century.









