The alibi of schmauthenticity

Tom Asacker has problems with the concept of authenticity. He thought about it for a long time and wrote an article to express his point: Authenticity Schmauthenticity! He doesn’t believe in it. He believes that consumers want a great experience even if the inauthenticity hits them in the head.

I posted on authenticity before and referred to Tom here and here and here again. All my posts on authenticity can be found here. Basically my point is that most consumers do not care about authenticity, but:

1. Consumers do care about the consequences of organizations not being authentic; they do not like to be taken for a fool.
2. Being authentic means living up to your promise. A lot of organizations don’t. Again, consumers care about not having their expectations lived up to.
3. Authenticity makes it easier for for brand and organizational culture and behavior to align and be consistent over time. Especially for organizations that bring an experience. Inauthenticity requires good actors to give a consistent performance.
4. Authenticity has to do with Corporate Social Responsibility. Inauthentic CSR is worse than no CSR at all. Just like claiming authenticity when one is not is a big no-no.
5. All in all authenticity in itself means nothing. There can be good authenticity and bad authenticity.

So I think there is more of a nuance to the concept of authenticity then Asacker’s presents. His position creates an alibi for every organization that wants to be untruthful or even misleading; the consumer doesn’t want authenticity or truth. If organizations are given this alibi not to be genuine, where will that lead? To tobacco companies bamboozling their consumers into the false belief that smoking is a pleasant experience without any effect on their health…..? I think we passed that point a long long time ago…………………

Comments

[Tom Asacker]

The proof of the desirability of "authenticity" - whatever that is - in the marketplace lies in the behavior of customers in the marketplace.

And imho authenticity is not the same thing as telling the truth. For what is the truth? For example, bottled water is a huge waste of $, and the plastic consumes oil and is polluting the environment. Is that YOUR truth?

[Pepita]

Tom: I think the whole thing about authenticity is that it doesn't matter if the customers in the marketplace want it or not. If you/an organization are/is authentic you do it anyway. It is a totally inside-out thing. As soon as you do authenticity because your customer want it, it is not authentic anymore.

[Eamon]

Interesting and useful post.

I think there are some brands such as Guinness where authenticity can play an important role. Many people think of Guinness as being from Ireland / Dublin and they associate Guinness with many traits of the Irish etc as well as being around for a long time .. Guinness does have a certain authenticity to it (that a new brand, for example, doesn't have) which can be converted, to a degree, into mystique.

Don't know. Might be wrong. Just throwing up a thought.

Eamon (www.spotlightideas.co.uk)