Mr. Schumacher discusses the notion of a “post-future hangover,” highlighting societal disillusionment with ambitious goals that remain unfulfilled, such as climate change and gender equality. He notes a significant shift in consumer behavior due to recent crises, emphasizing the need for companies to genuinely engage with customers rather than merely projecting ideals. As brand trust becomes increasingly crucial, he suggests that brands must fill the societal void left by traditional institutions, evolving into “everything brands” that provide direction beyond their products.
The Concept of a Future Hangover
Mr. Schumacher, it’s intriguing that you refer to yourself as a futurist while simultaneously stating that we are experiencing a post-future hangover. Could you elaborate on what this means?
As a society, we’ve set remarkably ambitious goals for our future. We believed we could effortlessly juggle work and family, manage migration and integration, champion gender equality, and tackle climate change. We aimed for more women in leadership roles, body positivity, and a multitude of other aspirations. Yet, here we are today, feeling like we’ve made little to no progress.
Many individuals are conducting a reality check and coming to terms with the fact that our advancements have stalled. We’re now further from achieving climate goals than we were before. Body positivity seems overshadowed by the rampant use of Ozempic. This isn’t about mocking these issues; rather, people are starting to rethink their priorities.
Shifts in Consumer Behavior
With your background in marketing, how has the consumer’s desires shifted?
The transformation in consumer behavior over the past three years has been more significant than in the last three decades. Developed nations are currently facing what can be termed a permacrisis, marked by a series of events: the financial crisis, euro crisis, refugee crisis, climate change, COVID-19, war, and inflation. This has prompted a re-evaluation of priorities and a departure from established behavioral patterns.
For instance, during the COVID-19 pandemic, the concept of “the new normal” emerged, which many consider an understatement. The pandemic forced rapid behavioral changes, with individuals adapting to new realities almost overnight.
Take digitalization as an illustration. It surged ahead, allowing for unprecedented delivery options. While this initially seemed beneficial to consumers, it led to inflated expectations. When consumers engage with companies that haven’t significantly improved their services—like airline call centers—the disconnection becomes apparent. Consumers begin to question whether they are truly valued.
Are companies losing touch with their customers?
In marketing theory, we’ve emphasized the importance of putting the customer first for the past two decades. However, we’re only gradually reaching this ideal, thanks to advancements in technology. While this shift is beneficial for consumers, it also alters their expectations.
How do your theories reconcile the improvement in convenience with the existence of a future hangover among consumers?
Many aspects of life in developed economies have indeed improved over the last fifty years—be it advancements in health or nutrition. Yet, we are now grappling with a “cost-of-living crisis” that extends beyond inflation. This situation affects previously attainable goals, such as vacations, home ownership, and education for children. These aspirations have historically served as the glue holding Western democracies together, and their erosion poses a significant threat.
Are we witnessing the emergence of a generation that is indifferent to future aspirations?
In Europe, we observe what some describe as the “end of ambition,” indicating a waning desire for upward mobility. When the promises of progress and societal narratives fail to materialize, it creates a precarious situation for Western democracies, fostering polarization and populism.
Could the consumer’s disillusionment be linked to political phenomena, like Donald Trump’s re-election?
Absolutely! The consumer’s mindset is intricately connected to these political outcomes. A stark example is that seventy percent of Germans anticipated a win for Kamala Harris, largely due to a disconnect from the realities faced by Americans.
Who exactly constitutes “we” in this context?
This refers to certain elite circles, including academic and urban communities, along with segments of the marketing and media industries. There has been a noticeable detachment from broader societal dynamics.
While politicians may misjudge public sentiment, corporations invest heavily in understanding their target audiences. Why do they also falter?
We exist in a new communication landscape where the loudest voices often dominate. Movements like the woke movement have gained traction because a small group effectively amplifies their message, which may not reflect the concerns of the general populace.
Many companies have engaged with social topics; for example, VW has embraced rainbow colors in support of the LGBTQ community, and numerous firms are employing diversity managers. Is this approach misguided?
While it’s important to acknowledge the positive aspects of discussing diversity and female empowerment, there’s also a risk. Out of insecurity, managers may overreach and address every possible issue, diluting their message. Consequently, many marketing campaigns risk becoming mere folklore, which can be counterproductive.
What does better consumer engagement look like?
We need to take consumers seriously and actively listen to their needs. A better approach would involve creating thoughtful offerings instead of patronizing or dictating terms to them.
Should companies reconsider their diversity initiatives?
Not every individual needs to participate in every initiative, nor does everyone need to get along. Embracing this diversity of thought is what can elevate a brand’s identity.
In a world of disillusioned consumers, do brands hold greater significance?
Brands will bear more responsibility moving forward than they have in the past. Traditionally, societal anchors like churches, families, and political parties provided guidance, but these roles have fragmented. Companies and brands must now fill that trust void.
Is this expectation too demanding? After all, many companies are primarily profit-driven.
Brands such as Nike, Apple, or Gucci have already embraced this new role. They possess a guiding competence that extends beyond their products’ functionality. For instance, if Nike were to open a hotel, it would likely attract customers; if Marriott launched a sneaker, it would not. This difference stems from Nike’s ability to offer a sense of direction that Marriott lacks. This concept is often referred to as “the everything brand.”
Does Donald Trump embody the idea of an “everything brand”?
In a sense, yes. We are navigating through extraordinary times, where…