University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Utilizing brand personality while engaging Millennials on Twitter

(USC Thesis Other)

Utilizing brand personality while engaging Millennials on Twitter

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content
1

Utilizing Brand Personality While
Engaging Millennials on Twitter
By

Emily Savastano

A Thesis Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC GRADUATE SCHOOL
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment for the Degree
MASTER OF ARTS
(STRATEGIC PUBLIC RELATIONS)

May 2015

Copyright 2014 Emily Savastano

2
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION
.................................................................................................................................................
3

SECTION I: MILLENNIALS
.............................................................................................................................
4

MILLENNIALS: IN PURSUIT OF HIGHER EDUCATION
..................................................................................................
5

MILLENNIALS: THE PEW STUDIES
....................................................................................................................................
7

PEW CONCLUSIONS
.............................................................................................................................................................
13

MILLENNIALS: CONSUMER INSIGHTS
..........................................................................................................................
14

MILLENNIALS: IN THE WORK PLACE
............................................................................................................................
16

MILLENNIALS: INTERACTIVE TECHNOLOGY
..............................................................................................................
17

SUMMARY
..............................................................................................................................................................................
19

SECTION II: BRAND PERSONALITY AND THE PSYCHOLOGY OF PURCHASE
...................
20

THE SELF-CONCEPT AND BRAND SYMBOLISM
.........................................................................................................
21

BRAND EXPERIENCE AND BRAND PERSONALITY
.....................................................................................................
23

THE FIVE BIG PERSONALITY TRAITS AND BRAND EVANGELISM
.......................................................................
25

BRAND PERSONALITY VS. CONSUMER PERSONALITY
............................................................................................
27

MILLWARD BROWN AND THE BRANDZ STUDIES
.....................................................................................................
30

THE NORTH FACE: A CASE IN BRAND PERSONALITY
.............................................................................................
32

SUMMARY
..............................................................................................................................................................................
34

SECTION III: PRIMARY RESEARCH AND FINDINGS, CONNECTING MILLENNIALS TO
BRAND PERSONALITY
.................................................................................................................................
35

PRIMARY RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
.........................................................................................................................
35

CODING, DE-CODED
...........................................................................................................................................................
36

RESULTS
.................................................................................................................................................................................
40

ARBY’S – OVERVIEW
.........................................................................................................................................................
40

DIGIORNO- OVERVIEW
......................................................................................................................................................
45

TACO BELL- OVERVIEW
....................................................................................................................................................
52

HELPER- OVERVIEW
...........................................................................................................................................................
58

CONCLUSION
....................................................................................................................................................
63

TWITTER BRAND PERSONALITY
.....................................................................................................................................
63

MOVING FORWARD
.............................................................................................................................................................
67

APPENDIX
...........................................................................................................................................................
72

REFERENCES
....................................................................................................................................................
80

ENDNOTES
.........................................................................................................................................................
83

3
Introduction

There is a current fasciation surrounding Millennials, both in generational characteristics and
buying habits, especially considering this demographic group’s size and spending power. This
generation’s diversity coupled with the rich technology and digital landscape they were
socialized to wield has created an imperative for brands to invent new ways to stay relevant to
this extremely unique and powerful cohort. Harnessing brand personality through social media
outlets is one major way companies are able to achieve this.

Not only has technology itself changed drastically in the last twenty years, from the mass
adoption of the internet to the ubiquity of smart phones, but the way in which branding, public
relations, advertising and marketing are conducted has changed drastically as well. We are no
longer in a daily or even hourly news cycle, we are in a real-time news cycle- with any and every
update imaginable learnable in seconds. This makes it necessary for brands reaching any
segment or audience to be reactive and responsive almost constantly, bringing interaction
between company and audience closer than ever before.

This paper will explore multiple aspects of both Millennials and brand personality in order to
find meaningful connections in the world of marketing and branding. It will first look into the
characteristics of Millennials, an audience of particular interest to most companies as they come
of age in the consumer marketplace. The study will look into aspects of behavioral and market
psychology to help explain how brand personality may relate to the often subconscious inner
workings of the consumer mind. It will also explore past research on brand personality and the
implications of this on the consumer experience and purchasing habits. Finally, both content

4
analysis and social media data monitoring will be used to study four selected corporate Twitter
accounts for elements of brand personality and to apply established brand personality categories
to see if any meaningful connections between Millennial characteristics and brand personality
can be discovered.

Ultimately, this paper seeks to understand the connection between the powerful Millennial
generation and the brands they interact with daily on social media. Due to significant changes in
recent years in how brands communicate with consumers, the study will survey in-depth how
elements of brand personality may be factored into these marketing attempts in order to sound
more relatable and genuine to the generation that craves authenticity.
Section I: Millennials

It is hard to peruse a marketing trade magazine or nearly any publication without running into the
new buzzword, “Millennials.” Though dates vary depending on the source, Pew Research Center
identifies this cohort of Americans to be born after 1980.
1
An “end date” for Millennials is still
widely debated amongst scholars and professionals and has been slated to be anywhere from
1994- 2000. Using the widest set of criteria, that puts Millennials between the ages of 14 and 34.
According to Pew, the Millennial generation, also known as “Generation Y” (Gen-Y) is a total of
77 million people, which is roughly the size of the Baby Boomer generation (born 1946-1964).
2

This is why Millennials are often referred to as “Echo Boomers.” The cohort gets their name
from coming of age in the new Millennium and is preceded by Generation X (born 1965-1980).
In 2011, Millennials’ direct spending power was estimated to be roughly $200 billion annually,
this number growing to $500 billion in indirect spending power (which takes into consideration

5
Millennials’ influence on others) and this is only expected to grow as more of them enter the
workforce and obtain increased earnings.
3
In his book, The Next America, Paul Taylor describes
Millennials as leery of attachment to large organizations, and instead more committed to friends
and close social networks.
4

In recent years, much research has sought to look at Millennials under a microscope especially in
relation to specialized topics such as parenting or work place behavior. There have, however,
been a few major studies conducted surveying Millennials more demographically, which this
paper will explore in order to best understand the generation comprehensively.

Millennials: In Pursuit of Higher Education

In their 2003 book, Neil Howe and William Strauss follow up on their hypotheses regarding
Millennials, the term they coined in their 1991 book, Generations. Their later book makes
assumptions on Millennial characteristics as the first ones entered college around the year 2000.
The authors credit Millennials for championing lower numbers of teen suicide, pregnancy and
abortion, violent crime as well as drug use. Alongside this they saw an increase in test scores as
well as academic pressure on Millennial students.
5
Howe and Strauss believe that Millennials
depart significantly from the narcissistic, impatient and talk-focused Boomers and opt for more
action, comparing them most closely to the G.I. Generation (1901-1924) being “upbeat, high-
achieving, team-playing and civic-minded.”
6

In their book, the authors identify seven traits inherent to Millennials including: special,
sheltered, confident, team-oriented, conventional, pressured and achieving. This was based on

6
extensive research on Millennials and sought to learn more about how Millennial characteristics
would translate in institutions of higher education and how college admissions should adapt to
the generation about to hit their classrooms in full force over the next two decades. For sheltered,
authors believe Millennials have grown up with a premium on security and come to expect this
in their everyday lives. Confident, in their beliefs for future success and their desire to “make a
contribution to society” is higher than “making lots of money.”
7
Team-Oriented, in contrast to
what Strauss and Howe identified as a “lack of cohesion” amongst Gen-X, compounded by the
fact that technology has exponentially increased Millennials interconnectivity.
8
Millennials are
identified as conventional because they are seen to be more connected to their parents than
previous generations and find comfort in talking to them. The authors argue that, “Millennials
are far more interested than Gen-X in institutions, including colleges that can enhance (the) job
and life stability” and pressure to academically achieve is extremely high among this cohort.
9

Finally, the book reports that not only are teen Millennials at this time successful, but they know
they are successful, which pushes them to continually achieve and shapes them as an aspirational
and confident generation.

This book, though somewhat outdated in terms of the current college landscape, gives interesting
insights into what differentiates Millennials and the characteristics that shape them according to
researchers who have spent a greater portion of their life’s work immersed in generational
studies. Items of confidence, pressure, team-orientation and achieving are themes we will begin
to see repeatedly in this literature review and begin to paint a holistic picture of Millennials.

7
Millennials: The Pew Studies

In 2010, Pew Research Center (PRC) conducted a large scale, representative survey of
Millennials, seeking an in-depth look at their generational attributes. This survey was also
supplemented by other PRC studies in more directed areas such as work attitudes and
generational differences. The original survey was expanded upon and updated in 2014 as a part
of PRC’s more longitudinal research.

One major introductory note in the 2010 study’s preface illuminates three overlapping processes
that can help clarify in part generational differences.
10
The first is life cycle effects, which can be
explained by the simple fact that young people will always be different from old people, but the
young people of today may become more like the older people of today as they age.
11
While a
Millennial now may be perceived as enormously different from their older counterparts, this may
change and the differences converge as time passes. Secondly, Pew identifies period effects as a
contributor to cohort differences.
12
These effects are typically major events such as war, natural
disaster, social movements, changes in the economy or scientific breakthroughs. These
happenings affect all people who endure them; however, these effects may be different
depending on the person’s age. For example, in the Great Recession of 2007-2009, the effects of
this disaster were likely to affect a college graduate, retiree, or small child in vastly different
ways. Finally, cohort effects are described as certain trends leaving a deeper impact on young
adults experiencing it because they are at a point in their lives where they are developing
personal beliefs.
13
For example, a young person growing up through the civil rights movement or
the more recent gay rights movement is likely to be impacted in a more substantial way than

8
those who have more established beliefs or those who are too young to understand the full
implications of those events or trends.

It is important to consider these processes because they serve as reminders that at any given time
any one or even all three may be taking place and are not mutually exclusive. In fact, it can be
impossible to determine which is actually occurring and what the true effects are. Additionally,
within any group of people, especially one the size of Millennials, there are a myriad of
differentiators in this highly diverse segment making generalizations often quite weak or
unsubstantiated. A great deal of research pulled from this Pew study will seek to focus solely on
demographic information, taking special care to remain reasonable with major implications.
Major Takeaway: Demographics
In 2010, Pew identifies Millennials to be “more ethnically and racially diverse than older
generations, more educated, less likely to be working and slower to settle down.”
14
In fact, ethnic
and racial diversity can be tied into the enormous size of Millennials. While Millennials and
Boomers have roughly the same population size, the study found these were for completely
different reasons. Notably, the fertility rates during the Boomer years from 1946-1964 were
about 70% higher than birth rates today. In fact, Millennial population size can be more highly
attributed to an increase in immigration to the United States, especially among women of
childbearing age.
15

When surveying race, only 61% of Millennials, 62% of Gen-X and 73% of Boomers are non-
Hispanic whites, displaying this trend of increased ethnic diversity, especially considering the
12% increase in ethnic minorities from the Boomer to Millennial generation.
16
While Millennials

9
are less likely to be born outside the U.S., 11% of Millennials have at least one immigrant parent,
the same percentage as the Silent Generation (born 1928-1945), which reflects a similar boom in
immigration to the United States in the 1800s. This trend of ethnic diversity continues to the
present day. In 2014, 50% of children born in the United States are non-white according to the
Center for Disease Control.
17
Furthermore, the U.S. Census Bureau projects that the U.S. will be
majority non-white within the next thirty years.
18

When it comes to education, in 2010, more than half of Millennials obtained at least some
college education, a more than 5% increase from Gen-X and nearly 20% increase from
Boomers.
19
Another notable change is the reversal of female and male college attendance, which
began during Gen-X and has continued through Gen-Y with women making up 56.8% of college
students in 2012.
20
In 2014, a third of older Millennials (26-33) hold a bachelor’s degree, which
makes them the most highly educated young-adult cohort in American history.
21
This, in part,
can be attributed to a much harsher job market and difficult economic results for those not
continuing education post-high school.
22
This also comes with its economic issues, as roughly
67% of recent graduates have student loans averaging $27,000. Twenty years ago only half had
college debt and it was roughly $15,000.
23
This obviously has major implications for Millennials
and their part to play in the American economy.

Another substantial generational difference is noticed in terms of marriage and family. 75% of
Millennials have never married compared to 67% of Gen-X, 52% of Boomers ad 43% of Silent
at the same ages.
24
In 2010, only 20% of Millennials were married and only 12% had children,
which is nearly half the numbers for Boomers at the same age. Additionally, Millennials had

10
twice the number of single parents than Boomers (8% vs. 4%).
25
This demonstrates a notable
shift in American family structure. Though they are less likely to be married, when Pew asked
Millennials 18-29 what the most important things in their life were the top four responses were
being a good parent (52%), Having a successful marriage (30%), Helping others in need (21%)
and owning a home (20%).
26
While the percentage of married Millennials has grown since 2010,
it still represents the lowest numbers compared to any other generation, with only 26% of
Millennials being married in 2014 (69% unmarried) in 2014, compared with 36% and 48% of
Gen-X and Boomers respectively at the same age.
27

Major Takeaway: Sentiments
When asked, 61% of Millennials believed that their generation was distinct from others, which
they attributed to multiple factors. Among factors Millennials believed set them apart were:
Technology Use (24%), Music/Pop Culture (11%), Liberal/Tolerant (7%) Smarter (6%), and
Clothes (5%). Conversely, Gen-X believed that Technology Use (12%), Work Ethic (11%),
Conservative/Traditional (7%), Smarter (6%) and Respectful (5%) set them apart. While
Boomers believed Work Ethic (17%) Respectful (14%), Values/Morals (8%), “Baby Boomers”
(6%) and Smarter (5%) set them apart.
28
These characteristics can be seen side-by-side in Figure
1. What these characteristics tell us are key identifiers that generations have indicated to be
special to them. Notably, there is a distinct difference between the more conservative, traditional
and value oriented Gen-X and Boomers with notably higher feelings of respect and work ethic
when compared to the more liberal and pop-culture-connected Millennials. This seems to
conclude that Millennials pride themselves in open-mindedness, championing of technology,

11
pop-culture, fashion and tolerance when compared to their older family members and suggests
they see this openness as integral to their generational identity.

