Celebrity Endorsement in British Fashion: PR Models & Effects

Introduction: Globalization and the Fashion Industry

In assessing the effectiveness of celebrity spokespeople in the fashion industry, it is helpful to understand, at least to a limited degree, that the fashion industry—despite being global—often operates as a small, tightly knit enterprise, with an interdependence that extends to the retail level. In particular, globalization's effect on the fashion industry, in Great Britain or any other location, can best be understood in terms of the mutual influences of consumer and industry on each other.

Globalization was the context in which Rantisi investigated women's garment production in New York City. While her work was mainly concerned with the operation of that industry, it also sheds light on how cultural products industries are affected by, and in turn affect, the consumer. She noted that in the garment industry—especially in New York City—frequent and flexible interfirm exchanges require the sharing of conventions, norms, and understandings that are inherent in the local environment (including, specifically, unions). However, she also notes:

"A recent extension of this perspective, as embodied in the literature on the cultural products industries, underscores the continuous and recursive relationship between product and place associated with the increasing commodification of culture in the new economy. The point of convergence between these perspectives is that the agglomeration of economic activities confers significant benefits on individual firms by providing distinctive tangible and intangible resources and an institutional infrastructure to use and capitalize on those resources" (Rantisi, 2002, p. 441+).

Granted, the New York City garment district is in most ways very distinct from the British fashion industry. However, if one is attempting to ascertain how public relations operates within the British fashion industry, knowing how it operates in the much more closed system of a few blocks in New York City—where design becomes clothing—cannot help but be useful, at least in terms of understanding the "fashion" mindset from the vantage point of producers. In fact, New York's historic garment district constitutes a unique and distinctive local industry in a global marketplace, and enables the rapid circulation of "information on market trends and new design innovations that are demanded by a cultural economy" (Rantisi, 2002, p. 441+).

Other facets of the U.S. garment industry, as seen through the lens of New York's garment district, may also be helpful in assessing how public relations operates vis-à-vis the British fashion industry—itself a relatively small and close-knit industry. Rantisi notes:

"Because of the highly competitive market structure of the U.S. apparel industry, in which the predominance of small- to medium-sized manufacturers stands in stark contrast to the concentrated buying power at the retail level, relations among district manufacturers are characterized by an intense competition that inhibits the direct exchange of information" (2002, p. 441+).

Another factor investigated by Rantisi is the changing nature of competition "and the increasing centrality of innovation as a basis of competitive advantage" (2002, p. 441+). That public relations efforts—possibly supplemented by, or based upon, celebrity endorsements—are nearly indispensable is confirmed when Rantisi notes that the advent of telecommunications has reinforced a shift in consumer demands "and the growing significance of identity and lifestyle movements in the production and marketing of goods and services, which demand the continual production of 'novel-seeming goods,' at ever faster rates of turnover (Jameson, 1990; Lash and Urry, 1994; Scott, 1997)" (Rantisi, 2002, p. 441+).

Moreover, influential on both the fashion industry and the public relations efforts within it is the fact that the U.K., like the U.S., has a shareholder-based economic system. This, in turn, has many disincentives built in, requiring relatively intensive interaction between shareholders and the public—that is, public relations efforts. The same is not seen as true in a coordinated economic system such as Germany's (Rantisi, 2002, p. 441+).

In the United States, there is also a seminal trade publication through which public relations efforts throughout the fashion industry—from designers to manufacturers to retailers to individual subscribers—are collected and, logically, influence the course of the industry. That publication, WWD (formerly Women's Wear Daily), circulates to 55,000 industry insiders, providing information on general fashion business issues but also including "market overviews, ready-to-wear and couture presentations, and the latest fashion trends for various price points" (Rantisi, 2002, p. 441+). Rantisi's interviewees regard it as "the most important source of fashion news" (Rantisi, 2002, p. 441+). Rantisi believes that the Garment District is, in fact, one large press release, as its "specialized services and associations can serve as the means through which information is distributed" (2002, p. 441+).

Goldsmith, Lafferty, and Newell (2000) asserted that corporate credibility was more important than celebrity endorsement credibility in promoting products. However, the product they were testing was a fictitious motor oil, not British fashion. Erdogan, Baker, and Tagg (2001), on the other hand, did investigate celebrity endorsement specifically in regard to British advertising agency managers' assessments of essential celebrity characteristics when choosing a celebrity endorser, and they assessed this across various product types.

In the case of celebrity endorsement, Erdogan, Baker, and Tagg note that Great Britain has followed the lead of the United States. They note that:

Industry Primacy vs. Celebrity Appeal

"A recent estimate indicates that around one-quarter of all commercials screened in the United States include celebrity endorsers (Shimp, 2000). Although celebrity endorsement has a historic presence in Great Britain, the number of celebrity campaigns has increased markedly in recent years. In fact, our findings show that one in five marketing communications campaigns in the United Kingdom feature celebrities" (2001, p. 39).

While this information is interesting on its own, it is more significant vis-à-vis the current discussion because celebrities may also generate extensive PR leverage for brands. For example, when Revlon launched the "Won't Kiss Off Test" for its Colorstay lipsticks in 1994—with Cindy Crawford kissing reporters—the campaign "featured on almost every major news channel and equally widely in the press" (Erdogan, Baker, and Tagg, 2001, p. 39).

