1. WE’RE NUMBER 2! WE’RE NUMBER 2!
We're Number 2! We're Number 2!:
Identification and Distancing Tactics Employed by Consumers
and the Potential Power of the Underdog Brand Biography
Matthew “Eric” Minor
IMC 612: Audience Insight
Final Writing Assignment

2. Minor – We’re Number 2! 2
Introduction
Consumers use products to define their identities in a variety of situations and settings (Solomon,
2010). Much research has been done into basking in reflected glory (BIRG), an impression
management tactic in which an individual publicly trumpets the association he or she has with a
successful other (Cialdini, et al., 1976). BIRG has been extensively researched as it applies to the
behavior of sports fans overtly displaying their allegiance (wearing a t-shirt, for example) when his or her
team is winning: the individual believes team success equals personal success and wants to enhance his
or her social status by wearing the emblem of a winner (Spinda, 2011). Marketers have successfully
applied this model to build and strengthen brand relationships. However, since Cialdini’s initial study of
sports fan behavior in 1976, several other impression management models have emerged. While some
of these impression management tactics used by consumers may appear counterintuitive (a consumer
rejecting a successful brand, for example), these behaviors have been verified through research and
marketers are using them to craft messages targeting consumers who employ these tactics. This paper
will explore five impression management tactics with a special focus on the marketing strategy of crafting
an underdog brand biography. It will also explore why an underdog brand biography might resonate
with consumers and, conversely, how employing this type of marketing strategy could backfire by
sending a message that is inconsistent with or damaging to a brand’s identity.
Social Identity Theory and Self-Presentation Tactics
The behaviors examined in this paper are rooted in social identity theory. Social identity theory
(Tajfel & Turner, 1979) states that we base a part of our self-concept on our membership in (or
perceived membership in) a relevant social group. Social identity theory, while evolved from the field of

3. Minor – We’re Number 2! 3
social psychology, has important implications for marketers. Bhattacharya and Sen (2003) suggested
that consumers can develop customer-company identification – a belief that consumers share the same
attributes as a company. More recent research (Lam, et al. 2010) has extended that concept further to
explore the ways consumers use brands to construct their concept of self, and has measured the level to
which self-brand connection can predict the strength of a consumer-brand relationship (Aaker, Fournier
and Brasel, 2004).
Impression management is the process by which a person seeks to reach individual or social
goals by attempting to control the flow of information to influence the opinions of others. When we
attempt to influence the opinions of others about ourselves, we are employing a specific type of
impression management called self-presentation (Schnlenker and Pontari, 2000). For the purposes of
this paper, we will examine self-presentation tactics that involve reflection. Rather than touting one’s
own performance or abilities, reflection refers to the way one positions oneself relative to another
performer in order to manage one’s own self-image and, by extension, the group’s perception of the
individual. Logic would suggest that an individual would want to associate with a winner and dissociate
with a loser. However, human (consumer) behavior is not always logical.
Basking in reflected glory (BIRG)
In this self-presentation tactic, an individual overtly displays his or her support of a successful
performer in an attempt to enhance his or her social status. Because this is a reflective tactic, the
individual exhibiting this behavior had virtually nothing to do with the actual success. Cialdini (et al.,
1979) first developed BIRG theory after it was observed that university students tended to wear team-
licensed apparel on the day after their football team had won a big game. Subjects were also observed
to use the personal pronoun “we” when describing the team’s performance (as in “we won”). The