Boomer Characteristics Gen X Characteristics Millennial Characteristics
Work Ethic (17%) Technology Use (12%) Technology Use (24%)
Respectful (14%) Work Ethic (11%) Music/Pop Culture (11%)
Values/Morals (8%) Conservative/Traditional (7%) Liberal/Tolerant (7%)
“Baby Boomers” (6%) Smarter (6%) Smarter (6%)
Smarter (5%) Respectful (5%) Clothes (5%)
Figure 1

In regards to the economy, Pew found that Millennials are markedly more optimistic about their
economic outlook despite the Great Recession, which ravaged through a great part of their young
lives. In fact, Millennials were significantly more optimistic about their economic opportunity
when compared to Boomers and Gen X. In 2010, only 31% of Millennials said they earned
enough money to live the kind of life they want, compared to 46% for Gen-X and 52% for
Boomers. However, when the question shifted to perceptions of earning enough in the future,
88% of Millennials believed they would earn enough in the future, compared to 76% of Gen-X
and only 46% of Boomers.
29
Pew has been tracking generational attitudes towards the United
States as a country for more than 20 years, and although the young typically express higher
optimism than older generations, “the gap in overall satisfaction is wider now than it has been at
any time since 1990.”
30
This signifies that Millennials are increasingly more optimistic than
older generations in a way that seems to go beyond life-cycle effects.

12
Alongside the rising gap in optimism, gaps in social trust among age groups are in the decline
and have “diminished significantly since 2006 as the level of trust among those ages 30 and older
has fallen sharply.”
31
For example, in 2006 44% of people 30 and older claimed that most people
could be trusted, while in 2010, that number fell to 32%, while the numbers for those younger
than 30 remained relatively the same in that time,
32
this statistic can have major implications
when considering an audience’s thoughts on their environment. When Pew asked the trust
question again in 2014, only 19% of Millennials believed that to be true,
33
demonstrating a sharp
decline in social trust. Alternatively, 49% of Millennials said that the country’s best years were
ahead, while only 42% of Gen-X said the same,
34
signifying a continuance in Millennial
optimism despite mounting skepticism and abysmal trust levels. This may also be related to a
shift from trust in organizations to higher trust in peers and more personal social circles.

Continuing its probe of Millennial sentiments, especially in regard to their relationship with
major institutions, in 2014 Pew discovered 50% of Millennials describe themselves as politically
independent and nearly 30% do not affiliate with any religion.
35
This signifies the greatest
disconnection of a generation from major institutions (politics and religion) in the last 25 years.

Millennials are also considered to be extremely expressive. According to Pew in 2010, 75% of
them had a profile on a social network, 20% had posted a video of themselves online, almost
40% had a tattoo (of that group 18% had six or more) and almost 25% had a piercing somewhere
other than an earlobe (six times greater than older adults).
36
This expressiveness may be
attributed to technology, specifically social networking, which allows for entire pages to be
dedicated to ones likes, interests, photos and more. While these technologies are ubiquitous for

13
all generations at present, the fact that their inception began at a critical and young point in
Millennials’ lives may demonstrate a cohort effect in adoption and mentality towards digital
connectivity and expression.

Major Takeaway: Technology
When Millennials were asked in 2010 about technology and the role it played in people’s lives,
their answers were notably higher than older generations. Millennials believed that technology
made life easier (74%), make people closer to friends and family (54%) and allowed people to
use their time more efficiently (56%).
37
In 2014, 81% of Millennials are on Facebook with their
median friend count at 250, significantly higher than any other generation.
38
Millennials are now
described as digital natives, meaning they grew up in a world where they did not have to adapt to
social technology, and instead were socialized to use it.

Pew Conclusions

Taking an in-depth look at the decades of generational studies Pew has undertaken illuminates
some key takeaways about Millennials. Not only is this generation immensely diverse, but they
are highly optimistic of the future, even though they have seen some of the worst economic
catastrophes America has ever faced early-on in their lives. It appears these economic downturns
have taken a higher toll on their trust of others rather than in their hope for a better future.
Economic conditions have forced Millennials to enroll in higher education at the highest rate in
history, but has also resulted in enormous levels of student debt. The economic conditions have
also delayed marriage for many Millennials causing them to be more focused on the individual at
this point in time, but aspirational for a healthy and fulfilling family and financial life. Finally,

14
Millennials are drawing further and further away from established political institutions as well as
religion. This may be attributed to their ethnic diversity and along with that openness to change
and experimentation, potentially because of their need to be flexible in a world where neither the
economy nor technology could be trusted to stay constant for any period of time.

Millennials: Consumer Insights

A similar generational study conducted by Barkley advertising agency alongside The Boston
Consulting Group and Service Management Group seeks to delve deeply into Millennial
attributes as well as patterns, specifically in relation to the consumer marketplace.
Based on survey results, Barkley defined changes in what it calls “The experience economy”
from an old model to a new one; turning interruption to engagement, reaction to interaction,
heavy users to engaged participants, big promises to personal gestures and passive consumers to
active co-creators.
39
This is based on findings that describe the Millennial generation and reflects
that generation’s wants, needs and expectations.

Although this study found that Millennials and non-Millennials spent about the same amount of
time online each week (11-20 hours), how Millennials spent that time was the differentiating
factor. 60% of Millennial users had reported some form of user generated content (UGC)
including photos, videos and reviews. Additionally, Millennials heavily used their Internet
connections seeking entertainment.
40
Similarly to the Pew study, nearly 50% of Millennials
surveyed indicated agreement or strong agreement with the statement that “My life feels richer
now that I am connected to more people through social media”
41
indicating how integral this

15
media has become to Millennials and their acceptance of it as a valuable part of their everyday
life.

When it came to brands and social media, more than 30% of Millennials liked a brand more if it
used social media and more than 50% indicated they liked “checking out brands on social media
sites like Facebook and Twitter.”
42
In a similar study conducted by Ad Week in 2014, results
showed that 38% of Millennials believed brands to be “more accessible and trustworthy” when
using social advertising as opposed to traditional. Furthermore, 66% reported following brand on
social media, with only a 41% enjoyment rate.
43
This demonstrates not only the ubiquity of
social media but that Millennials enjoy connecting with more than just personal friends on their
favorite media outlets, as long as it provides them value of some kind.

The study also found that Millennials are social in all aspects of their lives, especially when it
comes to decision-making, which can be related to Strauss and Howe’s description of Millennial
team-work. In fact, 70% of Millennials, compared with 48% non-Millennials believed that they
felt better and more excited about a decision if their friends agreed with that decision.
44

Millennials also see the products they purchase and even the programs they are a part of as a part
of their self identity with nearly 40% saying they would be willing to pay more for a product
“consistent with the image [they] want to convey” and 51% saying they purchase brands that
reflect their personality and style.”
45
This desired image, however, is not the absolute or only
criteria, as 56% of Millennials surveyed indicated they would switch a brand to use a “cents-off
coupon” indicating that they are also looking for a good deal.
46

16
Eating out was also found to be a common trend among Millennials, especially compared to their
non-Millennial counterparts. This relates specifically to later primary research, with all selected
companies being hosted within the food category, more specifically two quick service restaurants
(Arby’s and Taco Bell) and two at-home preparation companies (DiGiorno and Hamburger
Helper). The study found Millennials ate out 3.4 times per week compared to the non-millennial
2.8 times per week, and spend an average of $174 per month eating outside the home (compared
to $153).
47
Millennials sought to eat out in most cases out of convenience with the top four
reasons being “in the mood for a particular kind of food,” wanting to “treat myself,” wanting a
“break from cooking meals at home” and no “time to prepare and eat a meal at home.”
48

Highlighting the importance of convenience in restaurant choice, Millennials indicated that 40%
of their eating-out experiences were at fast food establishments, though their non-Millennial
counterparts were only a few percentage points behind them at about 38%.
49

This study, in comparison to Pew’s focuses more specifically on Millennials as consumers, but
allows for connections to form between what shapes Millennials as people and how this may
translate into the marketplace. For example, perhaps Millennials’ desire for high achievement
makes them consume more fast-food to keep up with a busy work place, or is in part related to
their desire to save money as well. Millennials in both studies indicated extremely positive
sentiments toward social media and also close ties with friends.

Millennials: In the Work Place

In their 2010 study, Ng, Schweitzer and Lyons sought to study Millennials and their actions
within the work place specifically. The researchers embarked upon this study as they noticed

17
huge discrepancies between young Millennial employees being recruiting and entering the work
force and their superiors who were overwhelmingly Boomers. As large numbers of Boomers
retire from the work place and Millennials replace them, the researchers saw it as imperative to
understand how this generation functions in a workplace environment and how this transition
may be made smoothly and without conflict based in generational differences.

The study discovered that Millennials expect great things from their careers and believed
advancement opportunities to be a high priority, confirming thoughts of Millennials as highly
ambitious.
50
The study also found Millennials expected promotions quickly, and were not
particularly interested in staying at one work place for a significant period of time.
51

Additionally, Millennials in this study indicated people to be a key factor in the work place,
which the researchers took to support the notion that Millennials are interested in more than just
work, and take pleasure in the social and communal aspects of the work place as equally
important to the work itself. This also may support the idea that Millennials are more loyal to
their colleagues than to their companies.
52

This study highlights even further characteristics of Millennials as highly connected in social
circles, team-oriented, confident, aspirational and uncommitted to large organizations.

Millennials: Interactive Technology

In a study conducted by Marguerite Moore at North Carolina State University in 2012,
researchers sought to study interactive media usage, especially amongst Millennials. Moore
sought to understand technology usage behavior as opposed to attitudes, which were more

18
commonly covered in similar studies. Primarily, Moore’s study compared Millennials to the two
generations preceding them, Boomers and Gen-X in order to understand interactive technology
usage cross-generationally. Two bases for her research include generational cohort theory, which
seeks to group generations based upon historical cycles, which includes events that shape
attitudes and behaviors within that cohort.
53
Additionally, Moore cites the Uses and
Gratifications theory, which “assumes that individuals select and use media in a goal-directed
manner to achieve a level of desired gratification… different types of media are perceived as
unique by individuals and must compete for their attention.”
54
In her study Moore utilized
Decision Tree Analysis in order to take an in-depth look at relationships amongst diverse data.
Moore found that in comparison to Gen-X, Millennials were more likely to use interactive
technology for marketing, connect with brands and retailers using mobile devices and use their
mobile device for social networking.
55
Moore also found that Millennials integrate media into
their lives significantly more than Boomers; however, Boomers surpass Millennials in brand
interactions involving blogs and couponing and utilizing the Internet for functional and
entertainment purposes. Additionally, Millennials were much less likely to purchase online than
the other two cohorts.
56
Moore concludes that brands should stay away from inundating their
Millennial consumers with content, as they tend to be more skeptical towards persuasive
marketing. She stresses that “clear communication, efficient technology and delivering on
promises” are key when it comes to this audience.
57
Overall, this study concluded that
Millennials are heavy consumers of interactive technology and though they frequently use this
technology to connect to brands, they rarely use it for purchase, which suggests they connect for
reasons other than purchase/sheer utility.

19
Summary

Based on the literature reviewed, it is clear that although a generation of nearly 80 million
individuals cannot be generalized easily, clear trends have emerged that allow us to begin to
understand their patterns of behavior. These are a few key patterns that have emerged based on
the reviewed literature:
• Millennials are focused on achievement and success. This comes from a focus on
academic achievement that translates later in life to an expectation for high achievement
in the work place. This also contributes to a sense of optimism for the future.
• Millennials are connected. They value connection to others, team-work and peer input in
decision making. These connections must be meaningful however, in order to carry true
weight with this generation.
• Millennials are expressive. They enjoy interacting with friends and brands alike on social
media as well as expressing their opinions to peers and others. They feel unique and
distinct and are likely to engage in user-generated content and seek other forms of self-
expression.
• Millennials are ethnically diverse, educated and detached from large institutions. This
makes them air on the side of open-mindedness and flexibility, while still making them
skeptical of large institutions and not quick to trust without report. This also creates an
imperative for brands to engage with them and be more authentic than ever before.
• Millennials champion technology. As digital natives, they expect nearly everything in
their lives to be accessible in the digital sphere. These technologies must embody utility,
entertainment and connectedness to be truly relevant.

