Opinion

Spending money is an exercise in choice and influence, so why waste it?

matt jones better happyThe social media response to the Alan Jones saga is uplifting, argues Matt Jones

When thousands warn a brand they will buy a competitor product unless the brand ceases funding content they find offensive, is that really 21st Century censorship? Or just consumers expressing a preference? 

When those same people use social media to amplify their voices, accelerating and multiplying the impact of their purchase intentions, is that cyber bullying? Or just consumers seeking to shape the world they live in, not just shop it?

Like most people, there are things I don’t like about the world and would like to change (or at least influence). But how to be heard?

I can vote. But voting is a limited way of expressing personal views. For one, you don’t get to vote very often. For another, you don’t get many votes. So expressing complex, balanced, multifaceted views is hard through voting alone.

I can campaign. I can protest, engage in direct action, write letters, phone in to radio stations, organize advocacy groups, and of course I can give my time and money.

And I can spend (or not). I can reward brands whose products and purpose I welcome, and withdraw my dollars from those brands I don’t approve of.

Of the three, it’s the spending option that is most rich with potential (we make hundreds of spending decisions every month) and arguably the least utilized.

I’ve long believed that the biggest impact of social media on brands would be to force them to behave better. But whereas three years ago, it felt like that would be focused on improving product behaviours (from better design to better service experiences), now we are seeing more signs of improved purpose-led behaviours too.

More and more brands are seeing the need to engage consumers at a purpose level. And it’s about more than just ensuring they have a socially responsible bottom line that takes care of people and planet, not just profit.

Look at Tom’s Shoes, who provide a pair of shoes to the developing world for every pair they sell in the rich world. Or Warby Parky, the eyewear brand that has adopted a similar one-for-one model but taken it a step further in terms of engagement with front line development experts. Warby Parker is also a B (Benefit) Corp, as is Patagonia, allowing them both to pursue a far wider range of public benefit objectives.

White-hot consumer brands like these (Fast Company ranked Patagonia the 14th most innovative company in the world this year) recognize that doing good (and being seen to do good) is good business too.

More and more people are grabbing the opportunity to express social preferences through consumption, whether switching to a fairtrade brand of coffee, using a local shopping loyalty card, or even dining at Chick-Fil-A (as thousands of conservative Americans did in support of the restaurant CEO’s comments about gay marriage).

Where activism through consumption gets really interesting is when people both do it together (creating scale) and do it openly (creating impact and changing behaviour). And, as Chick-Fil-A Appreciation Day showed us, it doesn’t have to be about boycotts…it can be about support too.

Carrotmob is a movement that encourages groups of people to vote with their money. Carrotmobs are based on coordinated agreements betweenconsumers and businesses, where if enough consumers agree to spend, then businesses take agreed ‘good’ actions.

It’s Groupon with meaning, pooling spending power to do more than save money. And that has to be a good thing. So good, in fact, that Unilever has just entered into a partnership with Carrotmob. Their first project together is focused on reducing ozone emissions from grocery stores. Here’s an extract from the agreement: “…for every two percent increase in the average attendance at the Carrotmob event on Saturday October 6, 2012, [Unilever shall] install one new energy efficient freezer in Pasadena’s Fresh and Easy retail outlet…up to a total of five energy efficient freezers.”

Ok so it’s a dry agreement about new freezers in a local grocery store, but the point is fascinating, and the potential endless.

The Big Idea Fund, developed in part by the Australian social scientist Ross Honeywill, is another new effort at consumer activism worth tracking. As are the emerging efforts of platforms like Brand Karma to crowdsource more meaningful and holistic rankings of brands.

As someone who believes that business can be part of the solution, not just the problem, when it comes to the big challenges facing society, I’ve found the online response to Alan Jones’ comments genuinely uplifting. It’s consumers voting (vocally) with their wallets.

Whether you want to see a more sustainable Australia, a fairer Australia, or even a kinder Australia…amplifying your voice and influence by rewarding businesses using their own spending power to help deliver those outcomes and sharing your actions using social media, is helping create a more and purposeful free market and more active society.

  • Matt Jones is the founder of Better Happy, a consultancy focused on connecting brands and purpose-led organisations.
ADVERTISEMENT

Get the latest media and marketing industry news (and views) direct to your inbox.

Sign up to the free Mumbrella newsletter now.

 

SUBSCRIBE

Sign up to our free daily update to get the latest in media and marketing.