Challenging customers: Gillette faces its slogan's echo

The context, in plain terms

On January 13, 2019, Gillette, a Procter & Gamble brand, aired its "We Believe: The Best Men Can Be" advertising campaign. This film openly questioned male behaviors, including bullying, sexism, and sexual harassment. It asked if this was truly "The Best a Man Can Get," the brand's historic slogan for 30 years. This campaign was presented as a modern reinterpretation of that motto, coinciding with its thirtieth anniversary.

The announcement immediately captured considerable public attention. It sparked strong controversy and millions of views in a few days. A later summary on Gillette's website described this 2019 initiative as a multi-year campaign built around the concept "The Best Men Can Be."

Publicly, the exact date of the company's internal decision is not established. January 13, 2019, was the date the announcement aired, not necessarily its approval date.

One Slogan, Two Readings

On January 13, 2019, Gillette's announcement resonated differently depending on the audience. For some observers, the brand took a courageous stance. It addressed topics like harassment and toxic masculinity. But for others, especially its long-time customers, the message read as a personal attack. It questioned their very identity.

Faced with this decision, the panel of simulated voices revealed a contrasted response. About one voice in three declared against the campaign. About one voice in three expressed doubt. A little less than half supported it. This diversity of reactions highlights the complexity of reaching such a broad and heterogeneous audience.

Some groups count for more because the decision concerns them directly, or because this kind of decision is settled with them first. These historical customers protect their sense of belonging and recognition from a brand they have always used.

A brand cannot question its customers without hearing their response.

Doubt About the Message's Execution

The primary brake is doubt about the message's execution. The question is not so much the validity of the values Gillette championed. It is rather how the targeted men perceive and experience this stance. For many, the message lacked nuance. It turned an invitation to introspection into an accusation.

Objections focus on Gillette's ability to deliver such a delicate message without creating a rift with its base. A leader must ensure that the tone and form of their communication do not betray the initial intent. This is where Unintended Resonance appears: a well-intentioned message produces an unexpected and negative echo among a significant part of its audience.

The brand took a public stance. However, a portion of its customer base felt directly accused. It is not enough to want the best for your customers. You must also give them the means to recognize themselves in that message.

A powerful message can turn against its sender if it is not calibrated for its most loyal audience.

The Loyal Customer Feels Betrayed

At the heart of the negative reactions, the voice of the loyal customer resonates with particular clarity. The lifelong razor guy, belonging to the historical customer group, expresses a feeling of betrayal: "I’ve used Gillette since I was a kid, and now they’re calling me a bully? Screw this, I’m done." This reaction illustrates the difficulty for a brand to question its consumers' identity without risking alienating them.

This opposition is not a simple disagreement. It is a strong emotional break. It highlights the fragility of the customer relationship when the brand's perceived values directly conflict with customers' self-image.

We ran the exercise three times: same answer. Gillette's message created a lasting wound for a portion of its customer base. This wound does not heal easily.

A customer's loyalty is earned over decades but can be lost with a single announcement.

Measure the Echo Before Speaking

Now that the decision is public, a leader's first follow-up action is to precisely measure the message's resonance with its most sensitive audiences. This is not about abandoning values. It is about ensuring the intent is well received. This means identifying friction points and unexpected interpretations. One must speak to those who feel targeted, not to apologize for the values, but to clarify the intent and offer dialogue.

Gillette, for its part, continued its initiative. It described the 2019 campaign as a multi-year effort around "The Best Men Can Be." However, nothing public indicates whether specific communication adjustments were made to defuse the strongest reactions.

This case does not say if the brand succeeded in regaining the trust of its most hostile customers. Looking back at the January 13, 2019 announcement, we understand that Gillette's challenge was not to speak. It was to ensure its message did not produce Unintended Resonance.

Silence after a strong message is a response in itself.

The questions readers ask

Related cases

No other published case is about the same kind of decision. See all Hub cases