20
These summary takeaways provide building blocks for approaching marketing to Millennials,
especially in the digital sphere. Understanding these integral characteristics is imperative to
connecting to them in a relevant and meaningful way. The next chapter will explore aspects of
brand personality in order to help determine a clear path where Millennials and brand personality
best practices can meet to provide valuable insights for brands seeking to connect to Millennials
in a lasting way.
Section II: Brand Personality and The Psychology of Purchase

According to Business Dictionary, brand personality is defined as “human traits or
characteristics associated with a specific brand name. The brand personality gives consumers
something with which they can relate, effectively increasing brand awareness and popularity.”
58

While the idea of brand personality is not new to the world of business and marketing, it has
taken new shape in the dawn of digital technology, specifically social media. In the past where
brand personality was determined significantly by consumer facing entities such as in-store
experience, customer service and predominantly advertising, social media is the new
predominant medium. The inherent purpose of social media is to connect people to those around
them, and when brands entered this mix, it brought the notion of brand personality to a whole
new level.

In this study, I will argue that brand personality in the wake of social media is more important
now than ever. Today, brands are more directly connected to the consumer than they have been
in the past and with this comes an unprecedented level of exposure. With any error in judgment
or missed detail, a company faces potentially millions of vocal protesters on social media,

21
making most issues ones that the company must face head-on with their consumers rather than
through former third parties such as newspapers or lawyers. Responses are expected in real-time,
and as seen in earlier literature people don’t want to follow a brand on Twitter that simply pumps
out coupons or handles customer service. This has not only brought the consumer and the
company closer to one another but has also created an imperative for the company to remain
relevant in order to be meaningfully heard. This study seeks to show that companies becoming
more like the friends their consumers follow on social media is one major way to achieve this
authenticity. The following studies and cases will help illuminate different ways of looking at
and measuring brand personality in order to understand the concept comprehensively and draw
conclusions moving forward.

The Self-Concept and Brand Symbolism

For decades, businesspeople and academics alike have sought to better understand the
relationship between people and their brands or products. In a 1958 article in the Harvard
Business Review, Sidney Levy discussed the shift in the consumer marketplace taking place in
the late 1950s. The article describes a market where customers were instead becoming audiences
much more preoccupied than ever before with not simply the functionality of their goods but
what it means to other aspects of their life. Levy states that “the less concern there is with the
concrete satisfactions of a survival level of existence, the more abstract human responses
become. As behavior in the marketplace is increasingly elaborated it also becomes increasingly
symbolic… it means that sellers of goods are engaged… in selling symbols.”
59
With this brand
symbolism there becomes a sort of schema within the human mind that causes one to look at a
product and how attributes of that product fit in with that person’s life and personality, taking

22
into consideration what that person values. This causes consumers to undertake both internal and
external evaluations of product or brand symbolism to determine whether or not it fits.

Continuing with this concept of brands being more than just their “nuts and bolts,” author Stuart
Britt states in his 1968 book on consumer behavior that, “A consumer may buy a product
because, among other factors, he feels that the product enhances his own self image. Similarly, a
consumer may decide not to buy a product or not to shop at a particular store if he feels that these
actions are not consistent with his own perceptions of himself.”
60
In their own study, Edward
Grubb and Gregg Hupp wanted to test this concept empirically, surveying car brands Pontiac and
Volkswagen, hypothesizing that consumers of a particular brand would associate characteristics
of that brand with both themselves and other consumers of that brand, and additionally that they
would differentiate themselves markedly from consumers of the other company.

This study was based on the theoretical foundations that from the time a person is a small child,
they begin to develop attitudes and evaluations of herself/himself and classify those feelings as
“self.” As this self-formation continues throughout that person’s life, it takes on more meaning
and value and becomes central to their identity and cherished greatly.
61
This is known as the self-
concept. In addition to this, the self-concept is cultivated by forces within a person’s life. Peers
and family alike respond to one’s exertion of self, and therefore that person will strive for
positive reinforcement from those he/she deems to be important. This highlights that external
factors of environment and others help to shape one’s aspirations and goals as a product of these
interactions. Therefore, it is believed that the consumer will choose things (products, brands etc.)
that reflect the self in a positive way to communicate to those around her/him elements of

23
personality or self. Ultimately, this would result in those around her/him responding positively
and that self being further reinforced.
62
This also inherently creates symbolic meaning in
virtually any product.

Results of the study concluded that consumers of one brand considered themselves unique from
consumers of the other and also held stereotypical beliefs alongside a particular brand.
Consumers also believed themselves to be similar to others with their same automobile. This
caused the researchers to ultimately conclude that the self-concept was indeed linked to
consumer behavior.
63

Both self-concept and brand symbolism go to show that utility aside, all products and services
have meaning, and that meaning is up to interpretation on the part of the consumer. Consumers
choose brands that reflect their identity or their aspirational identity, which falls in line with
perceptions of the self and a desire for social acceptance. Additionally, with help on the part of
the company, brands are not typically perceived to be completely unique from consumer to
consumer, and in general brand characteristics are perceived similarly from person to person.
This may be a result of a specific personality or meaning that a brand projects and its reception
by the public, which evolves and strengthens over time.

Brand Experience and Brand Personality

Before delving more into brand personality, it is useful to look at its origins in experiential
marketing. Joy and Sherry state that, “intertwining mind and body is crucial for creating an
unforgettable customer experience,” based on research that in the consumers’ purchase process

24
both feelings and logic are triggered depending on the situation.
64
Research conducted by Keng,
Tran and Thi affirms that a brand’s basic fight is one for buyers’ attention and a differentiation
from the competition in the consumer mind. This is because the marketplace is so inundated with
information and cues that modern marketers must channel brand experience and brand
personality in order to set them apart and emphasize their distinct value.
65
These researchers use
a landmark study conducted by David and Jennifer Aaker in the late 1990s as the basis for their
research in brand personality.

David Aaker believed that brand personality was rooted in what he called, “brand-as-person
perspective,” he believed brands had self-expressive benefits which were increasingly important
especially in a market with minute differences between product offerings and that of the
competition’s.
66
In 1997 Jennifer Aker identified five brand personality characteristics based on
her research. These characteristics were: Sincerity, Excitement, Competence, Sophistication and
Ruggedness and were described as follows:
67

Sincerity
• Down-to-Earth, Honest, Wholesome, Cheerful
Excitement
• Daring, Spirited, Imaginative, Up-to-date
Competence
• Reliable, Intelligent, Successful
Sophistication
• Upper class, Charming

25
Ruggedness
• Outdoorsy, Tough

Keng, Tran and Thi’s research which utilized these personality characteristics demonstrated
strong backing for the importance of brand experience and its influence on customer experiential
value and also found that all five personality dimensions were related to customer’s experiential
value.
68

Experiential value in this case is defined as a consumption experience that is rich in value and a
consumer’s perception of advantage as a result of an interaction with an organization.
69

The Five Big Personality Traits and Brand Evangelism

In a 2014 study conducted at the Florida Institute of Technology, researchers sought to find a
connection between five pre-determined brand personality elements and to understand how that
might contribute to what they call “brand evangelism.” The chosen “Big Five” personality traits
(as they are called) were determined based on findings from Robert McCrae and Paul Costa’s
landmark work on identifying personality traits. In their research, McCrae and Costa defined five
large scales as being: Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness, Agreeableness, and
Conscientiousness. Even further, these larger domains had eight-item scales that fell under
them.
70

Neuroticism
• Anxiety, Hostility, Depression, Self-consciousness, Impulsiveness, Vulnerability to
Stress

26
Extraversion
• Warmth, Gregariousness, Assertiveness, Activity, Excitement Seeking, Positive Emotion
Openness to Experience
• Fantasy, Aesthetics, Feelings, Actions, Ideas, Values
Agreeableness
• Trust, Straightforwardness, Altruism, Compliance, Modesty, Tender-mindedness
Conscientiousness
• Competence, Order, Dutifulness, Achievement Striving, Self-Discipline, Deliberation

In the study, researchers took these concepts and sought to apply them to differing levels of
brand loyalty, which they distinguished as market mavens, opinion leaders and brand
evangelists. Market mavens are considered to have a wealth of market information and large
breadth of knowledge, while opinion leaders are known for authority or knowledge in a more
specific area.
71
As defined by researcher Samuel Doss in 2014, Brand evangelists are defined as
a, “consumer that freely communicates positive information, ideas and feelings on a particular
brand… exhibits a strong desire to influence consumption behavior… [and] voluntarily convert
other consumers.”
72
Brand evangelism is obviously a point of interest for brands seeking to
cultivate followers, and this study seeks to find the connections between these loyalists and the
quantifiable personality profiles that had been studied in business as well as science for decades.

The results found that brand evangelism was significantly related to the traits of extraversion,
openness and neuroticism, with the latter being the weakest connection of the three.
73
The study
attributes characteristics of extraversion as being sociable, active, talkative, person-oriented,

27
optimistic and affectionate. Openness being connected to imagination, creativity and
unconventionality; Neuroticism related to distress, cravings, urges and maladaptive coping.
74

The researchers clearly saw opportunity for these conclusions to be applied toward social media,
as it was the first item of proposed future study at the conclusion of the paper. Certainly, brands
are interested in how these mavens, leaders and evangelists can be harnessed, and this study
provided explanation for how that might be accomplished via personality.

A similar study utilizing The Five Big Brand Personality traits conducted by Long-Yi Lin in
2010 found significant links to brand personality and brand loyalty. Lin found that there was also
a positive relationship between personality traits of extroversion, agreeableness and
consciousness with excitement, competence and sincerity. Furthermore, that there was a positive
influence of brand personality on affective loyalty and of one’s personality trait on brand
loyalty.
75
This extends the notion that personality traits are related to one another as well as a
consumer’s loyalty to a brand. It also concludes that customer’s affective (emotional) loyalty is
directly related to the brand’s personality in alignment with the consumer’s personality
characteristics. The following section will explore in further depth the relationship between the
consumer and brand personalities.

Brand Personality vs. Consumer Personality

The primary utility of social media is a way for users to project themselves on a profile and
interact with others using that profile. Since companies have begun to assume their own
identities and characteristics on corporate social media pages, questions have also arisen
regarding connections between human personality and brand personality. In their 2012 paper,

28
Huang, Mitchell and Resenaum-Elliot sought to uncover what the differences between human
and brand personalities (personality vs. personify) and what the implications may be in the
business world. The study defines personality as, “a configuration of an individual’s cognition,
emotion, and motivation, which activates behavior and reflects how the individual adjusts to the
environment by incorporating his life experiences.”
76
The researchers believe that former studies
were incorrect in their statements that brands had personality when they were in reality
discussing a brand personified. This is mainly because in addition to purely inward cognition
they also address exterior information such as demographics or class, which is enormously
broad. Personified brand image portrays more than just psychological characteristics, tapping
into the external and creating almost a caricature while conversely, brand personality serves as a
reflection of consumers’ perceptions of the brand’s characteristics intrinsically.
77

The researchers hypothesized that brand and human personality structures were the same, that
there was a positive relationship between consumers’ personalities and their favorite brands and
that category does not play a major role when it comes to brand personality and favorite brands.
The results of the study found that there was a connection between the personality of the
consumer and the personality of the brand. One explanation for this is attributed to Belk’s 1988
statements that consumers prefer to express their own identity through the products they
consume.
78
Taking this one step further, researchers believed there was a connection between
both consumer and brand projection of the “brand person,” which employs the functional aspects
of the brand rather than just psychological (i.e. organized and efficient).
79
However, the
researchers concede that consumers may not be seeking brand connection purely out of desire to

29
reflect themselves, but instead see it as a point of attraction to something that is similar to them
in personality rather than something they are trying to build.

Based on this finding, the researchers suggest that marketers stay away from the aspirational or
image-producing usage of brand personality, and instead use their target markets as inspiration
for brand characteristics in order to craft a brand image. For example, instead of relying on
pushing a luxury car as something that will bring success and status, focusing more on the person
likely to buy a luxury vehicle, and building an image based on that consumer’s personality. The
researchers believe that rather than trying to determine what that consumer may want or what it
will require to convince them that the product will make them better, relating to them will draw
them to the product more organically and lastingly. One of the most important takeaways from
this finding is the necessity for brands to realize that brand personality is a mechanism of co-
creation and that by allowing consumers a part in brand personality creation, the experience
becomes drastically more meaningful. Additionally, these feelings of personal connection were
not only attributed to brands, which are more conventionally seen as impacting consumer
feelings (i.e. a retail store expressing who you are because of your unique fashion sense).
Conversely, the study found that even more commoditized products such as dishwashing
detergent are still able to trigger psychological significance within the consumer.
80
With this
finding researchers suggest that marketers are able to use psychological and personality
characteristics to even the most utilitarian brands and that it can have an impact.

Ultimately in this study it was identified that human “personality and brand personality are
operationally comparable.”
81
Researchers also insist that brand personality should not be used in

30
external items such as demographics or appearance if it desires to tap inner characteristics of
consumers, which are inherently more meaningful. For example, rather than appeal to “the rich,
classy blonde woman,” which relies on external information such as socioeconomic standing,
hair color, and projected sophistication; brands should instead draw their focus to the notion of
that woman’s inner psyche. They argue that targeting these internal characteristics rather than the
more apparent external is the most effective way to utilize brand personality. This also highlights
their suggested difference between brand personality and personification. In the researchers’
eyes, personification goes too far in explaining brand information, and strays from the crux of
brand personality, which focuses on perception rather than pure fact. In other words, what is
more important is how that “rich and classy blonde woman” sees herself and the world around
her, rather than what a passerby on the street can tell by looking at her. This signifies that the
perception of the consumer and how that relates to their perceptions of themselves is where the
value lies in brand personality.

