I’m trying to understand how ogregores (greater-than-human techno-social entities that affect our lives) behave. The recent controversy involving Bud Light and a transgender Instagram influencer clearly demonstrates a pattern: when companies perform well, their leaders take the credit, but when they falter, blame falls on lower-level employees and the overall corporate structure. Given that successes often garner more media attention than failures, the role of leadership in corporate actions tends to be overstated. To understand the collective roots of corporate action, one must delve deeper.
The Wall Street Journal summarized its story as follows: “The brewing giant behind the brand became a case study in how not to handle a culture-war storm.” For coverage from The New York Times, refer here and here. The coverage focused on various executives and largely ignored the internal dynamics behind the beer company's behavior.
The plot goeth thusly: Bud Light marketers sent a personalized can of Bud Light to transgender social media influencer Dylan Mulvaney, who promoted a Bud Light contest to her 1.8 million Instagram followers on April 1st. This led to a firestorm which Anheuser-Busch did not address for two weeks. It included calls for brand boycotts and buycotts; a more than 28% year-on-year drop in Bud Light sales; bomb threats at several Anheuser-Busch facilities and wholesale locations; confrontations of Anheuser-Busch employees by irate individuals; and protests by musicians Kid Rock and Travis Tritt. A belated Anheuser-Busch statement only aggravated the situation, leading to the replacement of the Bud Light marketing head and the elimination of her manager’s role. Senior leadership blamed the marketing team for the Mulvaney incident and denied any knowledge of the decision.
However, the Mulvaney promotion was in line with the company's long-standing corporate policy. Bud Light has sponsored LGBT rights groups and Pride events for decades. Its owner, Anheuser-Busch, has repeatedly stated its support for LGBT employee inclusion. Transgender track star Cecé Telfer even featured in a 2021 ad campaign for Michelob Ultra well before the June 2022 promotion of Alissa Heinerscheid, the ousted marketing head, to manage the Bud Light brand.
The Mulvaney incident was controversial due to the political, social, and economic context, not specific marketing decisions or organizational structures. Transgender issues have become a hot-button issue for social conservatives in recent years. The Bud Light brand has been in trouble for a while. Heiderscheid mentioned she was hired to reverse a long-term decline by targeting young consumers. Bud Light’s market share is particularly high in rural and conservative regions, particularly among men, while its market share in predominantly liberal urban areas has been shrinking. Anheuser-Busch's political contributions to Republican campaigns led some LGBTQ rights supporters to boycott the company two years ago.
I'm fond of Manuel DeLanda's substitution test (a term I use, not his): an organization is the relevant actor in an explanation if replacing individuals in specific roles within its hierarchical structure does not alter the organization's policies or day-to-day routines (DeLanda, A New Philosophy of Society: Assemblage Theory and Social Complexity, 2006:37) In this case, swapping any Anheuser-Busch employees wouldn't have changed the company's policies, nor would the unfolding of the story have been different.
I'm not implying that executive decisions are never crucial in actions. For instances like France under Napoleon, or Apple under Steve Jobs, the substitution test would fail. However, I am suggesting that the roles of executives are often overemphasized by news coverage, which is largely written by and for humans.
Observable egregore behaviors in this case include marketing, public and private communications, and tracking metrics:
Marketing strategy: This can be inferred from actions. Prior to the controversy, Bud Light sponsored LGBT rights groups; afterward, it was included for the first time in Anheuser-Busch’s long-standing sponsorship of a veterans organization. Although marketing tactics are decided by specific employees, and different ones may choose different paths, I don't believe this undermines an egregore explanation. Organizations hire individuals and structure their hierarchy to align with their strategies and intended tactics. The strategy to target urban progressives preceded Alissa Heinerscheid's tenure. Anyone fitting her job description would have made similar decisions. She was just unlucky that Mulvaney was the butterfly whose fluttering brought down a storm on her head.
Crisis response: Most large organizations have established protocols for crises, developed well in advance. The CEO may decide what to do on a particular day, but this is informed by a staff process. In this case, the public response was slow. It did happen, though, taking various forms such as company statements, CEO interviews, reorganization, HR action, and meetings with key stakeholders.
Commercial metrics: These include sales, ad spending, stock price, and social media sentiment.
Update 7 June 2023:
A Wall Street Journal article about corporate responses to social media storms sheds light on how companies determine their reactions.
PPG Industries, a Pittsburgh-based paint maker, “uses an internal scoring system to determine if, and when, it is judicious for the company to comment on contentious issues that may upset some of its customers and employees, or impact its brands.” Executives, including legal and HR reps, meet regularly to weigh the merits and drawbacks of taking a stand. If the executives decide to comment, they deliberate on their messaging. In a similar vein, Upwork, which runs a freelancer marketplace, uses a series of questions developed by the leadership team over several years to help decide whether to weigh in. They include how central the topic is to the business and its customers, and whether customers would expect the company to have an opinion.
It’s clear that protocols are used to develop positions and decide actions. This is a group effort, not a decision made by a solitary leader.
No comments:
Post a Comment