4. Minor – We’re Number 2! 4
marketing application for this tactic is fairly obvious. Successful teams will sell more merchandise as
supporters seek to boost their own image by latching onto (bask in the reflected glory of) the successes
of the team. A good example of a marketing message that appeals to a BIRGing consumer is an
advertisement immediately following a Super Bowl offering purchasers the chance to “be the first to own
the official Green Bay Packers NFL championship locker room edition hat.” Essentially, the consumer
(who did nothing for the Packers besides cheer from the couch) can wear the exact same hat (flaunt the
same spoil of victory) that Aaron Rodgers was just wearing in his post-game interview (after taking a
game’s worth of physical punishment on global television). Gatorade tapped into BIRG behavior with its
“Be Like Mike” campaign which showed comparatively unskilled basketball players shooting hoops
with NBA star Michael Jordan but being “like” him by simply sharing a sports drink (Rovell, 2005).
Cutting-off reflected failure (CORF)
The corollary to BIRG is cutting-off of reflected failure (CORF), a self-presentation tactic that,
unlike BIRG (which involves identification) involves distancing oneself from an underperforming other.
This impression management strategy was acknowledged by Cialdini (et al., 1979) as students would
say “they lost” when their team lost (as opposed to “we won” when the team won). However CORF
was not measured with a control group until Snyder (et al., 1986) specifically studied both self-
presentation strategies. They determined that while BIRGing is an image enhancement tactic, CORFing
is an image protection tactic. Their findings suggested that CORF was the stronger image maintenance
tactic, suggesting that an individual will be more likely to avoid perceived association with failure than
they would be to pursue perceived association with success.
This too has important implications for marketers. If a brand is perceived as a failure, CORF
theory would suggest that consumers will distance themselves from it in an attempt to maintain a positive

5. Minor – We’re Number 2! 5
impression on the rest of the social group. This can be illustrated through the avoidance of out-of-style
clothing, for example. Rather than focusing solely on extolling the virtues of a client’s clothing brand, a
marketer may choose instead to show the ill effects of wearing the other (out-of-fashion) brand, tapping
into a consumer’s desire to cut off from the reflected failure of the “losing” brand.
Cutting-off future reflected failure (COFF)
While BIRGing is a well-documented and according to Wann (et al., 1995, p. 382) “well
substantiated,” it is not always replicated in all behavioral studies. While it was clearly illustrated in the
Cialdini study, it was based solely on fan support of and identification with a football program that was
highly successful and expected to win. When the same BIRG model was applied to political campaigns
(in which future success harder to predict), yet another phenomenon was observed. Sigelman (1986)
noticed that after an election, supporters of the losing candidates left campaign signs in their yards
longer than supporters of the winning candidate. Why would a voter who “backed a winner” not want
to bask in the reflected glory of the winner? Wann (et al., 1995) substantiated that those who removed
their signs were cutting-off from future reflected failure – unsure of the winning candidate’s future
success and protecting their own egos from future damage. Their study substantiated the existence of
COFF and, with respect to Cialdini, showed that the idea that “everyone outwardly loves a winner”
may not always apply.
Basking in spite of reflected failure (BIRF) and Cutting-off reflected success (CORS)
With an understanding, then, that human (and, for marketers’ purposes—consumer) behavior is
not always logical, the door was opened for studies of further reflective impression management

6. Minor – We’re Number 2! 6
strategies. In their article for the journal Sport Marketing Quarterly, Campbell, Aiken and Kent
(2004) suggest that two additional (less common and more counter-intuitive) models of behavior
emerge: basking in spite of related failure (BIRF) and cutting off reflected success (CORS).
For example, using the BIRF model, a hockey fan will continue to wear the jersey of her
favorite team even when the team is on a cold streak. She may do this for internal image-management
(loyalty boosts her self-esteem) or for external image management (she wants others to know that she is
loyal, that one day the cold streak will end and she will be perceived as being with the team “through
thick and thin”). She also might do this for camaraderie--to strengthen bonds she has with other diehard
fans. Conversely, a basketball fan may exhibit an aversion to a successful team (CORS). He may do
this out of a need for consistency (i.e., “sure, the team’s winning, but they’re all overpaid egomaniacs
and nothing like the guys I grew up watching”). He may not desire the social approval of the winning
team’s fan base and therefore, support a rival just to demonstrate his individualism, or he may do this
because he internally feels better rooting for the underdog.
Applying Impression Management Research in Crafting an Underdog Brand Biography
The social psychological appeal of the underdog
One of the tenets of social identity theory is that the accomplishment of individuals or groups
with which we identify is an important source of self-esteem. Why then would a person show support
for rather than show contempt for an underdog? Vandello (et al., 2007) explored the social
psychological “appeal of the underdog.” They suggested that “the salient historical, literary, or cinematic
examples of championed underdogs are exceptions to the rule (emphasis added), and it is their rarity
that makes them enduring.” They also proposed that “concerns with justice and fairness drive support

