The Tiger Woods scandal is not only rocking the sporting world, but also the corporate world. The legendary golfer who, till two weeks ago, had a squeaky clean image and an incredible golfing record, was the natural choice as a brand ambassador for companies as varied as Gilette, Nike, AT&T and Accenture. Take the case of Accenture. They had linked their high performance brand so closely with Tiger’s persona, that now they have had to beat a hasty rereat. Typically professional firms such as Accenture (which has its roots in consulting) do not buidl their brand using their CEO’s image, unlike many other companies in the technology space like a Microsoft or a Wipro or Infosys in India. However, by persisting with Tiger Woods for over 5 years now, they have adopted the same personality led theme.
Celebrity led branding is always risky as one is trying to connect a company’s personality with the celebrity’s “public” image. One has to be careful about skeletons in the cupboard, as the unexpected twist in the Tiger’s tale shows!
In this context, there are risks of branding a company beyond a point using the CEO’s image. We all know the fall out of the Satyam saga, a brand built around Ramalinga Raju. Likewise, even a smarter company like Infosys, may have been slightly caught on the wrong foot when Nandan exited the company as he had been the most visbile face of Infosys since Mr Murthy stepped back.
The moral of the story is that all companies would be well advised to use a mix of methods, and also carefully evaluate “shelf life” of different approaches.
Popularity: 10% [?]
Well, once Tiger’s multiple women started jumping out of the closet, Pepsi was the first to drop Tiger Woods as their brand ambassador, and now Accenture has followed suit. Personality-led branding is highly risky in today’s information-led age, where nothing can be kept secret anymore.
But on another note, are we expecting too much of our heroes? Why are we making them out to be gods? – of course we then will be devastated when they show their feet of clay. But Tiger was an athlete, not a politician. He was enormously gifted, disciplined and driven. But moral strength, loyalty to wife and family – these are bonuses, but we have begun demanding these virtues as well.
Now, expecting politicians to tread the straight and narrow, and our leaders of industry to be honest and ethical is one thing, but should we expect the same from our sports heroes?
Gayatri,in the case of Tiger Woods, integrity was a key part of his public persona. Especially in the case of Accenture, which is in the services business, that was important. Also, as human beings, we will be influenced by the personal lives of celebrities when they endorse something. A minor dalliance would have been forgiven, but this appears to have crossed the threshold. Also, what the public will find hard to forgive is that their views have been manipulated- I think if they remain as sportspeople it is fine, but the moment they make a business out of endorsements they ought to lead by example.
Tiger Woods is supposed to have made a cool 1 billion from just endorsements last year. With that kind of earnings, he better maintain a squeaky clean image. Guess they can’t it have it both ways.
I’m sure that Accenture felt that by paying Tiger Woods a huge sum of money, it had rights to both the man and his game; but Sudha, the point I was making was – shouldn’t we, the public, be able to separate the human being from the sportsman? As a golf pro, Tiger is the greatest – and he does ‘personify Accenture’s claimed attributes of integrity and high performance.’ He hasn’t taken drugs to enhance his performance, there are no accusations of cheating – he has been honest to the sport. And of course, his performance is way up there – as high as can be. It is not what we as the public want him to be – in a perfect world, all sportsmen will be demi-gods – but should the public be able to separate the man and the game?
It is interesting that Nike has said it will continue to support Tiger, and Tag Heuer hasn’t pulled out yet – I wonder how this will play out.
An interesting aside and a continuation of Deepta’s blog that there is a market for everything – there is a gambler for every situation! ‘The question now is if and when Mr Woods will do his first confessional interview, perhaps on Oprah Winfrey’s show? If he does, British bookies have put the odds at 8-1 that he would shed a tear.’
It seems you can calculate the odds for any situation……
Celebrity branding is definitely a high-risk high-reward proposition.
Most people have an emotional connect with celebrities. It is that emotional connect that the brand is drawing on, when it gets the celebrity on board. And hence the risk of negative association is just as strong as the positive association.
Makes one wonder if celebrities are worth all the trouble and expense (from a branding perspective)
Gayatri, much as you rationally argue as Ramya has also said, it is the emotional connect with the public that determines the value of a personality’s brand. That is why some people become stars while others who perhaps have more talent, do not, because they lack that charisma.
Also, Woods did flaunt his happily married family man image- see the number of pictures of him, in happier days, with his family. So it appears that he did use that image to add to his aura. Hence he would need to pay the penalty I guess.
I have been a huge Tiger Woods fan, and although I don’t know the difference between a Birdie and an Eagle, I have been following Tiger since Augusta 1997, and have come to admire him over the years. So, when the scandal erupted, it came as a huge shock.As they say, When It Rains, It Pours. The last time I saw the news, the count was 14, and I guess there is more to come.
Setting aside the whole moral argument, it was surprising to see the reaction of Tiger’s long time caddie, Steve Williams. In the good old days, Williams was eloquent about his being a close friend of Tiger. Tiger was also the best man at Williams’ wedding.Now,Williams has done an about turn, and he has gone to great lengths to distance himself from Tiger, arguing that ” I WORK for Tiger, and I don’t know what he does off the filed”.You will find your true friends when you are going through your worst time.
Scott Fitzgerald put it aptly when he said” Show me a hero and I will write you a tragedy”. It remains to be seen if Tiger can come out of this tragedy and add to his golfing legend.But Golf will never be the same again for a generation of non-followers like me, who were essentially in it only because a certain Eldrick Tont Woods was fulfilling his destiny.
The debate around this post in a way illustrates the point I made originally! Tiger Woods has evoked so much of reaction, some chiding him and others empathizing with him. It shows that even people remotely associated with the game or him have a point of view. Imagine the viral effect of the opinions of millions of such people all across the globe. I rest my case!
Read this article – http://seekingalpha.com/article/179011-accenture-drops-tiger-woods-excessive-damage-control
Quoting from the article – As reporter Jeremy Mullman pointed out, “there is a certain irony that a consulting firm, which gave advice for a living, is learning this lesson.” Figuring how Accenture built their reputation alongside Tiger Woods’ image, his fall is a huge event — one that will certainly remain a blip on Accenture’s image. As Accenture had put it before, Tiger Woods had served as a, “metaphor for [Accenture’s] commitment to helping companies become high-performance businesses.”