An unlikely theory on emotional branding...
I bought into Lovemarks and the approach of using creative to foster emotional connections with consumers. I believe this thinking has merit, but why has it not evolved in a decade? When so much is happening in the marketing landscape, I am shocked to still read articles that tout Lovemarks with the same vigor.
Are we really trying to foster relationships with brands today? Does my "like" really mean I am friends with your brand? If we are talking relationships then may I propose that your brand is your consumers' trophy wife - and you should be darn proud of it!
The success of sharing online is rooted in the fact that people love talking about themselves. People love to let others know who and what they care about.
Every choice a consumer makes and every post or tweet they write is a direct reflection on them. So isn't there an opportunity for brands to shift their focus and start to consider what they can do to become a brand consumers choose to associate themselves with - to transition from emotion to affiliation?
Lovemarks spoke of wanting to create a long term, enduring relationship between consumers and brands. Are we really buying into the musings of Jerry Maf*ckinguire? People and relationships don't complete you...but brands do. The brands a consumer surrounds themselves with are a direct reflection of who they are and their personality. You choose brands because they are in line with your values, interests or what you perceive those values and interest to be. The underpinnings of why brands want to speak to consumer emotions could become a little less about pulling at heartstrings if you will and a bit more about appealing to consumer projections of what they stand for in this world.