The effectiveness of public relations based on celebrity endorsement in Great Britain is well documented. While global marketing strategies can be undermined in various regions by cultural roadblocks identified by Hofstede (1984)—including differences in time, space, language, relationships, and the masculine or feminine nature of a culture—celebrities "with worldwide popularity can help companies avoid many of these problems."

Indeed, Advertising Age International (1997) reported that PepsiCo's management attributed a 2 percent global market share increase—in an industry where a 1 percent rise in market share is equivalent to millions of dollars—to the British pop group the Spice Girls (Erdogan, Baker, and Tagg, 2001, p. 39). This gives the United Kingdom a leg up on both receptivity to celebrity advertising in its home market and contributions to it in others. The power of celebrity endorsement is amply demonstrated by the experience of Lucozade, a soft drink brand that was previously associated with sick children in the public mind. The brand was able to achieve a new image through its association, via public relations and advertising, with globally famous athletes and British soccer players (Erdogan and Kitchen, 1998).

However, it must also be noted that there are pitfalls to using celebrity endorsers. Negative information about a celebrity endorser attaches not only to the celebrity but to any product endorsed by that celebrity (Klebba and Unger, 1982; Till and Shimp, 1998). O.J. Simpson, once an endorser for global car rental agency Hertz, is a prime example.

Celebrities endorsing a multitude of products—even across varied industries—can also cause problems. Over time, an overexposed celebrity ceases to be distinctive and can cause consumers to disregard the endorsement message, focusing instead on the financial factor—that is, how much the celebrity is being paid to promote the products (Cooper, 1984; Tripp, Jensen, and Carlson, 1994).

Celebrity endorsers can also suffer sudden damage to their image, losing public favor and casting the products they endorse in an unfortunate light. For example, former Spice Girl Geri Halliwell sought to shed the image of the "naughty girl" by becoming a roving ambassador for the United Nations and endorsing cancer charities. All of this was undermined when "a press photographer caught her smoking" (Ziegel, 1983).

These sorts of celebrity endorser pitfalls do not exist in a vacuum; they are, in fact, predictable based on a set of theoretical constructs. These include the Source Attractiveness Model, proposed by McGuire (1968); the Product Match-Up Hypothesis, proposed by Kahle and Homer (1985) and Kamins (1989, 1990); and the Meaning Transfer Model (McCracken, 1989).

The Source Credibility Model asserts that the perceived level of expertise and trustworthiness of an endorser is the primary reason for that endorser's effectiveness (Erdogan, Baker, and Tagg, 2001, p. 39). Kelman (1961) found that information from "a credible source (e.g., a celebrity) can influence beliefs, opinions, attitudes, and/or behavior through a process called internalization, which occurs when receivers accept a source's influence in terms of their personal attitude and value structures."

Trustworthiness concerns the honesty, integrity, and believability of the endorser as the target market perceives it, but it is not necessarily true that trust in a celebrity translates into a purchase (Ohanian, 1991). What does seem to translate into more concrete purchase intentions is the expertise of the celebrity endorser (Ohanian, 1991) in regard to the product at hand. In short, having a steeplechase rider endorse a new brand of fashion jeans would probably work less well than having a ready-to-wear designer endorse them.

Celebrity Endorser Models

The Source Attractiveness Model asserts that a message's effectiveness depends on how similar, familiar, and liked the endorser is by the target market (McGuire, 1968). Erdogan, Baker, and Tagg (2001) define similarity as an assumed resemblance between the source of the message (the celebrity) and the receiver. Familiarity, they note, is knowledge of the source via repeated exposure—on the soccer field, the fashion runway, or in fashion magazines, as the case may be. Likeability is regarded as a form of affection based on the celebrity's appearance and behavior.

The Product Match-Up Hypothesis goes conceptually beyond the two constructs above, noting instead that the message conveyed by the celebrity's image needs to be congruent with the characteristics of the product advertised in order to ensure effectiveness (Forkan, 1980; Kahle and Homer, 1985; Kamins, 1989, 1990; cited in Erdogan, Baker, and Tagg, 2001). Erdogan, Baker, and Tagg (2001) posit that this may be the reason for the use of celebrities such as Madonna, Cindy Crawford, and Isabella Rossellini to endorse beauty and fashion products.

Erdogan, Baker, and Tagg (2001) also believe that research in this area may need to extend beyond attractiveness and credibility on a limited scale, expanding to match the entire image of the celebrity with both the brand in question and the target audience being sought as customers. "The source credibility and attractiveness models may be inadequate in providing a heuristic for appropriate celebrity endorser selection, as DeSarbo and Harshman argued in 1985" (Erdogan, Baker, and Tagg, 2001, p. 39).