Millward Brown and the BrandZ Studies

Each year global brand, communications and media company Millward Brown publishes a
comprehensive report entitled “BrandZ Top 100 Most Valuable Global Brands,” which is
considered to be a leading expert resource in understanding brand equity.
82
BrandZ’s
methodology includes a combination of consumer-based research as well as financial analysis in
order to determine a brand’s true value alongside reports on market trends and other elements of
thought leadership. According to BrandZ, “research covers two million consumers and more then
10,000 brands in over 30 countries,” this is done in a three-step process including 1. Calculating
financial value in two parts, 2. Calculating brand contribution and 3. Calculating brand value.
83

31

In the 2012 report, BrandZ included a chapter on brand personality, and with it key archetypes to
understanding and leveraging this powerful tool. BrandZ argues “understanding a brand
personality enables the brand owner to deliver a consistent brand experience that connects with
consumers and leaves a deeper and more sustainable impression”
84
In their brand personality
typing methodology, BrandZ bases categories on “authoritative psychological personality profile
testing” in order to create 20 personality characteristics and 10 overarching archetypes.
85

The following are the brand archetypes (in bold) and characteristics developed by BrandZ in
2012:

• Joker
o Fun, Playful
• Seductress
o Desirable, Sexy
• Rebel
o Rebellious
• Hero
o Adventurous, Brave
• Wise
o Trustworthy
• King
o In control, Assertive
• Mother
o Generous, Caring
• Friend
o Straightforward, Friendly
• Maiden
o Innocent, Kind
• Dreamer
o Idealistic, Different, Creative

In addition to these characteristics and archetypes, BrandZ also aligns these onto two axes, one
for stability/change, the other for well-being/challenge.
86
Based on research findings, the

32
Seductress, Wise, King and Mother were all associated strongly with brand equity, while Joker,
Rebel and Maiden were somewhat lower. Interesting to note, that among the top 100 brands
surveyed, “in control,” “assertive,” (King) “trustworthy,” “wise,” (Wise) and “creative”
(Dreamer) were all among the most common brand traits.
87
BrandZ concedes that although
archetypes like friend and maiden are cited to be somewhat less successful, some top brands such
as Facebook (Joker) and Amazon (Friend) find success in these niche personality traits.

This report, though mainly focusing on overall brand value has identified these key
characteristics and archetypes and determined them as important players in a brand’s value and
success. At the very least they offer ways in which a brand is able to distinguish itself from
competitors, but more importantly, brand personality can serve as a signal to consumers of a
brand’s core identity, which in turn fulfills a consumers emotional as well as utilitarian needs.

The North Face: A Case in Brand Personality

In 2012, researchers Ronald and Elizabeth Goldsmith studied 132 college students in order to
determine if there was a significant connection between brand engagement and brand personality
that was supported by empirical rather than anecdotal research.
Their research utilized a new and distinct set of brand personality traits explored by Geuens et.
al. which encompassed personality traits including:
88

Responsibility
• Down-to-Earth, Stable, Responsible
Activity
• Active, Dynamic, Innovative

33
Aggressiveness
• Aggressive, Bold
Simplicity
• Ordinary, Simple
Emotionality
• Romantic, Sentimental

Geuens, Weijters and De Wulf believe this proves to be the most accurate brand personality scale
to date because it is more reliable for between-brand between-category comparison, between-
brand within-category comparisons and between-respondent comparisons. It was also considered
to be highly reliable with cross-cultural validity.
89

In their study of The North Face, Ronald and Elizabeth Goldsmith found that eleven out of
twelve studied adjectives utilizing Geuens’ brand personality scale were associated with brand
engagement for The North Face.
90
This concludes that these traits (encapsulated in the 12
adjectives) were overwhelmingly associated with The North Face distinctly. They argue this is
important because “so many product categories’ brands are manufactured to have equivalent
quality standards and provide similar levels of utilitarian benefits [so] marketers must rely on
their brand images to distinguish them from each other and to attract consumers to specific
brands.”
91
Overall, the researchers suggest that marketers should determine how their brand is
seen by their target audiences, and utilize brand personality elements to increase engagement.
For example, personality traits of responsibility and non-ordinary were predominant with The

34
North Face, so Goldsmith suggests that The North Face highlight aspects of responsibility and
non-ordinary brand characteristics to reinforce strengths of the brand’s personality.
92

Summary

When surveying the various studies, cases and definitions, trends begin to emerge regarding
brand personality. Although there are numerous different metrics to support measurement of
brand personality, there are key aspects present in these diverse tools.
• Brand Personality is strongly tied with experience, both internal and external
o Internal, finds that consumers enjoy brands that they see as a form of self-
expression, or self-reflection. They enjoy brands that they can emotionally
connect with and understand at a psychological level.
o External, brand personality impacting brand experience plays a major role in
differentiation of a brand from competitors, especially when there are few
utilitarian differences between competitors.
• Brand Personality was seen to have a positive impact on brand engagement, brand
evangelism, customer experiential value and brand loyalty.
• Although four different measurements of brand personality were discussed in this section,
they can be roughly categorized as such: Plain=Aaker Traits, Bold=McCrae and Costa,
Italicized= BrandZ, Underline=Geuens
o Sincerity, Agreeableness, Friend, Mother, Maiden, Responsibility
o Excitement, Extraversion, King, Activity, Emotionality
o Competence, Conscientiousness, Wise, Simplicity
o Sophistication, Seductress

35
o Ruggedness, Neuroticism, Joker, Rebel, Hero, Aggressiveness
o Openness to Experience, Dreamer

No matter how one chooses to categorize or identify brand personality, it is undeniable that the
phenomena exists and that it is a moving force in brand value, equity and impact.

The following sections will address primary research studying selected brand’s social media
accounts based on their appeal to a Millennial audience. The study will then measure information
based on personality aspects as a psychological function as well as characteristics unique to the
Millennial generation. The results of this study will demonstrate a meaningful connection
between brand personality and its value, and how that can be leveraged specifically when
targeting a Millennial audience on social media.

Codes for the following study were chosen because of their applicability to Millennials,
specifically, their inclination towards optimism which translates into excitement, extraversion,
king, activity and emotionality.
Section III: Primary Research and Findings, Connecting Millennials to Brand
Personality
Primary Research Methodology

Primary research consists of a content analysis of four brands’ Twitter handles for the two-month
period of June 1-July 31, 2014. Brands surveyed were: Arby’s, DiGiorno pizza, Taco Bell and
Hamburger Helper. These accounts were featured in a Time article entitled, “The 13 Sassiest
Brands on Twitter,”
93
and also appeal to a Millennial audience. Success of these brands among

36
an audience known to be resistant to their market may show success of Brand Personality in
social media marketing tools.

Each tweet was evaluated and categorized using a pre-established set of codes based on various
demographic information regarding Millennials, brand personality categories as well as
personality elements based in common cultural artifacts.

Finally, social media measurement software Brandwatch was used to track general success and
data of a company’s Twitter handle during a sampled week in August. This will help paint a
more accurate picture of the brand’s Twitter handle and the impact it has on its audiences.
Coding, De-Coded

Based on the seemingly inexhaustible list of brand personality traits and characteristics, it
became necessary to narrow the scope and determine which traits to measure as well as how to
measure them in connection with Millennials.

Before any in-depth analysis took place, it was determined that the most prominent personality
traits that would be discovered would be in the vein of Excitement, Extroversion, King, Activity
and Emotionality. There were also common traces of Ruggedness, Neuroticism, Joker Rebel,
Hero and Aggressiveness. The knowledge that these accounts in general would have these
characteristics paved the way for the creation of the codes. This took away looking at
characteristics such as trustworthy or sincere and focusing on more gregarious personality traits.

37
The first measures were those of tweets, retweets and favorites to give a volume benchmark and
illuminate frequency of personality trait use. The codes were as follows:

Mean/Edgy/Attitude/Blunt: Any tweet was coded as such if it contained traces of edge, or could
be interpreted by some to be rude or too forward. Examples of tweets that were coded this way
include statements such as, “and that’s why you’re single” (Taco Bell), “What is wrong with you
people” (DiGiorno), and “If meat isn’t on your agenda, it’s time to reevaluate your time”
(Arby’s). These tweets encompass personality traits of BrandZ’s King, because it is assertive and
in-control as well as the rebel for its often seemingly insensitive comments that go against
common mores. This code can also be seen as displaying an Aggressiveness in its boldness and
even Ruggedness in this tough-guy approach. While not all tough guys are Millennials, this trait
was intended to speak to Millennials attitudes and perhaps even a trace of societal animosity,
serving as an expression of self without filter. It also demonstrates a departure point from older
generations Gen-X and Boomers who self reported, “Respectful” as a defining generational
characteristic absent among Millennials in Pew’s studies.

Mention of Recent Event: This code is straightforward and also plays off of Pew’s distinction
question. Millennials, much more than earlier generations report knowledge of “music and pop
culture” as a defining point of the generation. In other words, Millennials are in touch with
trends, especially in pop culture, which should be indicated in Twitter accounts they follow. This
exemplifies Millennial connectivity at its peak, with Millennials connecting strongly to one
another and also to mainstream culture surrounding them. Examples of mentions of pop culture
include tweets recounting recent episodes of the HBO’s series, Game of Thrones The 2014

38
World Cup, Independence Day and other obscure “holidays” (i.e. National Lasagna Day). This
also demonstrates personality characteristics such as Aaker’s Competence, in proving to be
reliable and connected to the times.

Repeated or Outlandish Hashtag: Although hashtags are prominent throughout Twitter, hashtags
that are excessively lengthy or neurotic prove to be more of a personality piece rather than a tag
to be used for the purpose of a hashtag. For example “#EmmyNOMNOMNOMS” utilized by
DiGiorno is clearly aiming at humor rather than providing a resource. Additionally, hashtags
such as “#DiGiorNOYOUDIDNT” not only conveys humor but provides a way in which the
hashtag can be utilized repeatedly for branding purposes. These repeated and often crazy
hashtags convey obvious elements of humor with traces of BrandZ’s Joker in its fun and
playfulness as well as the Big Five’s Neuroticism in its impulsiveness as well as Extraversion in
its assertiveness and gregariousness. There are also cases where more typical hashtags are
counted such as #WorldCupFinals. The way these codes are unique to Millennials is more
subjective than others. The reason for this being that much of the hashtags are rooted in common
Millennial/Pop Culture vernacular or are related in some ways to the present times, making them
automatically relevant to Millennials because of their age. They contain elements of not only
pop-culture, but also an erratic nature both of which have been seen to appeal to this segment.

Current Slang/Vernacular: This code, similar to the recent event code, also touches upon
Millennial connection to pop-culture and is unique to them for obvious reasons. Examples of
vernacular coded are items such as: “omg,” “smh,” “u guys,” “bae,” and “no. just no.” These
exemplify personality characteristics such as Extraversion as well as Activity, which encompass

39
dynamic personality. This trait also ties in with the “Friend” archetype, speaking a language that
the user identifies with as a part of their own culture as well as identity.

Use of Emoji, Overly Punctuated: This code is similar to the Repeated or Outlandish Hashtag
code. It is intended to express intense emotion or excitement and that is why it is linked to the
Excitement, Extraversion, Activity, Emotional and Joker characteristics. Emojis are a prominent
artifact of pop-culture, and connecting that to Millennials and expressiveness is apparent in the
usage of tweets in all caps or using excessive punctuation marks such as exclamation points.
Aside from connection to pop-culture, Millennials are considered to be an extremely self-
expressive generation, which can in very small part be seen and identified alongside these
expressive brand personality artifacts.

Direct Address: This code is used when a tweet makes a direct statement at You, the consumer,
in a way that contains a call to action. In general, this is an article of brand personality because it
personifies a brand by its very nature. Furthermore, in its application to Millennials, similar to
the Mean/Edgy/Attitude code, it denotes an often tabooed direct call-out. It ties into the Friend
archetype in being very straightforward.

Funny/Clever: This code refers to any tweets that contained elements of humor. While these
jokes were often clearly targeted at Millennials by means of other coded elements, some of them
did not fall into one in particular so were categorized using this code. For example, a tweet may
be funny and contain another coded element, though that element may not be the reason the
tweet was funny. Examples include Arbys’ “The second continental Congress did not order salad

40
the day they signed the declaration of independence” or Hamburger Helper’s “That’s the Sound
of Freedom.” While humor can be absorbed through any generation, it is often a result of the
current environment, which was the case in many tweets coded this way. Even so, funny tweets
furthered the brand in its aspirations for the “Friend” archetype.