7. Minor – We’re Number 2! 7
for the disadvantaged” (Vandello, et al., 2007 p. 1604). Vandello’s (et al., 2007) findings suggested
that, depending on the situation, two processes might be operating:
For example, when one competitor clearly has more resources than is normal (e.g., a huge
corporate chain store), this might focus our attention on the top dog and lead to resentment and
schadenfreude (the enjoyment of seeing high achievers fail); on the other hand, when one
competitor is clearly lacking in physical or material resources (e.g., an unusually slight athlete or
a politician with limited funds), our attention may be drawn to the underdog, in which case we
truly root for their success. (p. 1614).
The consumer appeal of underdog branding
Gatorade’s “Like Mike” campaign has shown that marketers can successfully use BIRG to craft
a message linked to a “lovable winner.” However, further impression management research cited in this
paper has also shown that people will, under some circumstances, attempt to increase their own
standing in the group by either shunning the winner or supporting the underdog. How can marketers
weave that somewhat counterintuitive behavior into their brand narratives? Anat Keinan, an assistant
professor in the Marketing Unit at Harvard Business School (et al., 2011) published research in the
Journal of Consumer Research that showed that “underdog brand biographies are effective in the
marketplace because consumers identify with the disadvantaged position of the underdog and share
their passion and determination to succeed when the odds are against them” (Lagace, 2010). In an
email Q&A with the Harvard Business School’s Martha Lagace (2010) in advance of the article’s
publication, Keinan gave the following examples of contemporary brand biographies using underdog
narratives in their packaging, websites, blogs and other marketing communications:
 Avis’s classic slogan “we’re number 2” emphasized that it was playing second fiddle to a giant
in the rental car business.
 Brands such as Google, Clif Bar and Apple celebrate their garage origins.

8. Minor – We’re Number 2! 8
 Adidas’s “Impossible is Nothing” campaign emphasized the underdog stories of famous
athletes.
Keinan (Lagace, 2010) suggested a common theme linked these brands’ underdog biographies:
1. a disadvantaged position in the marketplace versus a “top dog,” a well-endowed competitor
with superior resources or market dominance, and
2. tremendous passion and determination to succeed despite the odds.
Keinan, (et al., 2011) suggested that, especially now, during difficult economic times, an underdog
brand biography may be especially resonant with consumers who are themselves struggling. Further,
they suggest that an underdog narrative may help marketers avoid anti-corporate backlash, or “the
curse of success” (Lagace, 2010).
Keinan (et al., 2011) also offered a caution to marketers considering making an underdog
narrative part of a brand biography: not all products and services are suitable for this strategy. Ben &
Jerry’s ice cream and Snapple faced consumer backlash after larger companies purchased them (an
example of CORS). Keinan (et al., 2011) warned that once those brands attained that level of
prominence, the effectiveness of their underdog brand biographies were greatly diminished. Likewise,
Keinan warned that with certain product categories (hospitals, for example) a consumer might believe a
brand’s external disadvantages diminish the product’s quality and safety (Lagace, 2010).
Conclusion
Consumers employ a wide range of tactics to manage their “public image” as it relates to
products and brands--either identifying with or distance themselves from those brands. Some of these
tactics are logical. For example, it would not be surprising to see a person display an Apple logo
sticker in their car window if they are highly loyal to the Apple brand. However, we have come to

