Why brands get 'authenticity' completely wrong.
If you need a team of branding experts trying to define what authentic means, then you're probably not being authentic.
I'm lucky enough to have a pretty weird career which has seen me get a grounding in an old-school newsroom, and report on an industry which is absolutely obsessed with its self-image.
I've then managed to segue into brand editorial units (bit of an oxymoron), and finagle my way into brand teams with huge marketing budgets.
One of the things which my experience has allowed me to get a different perspective on is brands grappling with the concept of authenticity.
As a reporter, I didn't worry about the concept of authenticity at all. Something was news, I reported it. It was real.
Given truth is an essential element of authenticity, it just flowed naturally into my writing if I was doing my job right.
So, imagine the absolute mind-f**k of trying to reverse engineer it.
Authenticity isn't what you think it is.
One of the interesting things I've done over the past couple of years is work with teams grappling with tone-of-voice documentation and how to implement it.
I've also worked with completely well-meaning HR types telling us to 'bring our whole selves to work' and 'embrace our humanity'.
You know, the kind of stuff you'd find on LinkedIn where professionals desperately connect with other professionals to try and find context and meaning in work which amounts to a hill of beans.
But what people don't get about authenticity is that anger is authentic.
Sarcasm is authentic.
Bad moods are authentic.
Frustration is authentic.
All those things that are completely imperfect but make us humans is an integral part of what makes something authentic.
So why on earth would a brand want to be authentic? That may involve telling a customer who's carrying on like a pork chop that they're carrying on like a pork chop -- and that's not great for brands, generally speaking.
It may involve several representatives of a company speaking in their own voice, because they're human beings and not an extension of a brand.
So brands really need to stop describing themselves as authentic, because it's not something they actually want.
So, what do brands actually want when they say they want to be authentic, and how do they achieve it?
How to be authentic: the five pillars of brand authenticity
I'm not a branding expert, but I've been lucky enough to be in brand teams which have grappled with this very question.
Most brands, when they say they want to be authentic actually mean that they want to be seen as friendly and consistent -- and there's nothing wrong with that.
But actual authenticity is the demonstration of the same behaviour over a long period of time, and that's not really something you can flex with tone of voice -- it's an attribute customers give a brand.
So, how do you earn it?
Don't try too hard. It's trite, but there is something in the old maxim that the coolest people don't try to be cool -- they're just cool.
Stick up for what you care about. Take Atlassian. It talks about diversity, and it walks the talk, relentlessly. It talks about wanting to make the world a better place, and Mike Cannon-Brookes openly advocates for clean energy policies.
Speak in your customers' voice. Think about how freaked out you'd be if you met somebody in a pub and they started talking in perfectly crafted copy which had been run through five sets of marketers. Just talk like a human.
Be honest. When something goes wrong, be honest about why it's going wrong. Obviously a little diplomacy goes a long way, but trying to hide what's happening or passing the buck is a one-way ticket to gross.
Be consistent. In much the same way you earn customer loyalty by solving their problems over and over again, you only gain authenticity when you demonstrate the same behaviours over a long time period.
The bad brands out there will want to sound authentic, but the good brands will know how to be authentic.
But of course, this is just one man's rambling -- what do you think?