The Friend archetype is especially valuable when surveying Millennials because of how dearly
they hold their friends and close groups. It also serves as a distinguisher between the Twitter
brand and a large institution. Since Millennials are detached and skeptical of these institutions
and prefer smaller, more close knit interactions, it is clear why taking on the persona of a friend
to a Twitter account is a much more effective marketing strategy that is perceived to be more
authentic by Millennials.
Results
Arby’s – Overview

Arby’s Restaurant Group (ARG) is an American Quick Service Restaurant that was formed in
1964 and has roughly 3,600 restaurants in the United States and scattered abroad. The restaurant
specializes in roast beef and other types of sandwiches and its chief competition includes
McDonalds, Subway and Quiznos. A large portion of the company was formerly owned by The
Wendy’s Company of which the majority stake was sold to Roark Capital Group in 2011. Arby’s
had annual sales of approximately $1.34 billion in the 2013 fiscal year.
94

41
Twitter Stats
Arby’s- @Arbys Est. 2010
Tweets 24,200
Following 95,300
Followers 271,600
Figure 2

Arby’s- Content Analysis Results
The channel data for Arby’s from June 1 – July 31 2014 can be seen in the figure below:

Tweets Retweets Favorites Avg. Retweet Avg. Favorite
79 3548 5009 45 63
Figure 3

This gives a general idea of the volume of tweets Arby’s had during this two month period as
well as how the number of tweets measured up in comparison to the other three companies. On
average a tweet was retweeted about 45 times and favorited 63 times. In comparing the two
months, positive growth was seen from June to July with retweets and favorites rising nearly
200% despite an only 47% increase in tweet volume.

42

Figure 4
Based on the above data, it is clear that Arby’s utilizes personality characteristics alongside
purely informational tweets. In the studied time period, Arby’s utilized unique and repeated
hashtags the most frequently with general funny/cleverness in second and purely information
tweets third. The third most used personality traits, excluding strictly information, were a near tie
between direct address and mention of a recent event. This data begins to shed light on the
personality characteristics that Arby’s has chosen for its social media handle, which maintained a
funny air, with many of its tweets having a quirky nature about them.

With this data in mind, Arby’s has clearly taken on a more clean-cut, corporate voice in its
Twitter handle, and utilizes a hybrid approach to its content. While there are instances of humor
and funny remarks that would appeal to the Joker archetype, the account does retain a corporate
air. As many quick service restaurants do, Arby’s still includes promotions in their Twitter
account, but when surveying Figure 4 closely, it can be seen that the purely informational posts
do not exceed the top two personality posts. One conclusion to be made, is that Arby’s unlike
6

15

42

10

6

16

32

23

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Instances

Arby's
Personality

43
many other brands that are surveyed in this study, does not approach Twitter with reckless
abandon, but instead compliments its “clean” image, that stays up do date with events such as the
World Cup and holds a series of tweets for its 50
th
Anniversary containing facts about the brand.

It does not appear that Arby’s is channeling Millennials exclusively, especially considering items
directly linked to pop-culture are some of the lowest coded on this account. It is worth noting,
however, that the account is “Millennial friendly.” While it does not seek to exclusively target
the generation, the way in which it conducts its Twitter handle is one in which Millennials are
not turned-off, which in the case of Millennials is considered a brand win. As discovered before
Millennials enjoy a discount, and do not mind receiving them on social media, what matters in
this case is that the brand appears authentic and provides value. The value in this case can be
seen as two fold, both humorous value from the tweets as well as monetary value.

Arby’s Brandwatch:
In addition to the content analysis conducted to learn more about the personality of Arby’s
account, research was also done utilizing social media monitoring software, Brandwatch.
According to Brandwatch, during a week long period in August (Friday August 15
th
- Friday
August 22
nd
) Arby’s tweeted 183 times. This is significantly larger than the number for the
combined months of June and July, and a big reason for this is that nearly 70% of those tweets
(123 of them) were replies to individuals. This supports the finding that Arby’s is a helpful
handle and although it exercises humor, it remains dedicated to engagement with its audiences.

44
Owner
Tweets
Owner
Replies
Audience
Retweets
Audience
@mentions
Owner
Impressions
Audience
Impressions
Net
Followers
183 123 2,329 4,311 17,754,605 19,284,701 5,356
Figure 5
Note- Owner impressions refers to the number of impressions garnered by Arby’s owned
content/tweets. While audience impressions refers to those gained by the audience’s own
activities. Impressions are defined by Brandwatch as the sum of all followers of all who tweeted
or retweeted (the potential number of users).

Of the three most impactful tweets during this time, which received 272, 446 and 501 retweets
respectively, two contained a unique hashtag, #meatcraft which aligns with the findings that in
general, unique hashtags were a major part of Arby’s brand personality formation. Additionally,
all three of these tweets contained information about a new product, which also aligns with
findings in June and July that this Twitter account was used largely to promote new products.
Interestingly to note as well, that when surveying the top ten most impactful tweets, 60% of these
by coding standards used in the previous months shifted dramatically toward “Attitude” or
“bluntness.” This may be in part due to the ramped up marketing campaign surrounding Arbys’
new meat-filled sandwiches which is from observation a hyper-masculine campaign. This may
explain why the personality of the account has shifted slightly toward the attitude personality
similar to the Taco Bell account. It also furthers the belief that many of these accounts not only
are targeting Millennials, but specifically Millennial males.

Finally, the most impactful tweeter that interacted with the account is The Onion, a satirical
“news” organization who mentioned Arby’s in a tweet. The Onion sheds an interesting light on

45
the data as it has nearly six million followers on Twitter, the bulk of its content is considered
popular among Millennials,
95
with self-reported readership at 90% for 18-44 year olds, according
to The American Journalism Review, 60% of its readers are male.
96
The content of the tweet in
this satirical post, was poking fun at companies blatantly targeting Millennials. The Onion was
the third most mentioned topic in conglomerated data, with “Roast Beef” being the first (1,057
mentions) “One Sandwich” second (773 mentions) and “The Onion” tied for third with “Steak”
at 682 mentions.

Figure 6
In the next section we will explore the brand personalities of the other handles surveyed and
begin to compare and contrast them with one another.

DiGiorno- Overview

DiGiorno is a frozen pizza brand sold in the United States and owned by Swiss company Nestlé
SA. In early 2010, DiGiorno was sold by Kraft Foods for $3.7 billion, expanding Nestlé’s
presence in its largest market and extending its pillar in the frozen food category.
97
This was a
strategic move for Nestlé, as it also purchased Tombstone and California Pizza Kitchen from

46
Kraft, expanding its prowess in a U.S. pizza market, which has over $37 billion in annual sales,
and is the largest pizza market in the world.
98

Compared to the two other ready-made pizza brands in Nestlé’s new arsenal, Tombstone and
California Pizza Kitchen, DiGiorno is priced somewhat higher ($5-$7) than Tombstone ($1-$3)
and considered in general to be of higher quality. However, it falls behind California Pizza
Kitchen ($5 for personal sized), which is considered to be more premium, mimicking recipes
from the popular California Pizza Kitchen restaurants. In recent years DiGiorno has expanded its
portfolio to include extras like rising crust, design-a-pizza, small size pizzas, and wyngz.
DiGiorno is famous for its tagline, “It’s not delivery, it’s DiGiorno” which seeks to position
DiGiorno as a quality frozen pizza that is less expensive and more convenient than delivery
pizza.
Twitter Stats:
DiGiornoPizza- @DiGiornoPizza
Est. 2009
Tweets 9,464
Following 854
Followers 80,500
Figure 7

47
DiGiorno- Content Analysis Results
The channel data for DiGiorno from June 1 – July 31 2014 can be seen in the figure below:
Tweets Retweets Favorites Avg. Retweet Avg. Favorite
264 42,742 44,893 162 170
Figure 8

Of all brands studied, DiGiorno by far was the most active on Twitter. With average tweets
garnering roughly 162 retweets per tweet and 170 favorites per tweet, DiGiorno’s Twitter
engagement is exceedingly high. Looking at the coding data for the brand will help to determine
the type of personality DiGiorno exercises and how that may be serving the brand and its target
audiences.

Figure 9

4

44

255

105

153

28

70

1

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Instances

DiGiorno's
Personality

48
Similarly to Arby’s it is clear that DiGiorno has created a brand personality of its own. This is
characterized by the high usage of repeated and unique hashtags, current slang and vernacular
and Emoji/extreme punctuation. Hashtags were ubiquitous in this time period, often exceeding
the number of tweets themselves. DiGiorno utilized hashtags in a very unique way by often
coupling them with current slang or vernacular or general absurdity (i.e. #tipsfornewborns,
#nevermind and #stuffpizzathinksabout). Additionally, the slang and vernacular utilized by the
handle was extremely akin to that of an actual person, emulating the characteristics of that “crazy
friend of yours.” The account used words such as, “guys,” “yo,” “forevs,” “literally,” and
“prolly.” Oftentimes the account had an air or extreme neuroticism where the account would
tweet something silly and later in the same tweet say something like, “I am genuinely sorry,”
adding to the hilarity and ridiculousness of the account and its persona. Extreme punctuation was
used mostly during weekly live-tweets of WWE’s Raw in the month of June, where a vast
majority of the tweets were in all caps and included excessive punctuation. The account also had
its share of general cleverness, for example, when a tweet occurred during an exciting part of a
World Cup game, DiGiorno tweeted, “OMG THIS IS SO EXCITING i’m sorry i just made a
pizza whats going on in the game.”

This account unlike Arby’s seems to be appealing very directly to Millennials, and in many ways
directly to Millennial males. The brand live tweeted numerous sports events including the NBA
Finals, World Cup, WWE’s Raw, and the NBA finals as well as coverage of NBA player Lebron
James’ decision to return to Ohio. The tweets were also spastic, erratic and random, a personality
style shown to be successful among Millennial men and commonly used by brands such as Old
Spice. Its extreme usage of funny and pop-culturally appropriate hashtags demonstrates a

49
knowledge of the Millennial generation as a whole, and the usage of slang and vernacular takes
this even further. The account is likely targeting the younger portion of Millennials, currently in
their twenties, likely because of the price point of the pizza. The account references cultural
items that are especially relevant to Millennials, including Netflix and popular television shows
among the segment including Game of Thrones and Orange in the New Black. In July the brand
also conducted a live-tweet of the ABC Family “Potterhead Marathon” which aired all eight
Harry Potter movies in a row over the course of the weekend. Harry Potter, while a series
popular globally and among every age group is one especially prominent because of its rise to
fame and popularity during Millennials’ childhood.

The account is clearly not used in any way to promote deals, and when it was used in that way,
those tweets were almost always completely ignored. This indicates that the value of the handle
for many may be comedic relief. DiGiorno has significantly fewer tweets as well as followers
when compared to Arby’s, however, DiGiorno’s engagement dwarfs that of Arby’s.
Impressively, there were only 4 days in the entire month of June that DiGiorno did not tweet,
(Arby’s took off 9 days).

DiGiorno Brandwatch
During August 15-22, DiGiorno saw the following data on its twitter account:
Owner
Tweets
Owner
Replies
Audience
Retweets
Audience
@mentions
Owner
Impressions
Audience
Impressions
Net
Followers
51 35 1,409 626 2,032,838 540,590 25
Figure 10

50
This data brings interesting insights into the differences between the content analysis and
Brandwatch numbers. Despite a one-day dip in audience retweets, DiGiorno saw continued
growth in this area with each day rising from 37-347 within a six-day period. Conversely,
audience @mentions were also very stable during this time.

When surveying the most impactful tweets from the week, the findings are very much in-line
with the content analysis personality trait findings. The first, is a tweet directed at Hip-Hop artist
Nicki Minaj and plainly states, “does baby got pizza.” This is in line with DiGiorno’s tendency
to utilize current slang and vernacular, this tweet in particular also including a current celebrity
and referencing a popular music video the day it was released, demonstrating an extremely close
connection with popular culture. This tweet alone garnered over 400,000 impressions. The
second tweet (Figure 11) is equally aligned with DiGiorno’s Twitter personality including large
parts of the text being capitalized, current slang and vernacular as well as a reference to pop
culture. The tweet also features a list, which is a popular form of prose for current Internet
publications. The third tweet is entirely in caps and reads, “ITS FRIDAY YOU GUYS! MAY
YOUR WEEKEND BE FILLED WITH PIZZA AND GOOD TIMES AND MEMORIES AND
PIZZA ONE MORE TIME.” This tweet like the others contained the coded materials for all
caps, current slang and vernacular and general funniness as well as slight neuroticism.

51

Figure 11

As opposed to the Arby’s page, which had two of its three most impactful tweeters as established
organizations (Ad Age and The Onion), one of which was directly calling out the brand for
blatant attempts at targeting Millennials, DiGiorno’s page’s most impactful tweeters are
“Everyday” people including one user, @TheStateFarmGuy (not affiliated with the insurance
company) with over 25,000 followers tweeting directly at the brand. The top three topics for
DiGiorno include “delivery pizza” (226 mentions), “RAW” (115), and “ONE MORE TIME” and
“Liveyourdreams eat a pizza” both at (90). It is clear that even the trending topics with DiGiorno
are aligned with brand personality and reflect the common codes seen in this handle.

When surveying the data and beginning to compare, it becomes clear that although DiGiorno is a
much more erratic page compared to Arby’s it appears to be considered slightly more authentic
and significantly less corporate. From tweets, to top tweeters, to greatest topics on the brand,
these are all in sync with the personality that DiGiorno has chosen for itself. So far, we have
surveyed two brands, one a quick service restaurant, the other a prepared food item and have
discovered potential differing utilities for the brands’ twitter accounts to users. Next we will

52
explore another quick service restaurant, considered to be a behemoth in the fast-food social
media game.

