Celebrity endorsement - Never 'just do it' !

Nike and its tumultuous history with its brand ambassadors is a real case study. After Tiger Woods, Oscar Pistorious, Lance Armstrong, and very recently , it is now the Tennis sensation Maria Sharapova who has given a headache to Nike and heartache to her fans world wide.

Nike recently terminated its contract with Manny Pacquaio after what they termed as his 'abhorrent' comments on LGBT community.
In the latest round of strained relationships with its brand ambassadors, Nike this week severed ties with the 28 year old five times grand-slam champion Maria Sharapova after her shocking revelation of having been  tested positively for a banned substance - meldonium at Australian open earlier this year.

Back home, Snapdeal had to bear the brunt for its brand ambassador Amir Khan's comment on the intolerance issue in the country which took a political turn.

Such incidents demonstrate the risks that brands are exposed to, while nominating a brand ambassador. While having a celebrity brand ambassador is almost a norm and not a choice in several industries and product categories, the risks of associating with a celebrity are as high as the reward.

Obviously, any such association demands a great deal of focus on personality alignment between the brand and the prospective ambassador, an important but grossly ignored concept.

It is imperative to mention here that the celebrity personality in today's highly networked truly global world is no more only about how they do their job, like  modeling, acting or sports etc, but also their social, political and cultural views and inclinations. Again, while these are more public in nature, due diligence is of utmost importance about their personal lives. Tiger woods' and Oscar Pistorious' cases testify this argument.

Brand managers blindly expect the positive  personality rub-off from the celebrity to their brands without taking into consideration a host of other factors that must be looked into.

Some of the important factors are -
# The individual and the collective personality of the celebrity
# The desired brand image of the product
# The synergy between the first two personalities
# The overlaps and counter-laps between the endorser and product personality

While the first two factors are extremely important to derive at what are we dealing with in terms of possible association between two personalities, the third factor helps in understanding whether or not there is a broad alignment between the product and the celebrity. However, it is most often the fourth factor which is blatantly ignored, and often to one's own peril.


The counter laps or the points/occurrence/frequency of contrasts between the two personalities(the endorser and the product) must be closely researched and debated before closing a brand endorsement decision. The most important decision here is what aspects of the celebrity's personality may not/are not - align/aligned, with the core brand personality and its desired brand image.

Finally, a brand endorsement is a very expensive decision for any marketing manager and a thorough due diligence is not a choice but a compulsion to avoid foot in mouth situations that hurt the brand and the company. This may very well help in avoiding some issues altogether while mitigate ill-effects of others.

Nike – Just did it…again !

It is remarkable how Nike manages to get into the wrong bogie every time. For the most innovative company of 2012 (Fastcompany.com), it is ironical to be astonishingly innovative and sadly, succeeding in finding a terrible end to its celebrity endorsement spree, with so much consistency!

When Oscar Pistorius was caught on charges of murdering his girlfriend earlier this week, Nike added another feather to its embarrassing “endorsement-gone-wrong” cap (Other feathers being Marion Jones, Tiger Woods, Lance Armstrong, Joe Paterno etc)

Oscar Pistorius

Celebrity endorsement has always been counted as one of the safest marketing tactics. But the times have changed and so is the perception of brands endorsed by celebrities. In the backdrop of multiple surveys it may be safe to assume that celebrity endorsement, to say the least, is no more a safe bet when it comes to ROI for marketers. However, endorsement of sports products by sports personalities still remains to be fairly effective. 

Celebrity-Brand connection due to endorsement

It is largely because of the very association which a consumer can make between the endorser and the product. Since the endorser is not just the propagator of the brand and its advantages, but is also an aspirational figure for the same audience, the brand identity is strengthened due to such endorsements.

Consistent brand communication, synergy between the endorser and the brand, brand personality created due to the endorser and the overall credibility of the endorser are some of the other reasons why companies are still relying upon sports figures for brand endorsements.

At first look, it may seem like this is it; the big marketing tactic for any product under the sun. But since we are only halfway through this post, I guess you must have realized that I would say, No!

Factors affecting celebrity Brand endorsement

Celebrity endorsement is not a no-risk game. There are substantial risks involved and multiple aspects must be considered before going on with one. Check the smart-art figure for some pointers on these.

Nike, for sure must have done extensive research work before inking endorsement deals but these did not turned out to be as favorable as Nike wanted them to be. Hence, what also must be clearly put through is a mitigation and contingency plan in the event of risk actualization. That is where Nike has had problems too, which is rather sad considering that the other factors, of course, were beyond its control, but its own response to the disaster was rather perplexing and self-defeating.

Tiger Woods hurt the brand due to his off-field behavior when he was alleged of having multiple affairs outside his marriage. The scandal hit both his credibility as well as personality. However, Nike kept faith in Tiger Woods and made an argument that being a world-class sports performance brand it builds upon the elitist athletic performances of its endorsers and draws a line between their personal and professional conduct. It though suspended certain ads for some time but got on with them after some time again.

Tiger Woods

Nike was a tad late in dropping Lance Armstrong as its endorser after he was charged for doping, which was as per the US Anti-Doping Agency, "the most sophisticated, professionalized and successful doping programmme that sport has ever seen". It even stood by Armstrong initially, before disowning him emphasizing that since Lance Armstrong had betrayed the spirit of sportsmanship, which the brand stands for, there was no reason to continue supporting him.

Lance Armstrong

In case of Oscar Pistorius, Nike was quick to take off its “I am the bullet in the chamber” ad featuring him and seems to be on back-foot. This is in stark difference with the other two cases. Though the affecting behavior again is outside the field but the response was one which was supported by Nike for conduct on-field (in connection with Nike’s argument in case of Tiger Woods).

It’s a Deja-vu moment for Nike with Oscar Pistorius. It is to be seen how it respond to this known threat externally and internally but for sure, the celebrity research teams got their job-descriptions extended with - comprehensive personal information collection, analysis and risk calculation. May God be with them!

Cheers,