The events of the past week have raised questions in the minds of golf and celebrity followers alike, perhaps most prominently "Who is Tiger Woods?" Certainly, the real Tiger was not a family man, but this revelation, while of interest to many, can't be categorized as surprising (Quick- think of the commercial featuring Tiger and his children. Got it? Neither do I.) Perhaps the more relevant question is "What is Tiger Woods?"
Because first and foremost, Mr. Woods is a global brand. His brand has been carefully designed and cultivated as the years have passed and the tournament victories have piled up, and that brand was one of elite excellence, deliberation, and control. His brand was never about family values, unless those values included beating up on your siblings in all competitive pursuits, or wearing a red outfit to church on Sunday. No, it has always been about control- and that apparent lack of control is what's most stunning in light of recent events, and it's why a good portion of his endorsement dollars are in serious jeopardy.
Whether you're a global phenomenon or a Scranton, PA financial advisor, the lesson of the ongoing Woods debacle is clear: the brand you convey to your potential customers must not stray far from who you actually are or what you represent. This insightful New Yorker piece from James Surowiecki points out the danger in contradicting a carefully-conceived brand:
Myriad studies show that celebrity endorsements are most successful when there is a tight fit between the pitchman’s identity and the product he’s pitching. Woods was the rare athlete whose identity seemed to fit not just with golf clubs or sports drinks but with consulting firms...The current scandal has disrupted, if not shattered, this image of perfect control. Scandals that aren’t out of tune with a celebrity’s image are often surprisingly easy to bounce back from: after images of Kate Moss snorting coke surfaced, her bookings fell, but, over time, they went up. Revelations that Michael Jordan had lost hundreds of thousands of dollars gambling barely dented his appeal, since the story reinforced the image of him as a fierce competitor. But scandals that conflict with a person’s public image can wreak havoc. And it’s hard to think of a scandal that’s more discordant with an image of focus and discipline than this one. Woods’s alleged cavorting with Vegas waitresses and celebrity groupies, his woeful “sexts” and voice mails, his driving his S.U.V. into a tree: all these things make him look weak and discombobulated. Some have speculated, optimistically, that this may humanize the Tiger. But that’s exactly the problem: what was so amazing about Woods was precisely that he wasn’t like the rest of us—that he wasn’t weak or distracted.
In other words, if Tiger Woods were a financial advisor, it would emphasize his focus, his control, his deliberation, his dedication. Woods, we thought, left nothing to chance. Now it appears he left a great deal to chance, and more of those "chances" are piling up on the magazine racks at your local grocery checkout every day. A brand doesn't recover from that.
In considering this, what does your brand convey? The lesson is clear: if your message is one of polished professionalism, don't show up to an appointment in a golf shirt. If it's one of down-home local chumminess, don't pull up to your client's ranch home in a Jaguar and a three piece suit. When the message is inconsistent with the experience, it's time to start over.
Just ask Tiger Woods.