Taco Bell- Overview

Taco Bell is a subsidiary company of world’s top fast-food conglomerate YUM Brands Inc. and
is the number one fast-food Mexican chain in the United States with over 5,600 locations
nationwide.
99
With revenue exceeding $11 billion annually Taco Bell dwarfs its top competitors
of Subway, Chipotle and Moe’s Southwest Grill whose annual revenue was less than $3.24
billion combined in the 2013 fiscal year.
100

Though Hoovers does not recognize McDonalds as a direct competitor, recently, Taco Bell has
undertaken numerous initiatives to directly compete with McDonalds, most recently with its
breakfast menu. Additional competitive moves have included the addition of a dollar menu. In
consumer terms, Taco Bell is not necessarily perceived to be low-quality, but is somewhat
infamous for unhealthy offerings and does not carry historical prestige as McDonalds does. Taco
Bell also suffered a scandal regarding the makeup of its meat product in 2011.

Twitter Stats:
Taco Bell- @Taco Bell Est. 2007
Tweets 35,500
Following 14
Followers 1.34 Million
Figure 12

53
Taco Bell- Content Analysis Results
The channel data for Taco Bell from June 1 – July 31 2014 can be seen in the figure below:
Tweets Retweets Favorites Avg. Retweet Avg. Favorite
67 231,959 245,566 3,462 3,665
Figure 13

While Taco Bell had among the lowest number of tweets of all brands surveyed, it by far
exceeded the other brands in engagement. With 3,462 average retweets and 3,665 average
favorites, Taco Bell is a superpower in the Twitter sphere. Though Taco Bell did see an
enormous amount of engagement, it was much less active than DiGiorno, signaling the sheer
impact of large follower numbers. It participated in events during this time, but it became clear
this handle was somewhat of an accessory to the brand rather than a major marketing tool.

Figure 14
18

6

12

13

1

13

15

12

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

Instances

Taco
Bell's
Personality

54
Taco Bell, the leader in followers and engagement took on a cool persona, much to be expected
from the most popular kid in school. The top personality trait was Mean/Edgy/Attitude/Blunt,
leaving the others more evenly scattered. This personality best describes the account as a whole,
especially coupled with Funny/Cleverness, Current slang/Vernacular and Direct Address. The
account carries with it an element of macho swagger, including many assertive one sentence
absolute statements. It could be best described as matter of fact, to the point and cool. Similar to
the Arby’s account, Taco Bell had a relatively high number of purely informational tweets
announcing new products or talking about deals for existing ones. It also sponsored events such
as VidCon, and tweeted frequently from the event. The content was also much more varied on
Taco Bell’s account. A higher number of videos and links from other social media accounts such
as Vine and Tumblr were present demonstrating a level of sophistication absent from the other
accounts, but also making it more corporate.

Similar to Arby’s it appeared that this account, while applicable to Millennials was also not
targeting them directly. Tweets often contained current slang and vernacular, but for the most
part were informational and intended to promote Taco Bell and the things in which the brand was
involved. For example, the account is filled with blunt tweets such as, “I could eat Taco Bell
25/8,” and “You are what you eat. So I am Taco Bell.” These tweets, though unique, are not
unique in their appeal to Millennials and could just as easily be targeting current teens or even an
older audience. However, one way in which Taco Bell may be successful with Millennials is in
its interactivity. For example, while promoting its breakfast menu, funny quips submitted to Taco
Bell’s handle that the brand found entertaining would be turned into Gifs. Tweeters used the
hashtag #ThatsLike and the intro “Getting a breakfast burrito from a burger place?...” with funny

55
completion phrases such as those seen in Figure 15 below. This type of content is the non-
traditional and authentic advertisement and engagement that Millennials seek in their brands.
The content in general also contained general humor, adding to the likelihood that the account is
intended to be as overarching as possible in its audience rather than distinctly targeted.

Figure 15

Taco Bell Brandwatch
During August 21-28 2014, Taco Bell saw the following data on its twitter account:
Owner
Tweets
Owner
Replies
Audience
Retweets
Audience
@mentions
Owner
Impressions
Audience
Impressions
Net
Followers
141 96 14,766 28,988 38,586,756 66,354,621 5,307
Figure 16
Data pulled from Brandwatch confirms that Taco Bell is by far the most active account of those
surveyed. Bringing in nearly 40 million owner and 67 million audience impressions in the period
of one week, it is clear that Taco Bell is reaching an enormous audience. The account is similar
numerically to the Arby’s account, both in number of tweets as well as engagement. This may be
explained by both entities being in the Quick Service Restaurant Category as opposed to
DiGiorno and Helper. Both audience mentions and audience impressions were somewhat stable

56
during this week, with mentions coming in much higher than retweets. This demonstrates high
levels of engagement among Taco Bell’s audience.

When surveying Taco Bell’s most impactful tweets for this week, the top three again align with
the attitudes of those coded in the content analysis. The first, “Are you taking me to Taco Bell or
nah?” encompasses the edgy attitude seen in many of the company’s tweets. It also includes the
direct address as well as current slang and vernacular with the “nah.” The second tweet, “I’m
Taco Bell hungry” again contains the straightforward and confident persona we’ve seen among
many of its tweets. Finally, “It’s always Taco Bell time” utilizes the same attitude. When
surveying these tweets, they are in no way as overtly funny as those of DiGiorno and seem to be
rather simple. All of them blunt statements regarding a love and need for Taco Bell. Remarkably,
these tweets garnered 7,674,640 impressions and 11,307 retweets combined.

Taco Bell’s most impactful tweeters also provide useful insights into the account and its
followers. The most impactful tweeter during this week was Tyler Oakley, a 25-year-old
YouTube celebrity, LGBT advocate for youth and two-time Teen Choice Award winner.
Oakley’s tweet, “There’s a pounding in my head and a @TacoBell wrapper in my bed” was seen
by nearly three million of Oakley’s followers and retweeted over three thousand times. The tweet
is also clearly in reference to a recent chart-topping song “Last Friday Night” by Kary Perry. The
next most impactful tweeter during this period is Nathan Kress, a 21-year-old actor famous for
his role in the Nickelodeon series iCarly, Kress also holds a Teen Choice Award nomination. His
tweet, “Welp… @TacoBell has a new dollar cravings menu. Any guesses where I’m getting in
my car to drive right now?” this was retweeted 537 times and viewed by nearly three million

57
people. The third most impactful tweeter was by the NFL on Fox, which was clearly the result of
a sponsorship between the two brands. Although the two most impactful tweeters cannot shed
light on major intentions of the brand, especially since this is based off one tweet and any tweet
from a celebrity with millions of followers is bound to receive high marks. What is worth noting;
however, is the ages of both these celebrities and their popularity among teens. Additionally, in
its coverage of the MTV VMA’s the popular teen group Fifth Harmony is mentioned numerous
times. This could further the suspicion that Taco Bell may be targeting the youngest of the
Millennials and even more into the following generation, the oldest of which are currently
teenagers. The top topics for Taco Bell were: Taco Bell, NathanKress, and Fifth Harmony again
shedding light on a potentially major trend among Taco Bell followers.

Despite the fact that Taco Bell does not appear to be targeting Millennials as obviously as
DiGiorno, if at all, it is clear the handle has a hip vibe and contains numerous elements that
would be appealing to a Millennial audience or likely even younger. While it contains more self-
promotion and advertising than other accounts, it is done so in a way considered acceptable by
Millennials and also offers a platform for them to be engaged and interacted with by the brand,
which also ranks high on a Millennials list for a brand on social media. The brand clearly uses its
Twitter handle as a way to stay relevant and engaged in particular events such as Vid Con and
the Video Music Awards while still offering promotional deals. The usage of a distinct
personality as well as the most direct involvement with events, all while still utilizing promotion
brands Taco Bell as a distinctly corporate account, but one in which has a specific agenda and
personality in mind which it uses in a targeted way.

58
Helper- Overview

Hamburger Helper is a boxed food product created by General Mills in 1971 to combat rising
meat prices.
101
Hamburger Helper typically consists of pasta or a starch and prepared seasonings
and sauces to be combined with a protein. Though the brand is traditionally known as
Hamburger Helper, in 2013 it underwent a branding shift to simply be called “Helper.” This
signified an attempt to target Millennials, more specifically Millennial men.
102
The removal of
“Hamburger” was intended to emphasize the fact that the brand produces other protein paired
varieties including Tuna Helper, Chicken Helper and Homestyle Helper, particularly because
chicken was becoming a much more popular choice. Helper also hosts a mascot, a four-fingered
happy glove named Lefty, which is the point-of-view of the Twitter handle for the brand.
103

Targeting Millennial men was a swift departure from the original goals of the company, which
more typically sought after working mothers who needed a quick fix for family dinner. These
changes were all in response to a 14% drop in sales from 2012-2013 while competitor Velveeta
Cheesy Skillet’s sales rose.
104
Shortly following the brand’s name change and target audience
shift DigiDay commended Helper for its acknowledgment that young Millennial men were
increasingly not on Facebook, and in great part preferred Twitter. DigiDay describes the handle
as having a “playful millennial tone and (occasionally painful) cheeky hip-hop vernacular.”
105

The periodical commends Helper especially for its extensive market research as well as
monitoring of online conversations and “cultural happenings” for the brand to chime in on, but
only where it makes sense.
106

59
Twitter Stats:
Helper- @Helper - Est. 2012
Tweets 8,085
Following 3,300
Followers 19,500
Figure 17

Helper- Content Analysis Results
The channel data for Helper from June 1 – July 31 2014 can be seen in the figure below:
Tweets Retweets Favorites Avg. Retweet Avg. Favorite
65 2,140 2,087 33 32
Figure 18

While Helper’s Twitter account was lowest in tweet numbers, retweets and favorites, it
nonetheless demonstrates a successful attempt at building the account from the ground up. The
average retweet and favorite numbers were roughly 33 and 32 per tweet respectively, not far
from its closest competitor, Arby’s. In June and July combined Helper had 21 tweet-less days,
which can help explain the low overall numbers.

60

Figure 19

Helper’s main personality traits can be seen clearly in Figure 19, with Slang/Vernacular and
Funny/Clever clearly dominating. The account is told from a first person perspective like many
of the others surveyed, however, this account is clearly narrated from the perspective of “Lefty”
himself, the company mascot. This was seen at times in DiGiorno, with the narrator presumably
being a pizza, but this was not nearly as consistently and overtly undertaken as it is in the Helper
account. The account often makes jokes about being a hand, and ties it into content in clever
ways. For example, during the world cup Helper tweeted, “Soccer is a sport created specifically
by people who hate hands, so how am I supposed to feel about it?” or “Any coaches looking to
draft a team player with excellent hand skills?”

Similar to what was described in the DigiDay article, it seems clear that Helper is targeting
Millennial men, an interesting trend considering the other surveyed prepared food category also
8

9

11

29

17

4

35

0

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Instances

Helper's
Personality

61
appeared to lean toward that segment specifically. One way in which Helper does this is through
the often hip-hop style vernacular the account employs. It is relatively frequent that the account
will tweet lyrics to a popular hip-hop or Top 40 song with the lyrics altered to be specific to
Helper. For example, references to Usher’s “Let Me Love You” with lyrics being, “So let me
FEEED YOUUU and I will feed you, until you learnnnnn to feed yoursellllllf!” The next is a
reference to The Notorious B.I.G.’s song, “Going back to Cali” with the tweet reading, “Going
Going. Back Back. to Cleveland, Cleveland.” This tweet was simultaneously commenting on the
current event of NBA player LeBron James’ decision to return to the Cleveland Cavaliers in July
2014. These references to pop-culture and in this case to currents sports landscapes highlights an
account targeting Millennial men both interested in sports as well as pop culture.

Another way the account clearly targets Millennial men is in its references to dating and women
as well as references to the struggle of cooking and having roommates. One tweet prompts to
cook a woman dinner to win her heart while the very next commends roommates who make
dinner for everyone calling them, “the real MVPs.” In this way, the account assumes the position
of a helpful and comedic friend for the everyday Millennial, taking it beyond just an easy made
and often ridiculed as unhealthy meal into a person who shares struggles, joys and humor with
the consumer.

62
Helper Brandwatch
During August 21-28, Helper saw the following data on its twitter account:
Owner
Tweets
Owner
Replies
Audience
Retweets
Audience
@mentions
Owner
Impressions
Audience
Impressions
Net
Followers
59 52 3,767 2,075 1,921,025 1,383,836 588
Figure 20

Helper’s Brandwatch data looks similar to that of DiGiorno’s, but with slightly higher numbers
of audience retweets, impressions as well as net followers. For this week in particular, replies to
audience members represented a very high portion of Helper’s activity at 88%. Other brands
during their surveyed time consistently had about 68% of their tweets as replies and the rest,
their own content. Looking at the week closely, it does not have the consistency that other
handles have seen. There is an enormous spike in activity starting on Monday, which drops
drastically by Wednesday, the account flatlines Thursday-Sunday and begins to show the same
trend the following Thursday. However, with nearly 4,000 retweets and just over 2,000
@mentions, Helper still saw healthy activity despite absences during this given week.

