What Lululemon founder’s comments are right and wrong about marketing

Lululemon founder Chip Wilson recently made a lot of headlines when he criticized the way the brand is managed by current leadership. In an interview with Forbes, he said he was disgusted by the brand’s leaning into “the whole diversity and inclusion thing.”

Wilson continued, adding, “They’re trying to be like Gap for everyone.” His comments continued on why he felt this approach was a mistake. He said, “I think the definition of a brand is that you’re not everything to everyone…You have to make it clear that you don’t want certain customers to come.” “

Wilson remains the sportswear brand’s largest shareholder, but has not been involved with the company since stepping down as a director in 2015. He initially stepped down as CEO in 2013 following backlash for his comments about complaints against the sportswear brand. The sheer feel of the brand’s yoga pants. At the time, he explained: “Some women’s bodies don’t really work. [for the yoga pants]

”

A spokesperson for Lululemon released a statement to NewsNation in response to the founder’s recent controversial comments, saying that both parties condemned Mr. Wilson’s views and noted that those views do not align with their own. , Mr. Wilson reiterated that he has not been involved with the company for nearly a year. Ten years.

The statement also reiterated Lululemon’s commitment to becoming a more inclusive and diverse company, noting that “we are a very different company today” than when Wilson was at the helm. I have said so far.

What does Mr. Wilson correctly understand about inclusive marketing in his statement?

Most of the discussion around Wilson’s comments has centered on how awful it is for a brand to talk so openly about shaming and excluding so many customers. But the part of his observation I most agree with is that in marketing, brands need to: do not have Trying to be all things to all people.

This is one of the biggest misconceptions about inclusive marketing. Being an inclusive brand doesn’t mean being inclusive of everyone. Rather, inclusive marketing is about intentionally recognizing consumer differences, choosing which identities to serve, and incorporating those identities into your overall marketing.

With that focus, we can do a better job of inviting, converting, and retaining more of our ideal customers, especially those with underrepresented and underserved identities. Become.

What Wilson got wrong about inclusive marketing

Wilson was wrong on quite a few counts.

First, it’s not a disadvantage for brands to be inclusive in their marketing. It’s for profit. The same goes for Lululemon.

In September 2020, the brand expanded its size offering, now offering apparel sizes 0-20. Since then, the brand has recorded revenue growth of 43.91% in 2021, 27.5% in 2022 and 23.01% in 2023. If a brand is damaged by people who don’t fit Wilson’s ideal customer profile, its growth rate will go in a different direction.

The more people buy your product, the more your income will increase. period. Inclusion opens the door to make that happen.

The second part of his comment is that this is bad advice and grounds for brands to exclude customers. In a full interview with Forbes, Wilson talked about how his first company didn’t allow smokers in its stores.

It’s another thing to exclude customers based on behavior that goes against your values. It’s standard and most people don’t find it offensive. It’s not uncommon for brands to exclude people or choose not to serve them based on the types of products they promote, such as those that incite hate. We’re also seeing brands exclude or choose not to do business with companies that carry products related to violence, such as guns. Additionally, we will see brands choosing not to serve or do business with people, customers, or businesses that support destructive habits such as smoking or gambling.

But what is less common or generally accepted is when a brand actively states that it does not want to serve someone based on their identity.

The owner of a famous Philadelphia cheesesteak restaurant faced backlash after he said he would not serve customers who did not order in English. Consumers slammed Victoria’s Secret after its former chief marketing officer said transgender and plus-size women don’t fit the “fantasy” the brand promotes. And once again, people are criticizing Wilson for saying that people who he feels “look unhealthy” are not ideal customers or models for Lululemon’s clothing.

In marketing, it is important to choose who to serve. However, excluding or discriminating against people because of their identity or assumptions about people is unacceptable to many people.

The third part where Chip Wilson’s comments miss the mark is his view that the product is the hero. From his perspective, both the brand and the product, in this case Lululemon’s yoga pants, can be devalued when worn by certain types of people.

Good marketing puts the customer, not the product, as the hero. This product helps customers achieve their transformation. Smart marketers showcase how their products help customers solve problems. Smart brands know that a product is nothing if the customer is not successful.

Contrast Wilson’s view of the story’s protagonist with Nike’s view as implemented in this ad.

When the customer is the hero, there is no need to embarrass yourself. A product’s success is highlighted by the customer’s track record of using it. When the product is the hero, you end up blaming the customer for any complaints or perceived problems with the product’s performance.

If your goal is to grow your revenue and influence, don’t listen to Chip Wilson. Lululemon didn’t have to follow his advice, and so should you.