9. Minor – We’re Number 2! 9
understand that not all consumer behavior is logical. For example, there are counter-intuitive self-
presentation tactics that can be equally informative and useful to marketers, especially if the marketing
strategy is intended to tout the brand’s status as the underdog. Underdog brand narratives can resonate
powerfully with consumers, especially during difficult times. However, marketers must use this strategy
judiciously to avoid sending a message that lacks credibility or might affect a consumer’s perception of
the brand’s quality or safety.
References:
Aaker, J., Fournier, S. and Brasel, S.A. (June, 2004). When good brands do bad. Journal of
Consumer Research. 31, 1-16. Retrieved Dec. 20, 2011 from EBSCOHost database.
Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. 2003. Consumer–company identification: A framework for understanding
consumers’ relationships with companies. Journal of Marketing, 67(2): 76-88. Retrieved Dec.
20, 2011 from EBSCOHost database.

10. Minor – We’re Number 2! 10
Campbell Jr., R. M., Aiken, D., & Kent, A. (2004). Beyond BIRGing and CORFing: continuing
the exploration of fan behavior. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 13(3), 151-157. Retrieved
Dec. 5, 2011 from EBSCOHost database.
Cialdini, R.B., Borden, R.J., Thome, A., Walker, M.R., Freeman, S., & Sloan, L. R. (1976). Basking
in reflected glory: Three (football) field studies. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 34, 366-375. Retrieved Nov. 16, 2011 from EBSCOHost database.
Keinan, A., Paharia, N., Avery, J. and Schor, J. (Feb. 2011). The underdog effect: The marketing of
disadvantage and determination through brand biography. Journal of Consumer
Research. 37(5), pp. 775-790. Retrieved Dec. 20, 2011 from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/656219
Lagace, M. (Sept. 2010) The consumer appeal of underdog branding. Harvard Business School
Working Knowledge. Retrieved Dec. 20, 2011 from
http://hbswki.hbs.edu/item/6351.html.
Lam, S. K., Ahearne, M., Hu, Y., & Schillewaert, N. (2010). Resistance to brand switching when
a radically new brand is introduced: A social identity theory perspective. Journal Of
Marketing, 74(6), pp. 128-146. Retrieved Dec. 20, 2011 from EBSCOHost database.
Rovell, D. (2005). First in thirst: how Gatorade turned the science of sweat into a cultural
phenomenon. New York, NY. AMACOM. Excerpt retrieved November 16, 2011 from
http://www.authorviews.com/authors/rovell/rovell-obd.htm
Schlenker, B. R. & Pontari, B. A. (2000). The strategic control of information: Impression
management and self-presentation in daily life. In A. Tesser, R. Felson, & J. Suls (Eds.),
Perspectives on self and identity (pp. 199–232). Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association.
Sigelman, L (1986). Basking in reflected glory revisited: An attempt at replication. Social
Psychology Quarterly, 49, 90-92
Snyder, C.R., Lassegard, M.A., and & Ford, C.E. (1986). Distancing after group success and failure:
Basking in reflected glory and cutting off reflected failure. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 51, 382-388. Retrieved Dec. 5, 2011 from EBSCOHost database.
Solomon, M. (2010). Consumer behavior (9th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Spinda, J.S.W. (Dec. 1, 2011) The development in basking in reflected glory and cutting off
reflected success measures. Journal of Sport Behavior. 34 (4). Retrieved Dec. 20, 2011
from EBSCOHost database.

11. Minor – We’re Number 2! 11
Tafjel, H. and Turner, J.C. (1979). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In Psychology
of Intergroup Relations, Stephen Worchel and William G. Austin, eds. Chicago:
Nelson-Hall, pp 33-47.
Vandello, J. A., Goldschmied, N., & Richards, D. A. R. (November 15, 2007). The appeal of the
underdog. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 1603-1616.
Wann, D., Hamlet, M, Wilson, T. and Hodges, J. (1995). Basking in reflected glory, cutting off
reflected failure and cutting off future failure: The importance of group identification. Social
Behavior and Personality, 23(4), 377-388. Retrieved Dec. 20, 2011 from
EBSCOHost database.