Helper’s most impactful tweets from this week include one in reference to a young rapper, Yung
Lean in the tweet, “Call me Yung Lean Ground Beef,” this is consistent with Helpers numerous
Hip Hop references and had just over 2,000 retweets. The next two were in conversation with
Twitter account Based Je$u$. According to Urban Dictionary Based Jesus is “A certain
individual who usually posts funny, humorous jokes on the website World Star Hip Hop’s
comment section,
107
the Twitter handle has 153,000 followers. The name is also similar to Hip
Hop artist Lil’ B who also goes by Based God. The tweets in those conversations garnered 320

63
retweets total. These influencers are tied directly to Helper’s brand personality and tweets with
their solid connection to Hip Hop. Based Je$u$ was also the accounts most impactful tweeter of
the week accounting for the top five most impactful audience tweets. The top three topics for the
week were “Call me Yung Lean Ground Beef” “PRAYINGFORHEAD” (Based Je$u$) and
“Beef.”

It is clear that Helpers’ personality is present in both the content analysis and Brandwatch data
for the brand. Helper has taken the opportunity to rebrand itself and honed in on its key audience
of Millennial men, which explains and solidifies its chosen brand personality and tweet subject
matter.
Conclusion
Twitter Brand Personality

When surveying the data all together, definite trends begin to surface. For example, it is clear
that each brand has found its own niche among the personality traits surveyed. Arby’s has chosen
to utilize cleverness and hashtags alongside information to brand its Twitter account, DiGiorno
has also chosen this route but on an enormously larger scale and with a tone of impulsive
neuroticism rather than the more tame humor Arby’s exercises. Taco Bell has chosen attitude
and cleverness to exemplify its personality while Helper has elected for slang and vernacular
coupled with funniness. Though there are commonalities as many brands have chosen general
cleverness or utilization of hashtags, which are somewhat conventional at the core of their usage,
the way in which the brands have gone about branding this personality is distinct. This is what
allows the various brands to all exercise humor, but in a unique way.

64
The fact that each of the brands surveyed exercised each of these traits, but in varying degrees,
with varying intensity, demonstrates their likeness to human personality. Some are more
assertive than others, some more informational, more erratic, more down to earth. It is these
minute human characteristics that when surveyed through a microscope become clear to an
observer and confirm that these accounts are indeed embodying human personality traits and
communicating them to their audience via the channel. Surveying the accounts holistically, it is
clear that Helper and DiGiorno contain more niche quirkiness, perhaps not acceptable or possible
for the larger more corporate brands who may have less creative freedom since they are entire
restaurant chains rather than one product brand.

Figure 21

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

All
Codes

Arbys

DiGiorno

Taco
Bell

Helper

65

Figure 22

The data then can be taken one step further when looking at the accounts through the lenses of
the personality characteristics surveyed earlier in this paper. When looking at the accounts
holistically using BrandZ’s personality archetype model, the accounts surveyed fall into the
following categories:

Brand Primary Archetype Secondary Archetype
Arby’s Friend Joker
DiGiorno Joker Rebel
Taco Bell King Rebel
Helper Friend Joker
Figure 23
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

All
Codes,
sans
DiGiorno

Arbys

Taco
Bell

Helper

66
Utilizing the Big Five Brand Personality Traits, the brands would fall into categories in this
schema as follows:
Brand Primary Personality
Arby’s Extraversion
DiGiorno Extraversion (Neuroticism)
Taco Bell Extraversion
Helper Extraversion
Figure 24

The assignment of these established personality traits to corporate Twitter handles connects the
theoretical to the practical in a profound way. It becomes clear that after studying both the
content of the Twitter handles as well as the different ways in which psychologists have
determined brand personality exists, that brands are most certainly exercising this phenomena in
the operation of their Twitter accounts. What takes this beyond novelty is the pointed way in
which these companies have chosen personalities, keeping in mind their desired consumer and
the elements of that consumer’s personality they wish to channel through the platform. The fact
that nearly every account encompasses Joker or Friend with hints of Rebel and King, and that all
accounts display the personality trait of Extraversion signifies that there is a trend in the
approach companies are taking in crafting the tone of their Twitter accounts as well as
similarities in their desired target audience. Each of these accounts to some greater or lesser
degree are targeting Millennials yet utilizing different tactics to do so; So although they differ in
execution, the same personality traits are being clearly conveyed.

67
Moving Forward

While none of these conclusions are absolute or generalizable and remain subjective to a large
extent, they shed light on the potential impact of utilizing brand personality, especially when
targeting a Millennial population.

While the vast number of Millennials make it impossible to say that every member of the
generation contains the same characteristics, there are few data points that can’t be argued with.
Millennials’ ethnic diversity has potentially made them one of the most open-minded generations
in U.S. history and a rigorous economy has shifted their trust from large institutions to small
friend groups and family. Additionally, their technological prowess as elevated their expectancy
for information and for everything around them to adapt accordingly. Alongside this, Millennials
have found technology as a playground for self-expression and also a breeding ground for their
connection to the world around them as well as to their closest connections. This blend of macro
and micro utilization of technology has posed an imperative for institutions to strike a balance,
with the knowledge that trust must be earned by Millennials and that authenticity and value are
true priorities.

Alongside this survey of Millennials, this paper sought to understand the importance of brand
personality not only in building brand loyalty, but also in understanding the symbolic power of
brands in a consumer marketplace. Research showed that consumers are not simply purchasing
products to fulfill utilitarian needs, but spiritual and psychological needs as well. Understanding
how much more powerful a brand is able to make itself by engaging in brand personality sheds
light on the brand equity potential in this endeavor.

68
When looking at all parts of these concepts, a holistic and powerful image begins to form.
Beginning with the general environment of the emergence of social networks at the beginning of
the 21
st
Century concurrently taking place with an enormous Millennial demographic becoming
inseparable from this technology as it surfaced. This, coupled with their craving for interpersonal
and authentic interaction creates the ideal climate for brands to utilize personality on these
mediums to reach a highly discerning audience.

This is not to say that brand personality is more important when targeting Millennials than other
generations or that this is an imperative in marketing practice. It is meant, however, to illuminate
that when done properly brand personality on social channels can be extremely effective in
reaching Millennials because of characteristics unique to this generation. Millennials see
themselves as savvy and confident, so by virtue of the utilities of brand selection and the self
concept, they want that to be reflected in the brands they select to consume. It is not surprising
that the traits seen in the selected brands aired on the light-hearted and funny side of since they
are brands that one would purchase somewhat flippantly and there is enormous competition in
this saturated market, making distinguishing points from brand to brand crucial to stand out from
the competition. It would be interesting in future research to see brand personality measured in
more serious fields such as airliners, insurance companies or banks, and which characteristics
and archetypes are employed on these social media accounts and how that is leveraged to bring
the company success via this medium. It would also be interesting to study how companies
determine these chosen personality characteristics and if they are carefully selected by a brand
team or instead emulated by a single person. This brings into question how sustainable a brand
personality is over time when it is constantly expected to perform, especially when humor is the

69
primary objective. Humor is often all in execution and it would be illuminating to probe how
organizations maintain these personalities’ consistency and how that is passed down from team
to team or how it evolves over time.

Direct measurement is also limited in calculating return on investment or concrete profit based
on social media endeavors, especially when surveying a page’s personality apart from more
straightforward tweet counts and campaigns. A major takeaway; however, from the brand
personality research is the importance of how a brand is perceived and consumed by a person
and how these slight interactions on social media build a picture in a consumers head for a brand
as well as an attitude of what that brand represents to them and their peers. While modern
software attempts to measure these things in terms of sentiment and impressions, these methods
are still evolving and somewhat inaccurate, unable to detect slight tones as well as cultural
artifacts that are only truly understood by the human psyche.

The important takeaway from this realization is two-fold. First there must be the understanding
that brand personality is highly impactful in the long-term over the short. Second, at its very core
a social media brand personality strategy must be founded in the qualitative and visceral, with a
tight connection to the current landscape of the world and also the way in which that is
interpreted by a core audience based on empirical and quantitative data on that audience. This
creates an imperative for the strategy to stay true to the consumer base as it reacts to all other
forces in an environment.

70
Branding professionals and marketers alike must be strategic in how the medium is used,
keeping in mind the audience trying to be reached and understanding this audience is constantly
in flux and multi-faceted. Brands have repeatedly found themselves in trouble, and even called
out by other brands for attempting a one-size-fits-all approach to marketing to Millennials.
Cherry picking comprehensive reports like Pew’s for ideal facts on Millennials can lead to
omitting interconnected information and eliminating any chance for a comprehensive picture of
an audience. For example, awareness of the enormous segment of Latino Millennials and
attempting to reach them using blatant hyper targeting marketing tactics, while effectively
checking the ethnic diversity box, in turn highlights a major oversight of Millennials as The
Authenticity Police, causing any efforts to backfire completely. The purpose of this lesson is that
when engaging in brand message alongside brand personality, this must not be a quick shot at a
trendy audience, but a thoroughly investigated endeavor, taking into consideration the
complexity of personality in general as well as the complexity of a population of nearly 80
million people.

Moving forward and using this holistic knowledge, the brand can then best distinguish what
information is the most valuable, and what voice makes the most sense not only for the side
imparting it, but for the side receiving it. This blend of speaker, listener and message are (though
they seem simple) absolutely integral in communicating brand personality and building this
personality to be consistent over time.

While this paper has no bulleted steps to crafting the perfect brand personality, it has illuminated
that creating such a list would be either entirely impossible or inaccurate. The most important

71
understanding is the holistic audience, the phenomena of personality itself and its impact on a
consumer, and how those come together based on the channel, product, and current environment.
Brand personality is a driving force in marketing today and given the landscape and the buying
power of Millennials surfacing in the next few decades, the combination of the two creates a
marketing force to be reckoned with.

72
Appendix

Boomer Characteristics Gen X Characteristics Millennial Characteristics
Work Ethic (17%) Technology Use (12%) Technology Use (24%)
Respectful (14%) Work Ethic (11%) Music/Pop Culture (11%)
Values/Morals (8%) Conservative/Traditional
(7%)
Liberal/Tolerant (7%)
“Baby Boomers” (6%) Smarter (6%) Smarter (6%)
Smarter (5%) Respectful (5%) Clothes (5%)
Figure 1

Arby’s- @Arbys Est. 2010
Tweets 24,200
Following 95,300
Followers 271,600
Figure 2

Tweets Retweets Favorites Avg. Retweet Avg. Favorite
79 3548 5009 45 63
Figure 3

73

Figure 4

Owner
Tweets
Owner
Replies
Audience
Retweets
Audience
@mentions
Owner
Impressions
Audience
Impressions
Net
Followers
183 123 2,329 4,311 17,754,605 19,284,701 5,356
Figure 5

Figure 6
6

15

42

10

6

16

32

23

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Instances

Arby's
Personality

74

DiGiornoPizza- @DiGiornoPizza
Est. 2009
Tweets 9,464
Following 854
Followers 80,500
Figure 7

Tweets Retweets Favorites Avg. Retweet Avg. Favorite
264 42,742 44,893 162 170
Figure 8

Figure 9

4

44

255

105

153

28

70

1

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Instances

DiGiorno's
Personality

75
Owner
Tweets
Owner
Replies
Audience
Retweets
Audience
@mentions
Owner
Impressions
Audience
Impressions
Net
Followers
51 35 1,409 626 2,032,838 540,590 25
Figure 10

Figure 11

Taco Bell- @Taco Bell Est. 2007
Tweets 35,500
Following 14
Followers 1.34 Million
Figure 12

Tweets Retweets Favorites Avg. Retweet Avg. Favorite
67 231,959 245,566 3,462 3,665
Figure 13

76

Figure 14

Figure 15

Owner
Tweets
Owner
Replies
Audience
Retweets
Audience
@mentions
Owner
Impressions
Audience
Impressions
Net
Followers
141 96 14,766 28,988 38,586,756 66,354,621 5,307
Figure 16

18

6

12

13

1

13

15

12

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

Instances

Taco
Bell's
Personality

77
Helper- @Helper - Est. 2012
Tweets 8,085
Following 3,300
Followers 19,500
Figure 17

Tweets Retweets Favorites Avg. Retweet Avg. Favorite
65 2,140 2,087 33 32
Figure 18

Figure 19

8

9

11

29

17

4

35

0

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Instances

Helper's
Personality

78

Owner
Tweets
Owner
Replies
Audience
Retweets
Audience
@mentions
Owner
Impressions
Audience
Impressions
Net
Followers
59 52 3,767 2,075 1,921,025 1,383,836 588
Figure 20

Figure 21

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

All
Codes

Arbys

DiGiorno

Taco
Bell

Helper

79

Figure 22

Brand Primary Archetype Secondary Archetype
Arby’s Friend Joker
DiGiorno Joker Rebel
Taco Bell King Rebel
Helper Friend Joker
Figure 23

Brand Primary Personality
Arby’s Extraversion
DiGiorno Extraversion (Neuroticism)
Taco Bell Extraversion
Helper Extraversion
Figure 24
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

All
Codes,
sans
DiGiorno

Arbys

Taco
Bell

Helper

80
References

Aaker, David. "Measuring Brand Equity Across Products and Markets." California Management
Review, 1996: 102-120.

Aaker, Jennifer. "Dimensions of Brand Personality." American Marketing Association, August
1997: 347-356.

Belk, Russell. "Possessions and the Extended Self." Journal of Consumer Research, 1988: 139-
168.

Bilton, Ricardo. "The Onion's NewFronts pitch: 'We're funny and millennials like us'." DigiDay,
April 30, 2014.