Vis-à-vis public relations, McCracken (1989) proposed that celebrity endorsements are special examples of a general process of meaning transfer, in which there is a conventional path for the movement of cultural meaning between members of society. The process of meaning transfer happens in three stages:

McCracken's model may initially appear to be purely theoretical, but it has been proven to have real-world effect. Langmeyer and Walker (1991a and 1991b) demonstrated that symbolic meanings attached to celebrities such as Cher, Madonna, and Christie Brinkley transfer to the brands they endorse.

Erdogan, Baker, and Tagg noted that most of the research concerning these theories is U.S.-based, and they believed there was a great need for British-based research so that insights could be gained for British advertising agencies seeking the best celebrity endorser for client brands. They asserted that such a study might "also be of use to practitioners in other countries, since U.K.-based advertising agencies are considered to be centers of excellence in the global marketing communication industry. Furthermore, this study may provide a 'triangulation' for previous consumer-based studies" (2001, p. 39+).

Till and Busler investigated the Match-Up Hypothesis further, with particular interest in the area of physical attractiveness. They noted that the hypothesis, as outlined by Kamins (1990), suggested that endorsers would be more effective when there was a fit between endorser and product. Most of the empirical research on the Match-Up Hypothesis concerned assessments of the physical attractiveness of the celebrity endorser. "The conceptual argument is that attractive celebrities are more effective endorsers for products which are used to enhance one's attractiveness (leading to higher brand attitude and purchase intentions). Empirical support for this attractiveness match-up… has been elusive" (Till and Busler, 2001, p. 1). They did note, however, that "casual observation suggests that marketing and advertising practitioners believe that using physically attractive spokespeople is effective" (Till and Busler, 2001, p. 1).

Not surprisingly, these authors also located studies showing that attractive people are viewed more favorably than unattractive people on a variety of traits, including social competence, intellectual competence, empathy, and integrity. "Given that attractive people are imbued with a host of other positive traits, it is natural that advertisers would wish to associate their products with attractive individuals" (Till and Busler, 2001, p. 1).

While that seems not only a logical but perhaps an unavoidable conclusion, there is a downside: attractiveness is appealing, but it does not consistently result in product sales. Baker and Churchill (1977) conducted a study proving that physically attractive spokespeople had a positive effect on consumer evaluations of the advertising at hand, but had no effect on their intent to purchase the items (pp. 538–555). Caballero and Solomon (1984) found that less attractive models actually increased sales for facial tissue, while more attractive ones did not increase sales of beer—substantiating earlier research that found the effectiveness of celebrity endorsers varies by product type.

However, Till and Busler also note that "the match-up hypothesis predicts that attractive celebrities are more effective when endorsing products used to enhance one's attractiveness" (Till and Busler, 2001, p. 1).

While the Match-Up Hypothesis and the other two constructs are useful for understanding the use of celebrity endorsers in public relations work, associative learning theory helps explain why the Match-Up Hypothesis is not perfectly workable in all cases. Associative learning theory posits a mechanism that links concepts or establishes relationships between them (Klein, 1991; Martindale, 1991). This theory uses "association sets" to explain how an object and an evaluation of that object are linked. "By repeated pairings of the brand and the endorser, the brand and endorser become part of each other's association set" (Till and Busler, 2001, p. 1).

The association set must be forged through belongingness, relatedness, fit, or similarity, according to Till and Busler (2001, p. 1). They note:

"It is this associative link—a perceived connection between a brand and an endorser—that drives predicted endorser effects. This theoretical perspective is consistent with hypothesizing by other researchers interested in match-up effects who propose the importance of 'congruence' (Kamins, 1990; Lynch and Schuler, 1994), 'fittingness' (Kanungo and Pang, 1973), 'appropriateness' (Solomon, Ashmore, and Longo, 1992), and 'consistency' (Walker, Langmeyer, and Langmeyer, 1992)" (Till and Busler, 2001, p. 1).

Although not specifically testing the Match-Up Hypothesis, Ohanian (1991) found that it was not physical attractiveness that drove purchasing decisions; rather, the characteristic of assumed expertise on the part of the spokesperson was the factor most closely allied with intention to buy the product (Till and Busler, 2001, p. 1). They also found that brand cognition often played a large role in the purchase decision, even in the presence of a spokesperson.

Although Till and Busler found that attractiveness was not the most important factor in purchasing decisions, they believed it would be premature to dismiss its role entirely. Despite a paucity of empirical evidence in favor of attractiveness as a significant influencing factor in buying decisions, "attractiveness is a useful dimension on which to match celebrities and products, but studies to date have not been adequately designed to substantiate this" (Till and Busler, 2001, p. 1).

They also asserted that associative learning's construct of "fit" or "belongingness" was a potentially useful means of understanding match-up effects. Till and Busler noted that "'fit' (or lack thereof) may explain why physical attractiveness may not be, in many cases, the most powerful dimension for generating a match-up, because the connection between 'attractive celebrity' and 'product used to enhance one's attractiveness' may not seem particularly obvious" (2001, p. 1). On the other hand, they contend that:

"Perhaps a physically attractive celebrity endorsing cosmetics provides a more obvious link for consumers, although one could also argue that the attractive celebrity is more 'expert' in cosmetics (given their attractiveness) than an unattractive celebrity. More research in this area is needed" (Till and Busler, 2001, p. 1).