2 Comments
author

Reilly, thanks for the comment. What we saw in the research is that people weren't identifying with the brands because the brands created an image/story that they bought into (80s innovation) but because they could identify how the brand was going to improve some aspect of their lives (functionally, emotionally, socially, aspirationally) and what they wanted was ongoing improvement, not one time improvement. They wanted to believe that the brand stood for continuous improvement to their needs. I do believe that there is a direct connection between situational markets and personal performance (and therefore loyalty).

People desire today to be able to respond to specific situations with improved personal performance. They look to technology and solution providers to do that for them.

Your comment makes me want to explore how desires have evolved.

Expand full comment

I’m very intrigued by this.

Do you feel that “personal performance” boils down to desire?

A desire to relax, a desire to solve the issue which stems from a bigger desire that the problem has created.

Like most knowledge, their is the unknown as well which could be known and unknown desires such as most people not knowing they wanted an automobile for Ford or people not knowing that they desire to track their steps, etc. — the desire may be rooted in mimetic desire as well majority of the time.

There also may be levels of desire based on the reason that is contextually dependent on the situation.

Just some initial thoughts!

Expand full comment