Britt, Stuart Henderson. Consumer Behavior and the Behavioral Sciences: Theories and
Applications. New York: John Wiley & Son, Inc. , 1966.

Business Dictionary. Business Dictionary.com . January 1, 2014.
http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/brand-personality.html (accessed August 9, 2014).

Carstens, Deborah, and Samuel Doss. "Big Five Personality Traits and Brand Evangelism."
International Journal of Marketing Studies (Canadian Center of Science and Education), May
2014: 13-22.

Center for Disease Control. Births: Final Data for 2012. National Vital Statisticcs, United States
Dept. of Health and Human Services, 2013.

Costa, Paul T., McCrae, Robert. "Discriminant Validity of NEO-PIR Facet Scales." Educational
and Psychological Measurement , March 1992: 229-237.

De Wulf, Kristof, Maggie Geuens, and Bert Weijters. "A New Measure of Brand Personality."
International Journal of Research in Marketing , 2009: 97-107.

Doss, Samuel. ""Spreading the Good Word": toward an understanding of brand evangelism ."
Journal of Management and Marketing Research, 2013: 1-17.

Eubanks, Steve. "Millennials Go To College Executive Summary." In Millennials Go To
College, by Neil Howe and William Strauss. American Association of Collegiate Registrars and
Admissions Offices, 2003.

Fromm, Jeff, Celeste Lindell, and Lainie Decker. American Millennials: Deciphering the
Enigma Generation. Generational Study, Barkley, Service Management Group, The Boston
Consulting Group, Barkley, 2011.

81
General Mills. Helper. 2014.
http://www.generalmills.com/Brands/Meals/Hamburger_Helper.aspx (accessed August 22,
2014).

Goldsmith, Elizabeth, and Ronald Goldsmith. "Brand Personality and Brand Engagement ."
American Journal of Management, 2012: 11-20.

Grossman, Samantha. "The 13 Sassiest Brands on Twitter." Time Magazine, Feb. 7, 2014.

Grubb, Edward, and Gregg Hupp. "Perception of Self, Generalized Stereotypes and Brand
Selection." American Marketing Association, 1968: 58-63.

Hoffman, Melissa. Here Is Everything You Need to Know About the Millennial Consumer.
August 13, 2014. http://www.adweek.com/news/technology/here-everything-you-need-know-
about-millennial-consumer-159139 (accessed August 21, 2014).

Huang, Hazel, Vincent-Wayne Mitchell, and Richard Rosenaum-Elliott. "Are Consumer and
Brand Personalities the Same?" Psychology and Marketing , May 2012: 334-349.

Joy, Annamma, and John Sherry. "Speaking of Art as Embodied Imagination: A Multisensory
Approach to Understanding Aesthetic Experience." Journal of Consumer Research , 2003: 259-
282.

Keng, Ching-Jui, Tuyet Mai Le Thi, and Van-Dat Tran. "Relationships Among Brand
Experience, Brand Personality, and Customer Experiential Value." Contemporary Management
Research, September 2013: 247-262.

Levy, Sidney. "Symbols for Sale." Harvard Business Review, 1959: 117-124.

Lin, Long-Yi. "The Relationship of Consumer Personality Trait, Brand Personality and Brand
Loyalty: An Empirical Study of Toys and Video Games Buyers." Journal of Product and Brand
Management, 2010: 4-17.

Lyons, Sean, Eddy Ng, and Linda Schweitzer. "New Generation, Great Expectations: A Field
Study of the Millennial Generation." Journal of Business and Psychology, 2010: 281-292.

McLellan, Michael. Arbys Restaurant Group Inc. . 2014.
http://subscriber.hoovers.com.libproxy.usc.edu/H/company360/overview.html?companyId=1508
08000000000&newsCompanyDuns=797315298 (accessed August 21, 2014).

—. Taco Bell Corp. . 2014.
http://subscriber.hoovers.com.libproxy.usc.edu/H/company360/overview.html?companyId=8952
3000000000 (accessed August 22, 2014).

Millward Brown. BrandZ Top 100 Most Valuable Global Brands . Annual Study, Millward
Brown, 2012.

82
Millward Brown. BrandZ Top 100 Most Valuable Global Brands. Annual Study, Millward
Brown, 2014.

Moore, Marguerite. "Interactive Media Usage Among Millennial Consumers." Journal of
Consumer Marketing, 2012: 436-444.

Pew Research Center. Millennials A Portrait of Generation Next Confident. Connected. Open to
Change. Generational Study, Pew Research Center, 2010.

Pew Research Center. Millennials in Adulthood. Generational Study, Pew Research Center,
2014.

—. The Millennial Count. March 22, 2010. http://www.pewresearch.org/daily-number/the-
millennial-count/ (accessed August 8, 2014).

Taylor, Paul, interview by Judy Woodruff. How the Values, Uphill Optimism of the Millennials
Compare to Older Generations (March 19, 2014).

United States Census Bureau. Women's History Month, Facts for Features. Census Data, US
Census Bureau, 2012.

Urban Dictionary. Based Jesus. February 3, 2014.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Based%20Jesus (accessed August 29, 2014).

Wabl, Matthias. "Nestle Buys Kraft Pizza Unit for $3.7 Billion, Spurns Cadbury." Bloomberg,
January 5, 2010.

Weissman, Saya. "Hamburger Helper is Awesome at Twitter. Really ." DigiDay, November 23,
2013.

Wenner, Kathryn. "Peeling the Onion." American Journalism Review, 2002.

Wong, Vanessa. "In Redesign, Hamburger Helper Drops the Hamburger ." Bloomberg
Businessweek, July 9, 2013.

83
ENDNOTES

1

Pew Research Center, “Millennials A Portrait of Generation Next,” Feb. 2010. Pg. 11.
2
Pew Research Center, “The Millennial Count,” March 2010.
3
Barkley, “American Millennials” 2011. Pg. 8.
4
Paul Taylor Interview, “The Next America” 2014.
5
Eubanks “Millennials Go to College” Exec Summary. 2006. Pg.1
6
Eubanks, “Millennials Go to College” Pg. 1.
7
Eubanks, “Millennials Go to College” Pg. 2.
8
Eubanks, “Millennials Go to College” Pg. 2.
9
Eubanks, “Millennials Go to College” Pg. 3.
10
Pew, “Generation Next” Pg. 4.
11
Pew, “Generation Next” Pg. 4.
12
Pew, “Generation Next” Pg. 4.
13
Pew, “Generation Next” Pg. 4.
14
Pew “Generation Next” Pg. 16.
15
Pew “Generation Next” Pg. 16.
16
Pew “Generation Next” Pg. 16.
17
Center for Disease Control “Births: Final Data for 2012” 2013.
18
Pew “Millennials in Adulthood” 2014 Pg. 6.
19
Pew “Generation Next” Pg. 17.
20
United States Census Bureau, “Women’s History Month” 2012. NPN.
21
Pew “Millennials in Adulthood” Pg. 9.
22
Pew “Millennials in Adulthood” 2014 Pg 9
23
Pew “Millennials in Adulthood” 2014 Pg 9.
24
Pew “Generation Next” Pg. 18.
25
Pew “Generation Next” Pg. 18.
26
Pew “Generation Next”Pg. 25.
27
Pew, “Millennials in Adulthood” 2014. Pg. 5.
28
Pew “Generation Next” Pg. 20.
29
Pew “Generation Next” Pg. 27.
30
Pew “Generation Next” Pg. 29.
31
Pew “Generation Next” Pg. 30.
32
Pew “Generation Next” Pg. 30-31.
33
Pew “Millennials in Adulthood” 2014. Pg 7.
34
Pew “Millennials in Adulthood” 2014 Pg 7.
35
Pew Research Center, “Millennials in Adulthood” 2014. Pg. 4.
36
Pew “Generation Next” Pg. 8.
37
Pew “Generation Next” Pg. 33.
38
Pew, “Millennials in Adulthood” 2014. Pg 6.
39
Barkley “American Millennial” 2011, Pg. 11.
40
Barkley “American Millennial” Pg. 16.
41
Barkley “American Millennial” Pg. 20.
42
Barkley “American Millennial” Pg.21.
43
Ad Week, “Everything You Need to Know About the Millennial Consumer,” 2014.
44
Barkley “American Millennial” Pg. 24.

84

45
Barkley “American Millennial” Pg. 32.
46
Barkley “American Millennial” Pg. 32.
47
Barkley “American Millennial” Pg. 59.
48
Barkley “American Millennial” Pg. 59.
49
Barkley “American Millennial” Pg. 62.
50
Lyons, “New Generation, Great Expectations, 2010. Pg. 9.
51
Lyons, Pg. 10.
52
Lyons. Pg. 10.
53
Moore, Pg. 2.
54
Moore Pg. 2.
55
Moore, Pg. 9.
56
Moore, Pg. 9.
57
Moore Pg. 9.
58
Business Dictionary, 2014.
59
Levy, “Symbols for Sale” 1959, Pg. 117.
60
Britt, 1968, p.186.
61
Grubb & Hupp, “Perceptions of Self, Generalized Stereotypes, and Brand Selection” 1968, Pg.
59.
62
Grubb, 1968, Pg. 59.
63
Grubb, Pg. 62.
64
Joy and Sherry, “Multisensory Approach” 2003. Pg. 259.
65
Keng, 2013, 248.
66
Aaker, 1996 Pg. 112.
67
Aaker, J 1997, Pg. 352.
68
Keng, 2013, Pg. 255.
69
Keng, 2013. Pg. 251.
70
Costa and McCrae, “Personality Inventory” 1992, Pg 234.
71
Carstens & Doss, “Big Five Personality Traits” 2014. Pg. 15.
72
Doss, “Spreading the Good Word” 2014.
73
Carstens, 2014. Pg. 19.
74
Carstens 2014 Pg. 19.
75
Lin, 2010, pg. 16.
76
Huang, Mitchell, Rosenaum-Elliott “ Are Consumer and Brand Personality The Same?” 2012,
Pg. 337.
77
Huang, 2012, Pg. 337.
78
Belk, “Possessions and Extended Self” 1988.
79
Huang, 2012, Pg. 345.
80
Huang, 2012, Pg. 346.
81
Huang, 2012.
82
Brand Z Report, 2012.
83
Brand Z Report, 2014, Pg. 65.
84
BrandZ Report,2012, Pg 45.
85
BrandZ 2012, Pg 45.
86
BrandZ 2012 Pg. 46.
87
BrandZ 2012 Pg. 47.

85

88
Geuens, “A New Measure of Brand Personality” 2009, Pg. 103.
89
Geuens, 2009, Pg. 97.
90
Goldsmith, 2012, Pg. 18.
91
Goldsmith, 2012, Pg. 18.
92
Goldsmith, 2012, Pg. 18.
93
Grossman, “13 Sassiest Brands on Twitter,” Time Magazine, 2014. NPN.
94
Hoovers.com, Arbys Group Inc., 2014.
95
DigiDay, “The Onion’s New Fronts pitch: “We’re funny and millennials like us’” 2014.
96
American Journalism Review, “Peeling the Onion,” 2002.
97
Bloomberg, “Nestle Buys Kraft Pizza Unit for 3.7 Billion, Spurns Cadbury,” 2010.
98
Bloomberg, 2010.
99
Hoovers, Taco Bell, 2014.
100
Hoovers, Taco Bell, 2014.
101
General Mills, 2014.
102
Bloomberg, “In Redesign, Hamburger Helper Drops the Hamburger,” 2013.
103
Bloomberg, “Helper,” 2013.
104
Bloomberg, “Helper,” 2013.
105
DigiDay, “Hamburger Helper is Awesome at Twitter, Really,” 2013.
106
DigiDay, 2013.
107
Urban Dictionary, “Based Jesus,” 2014.

Abstract (if available)

Abstract Often referred to as the ""Echo Boomers"" or ""Gen Y,"" Millennials are the enormous generation shaping the consumer marketplace and companies are trying desperately to reach them. This paper explores the Millennial generation alongside brand personality theory to determine how brand personality may be utilized to successfully target Millennials on social media, namely Twitter.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

A study of the cultural environment of social media

PDF

Pictures on microblogs: Twitter vs. Weibo

PDF

Digital impact: the impact of mobile digital technology on live music events and its influence on marketing, branding and public relations professionals

PDF

Generating valuable content for a destination in order to reach a new generation of travelers

PDF

Luring lovers: how brands make consumers fall head over heels

PDF

Analyzing the decline of symphonic music in the United States: public relations strategies to attract Millennials

PDF

A critical assessment of the uses and effectiveness of social media in investor communications

PDF

Collegiate athletics in crisis: a new practical model for crisis communication/management

PDF

Creating brand evangelists in the 21st century: using brand engagement through social media to develop brand loyalty in teens

PDF

Principles of transmedia branding

PDF

The impact of social media on the diabetes industry

PDF

Marketing to Millennials and Gen Z: a strategy presented for a startup creative agency

PDF

Corporate reputation crisis in the digital age: a comparative study on Abercrombie & Fitch’s reputation crisis in the U.S., China and Taiwan

PDF

The share factor: implications of global digital strategy for public relations

PDF

Conglomerate branding within the luxury goods sector

PDF

Musicians utilizing social media to increase brand awareness, further promote their brand and establish brand equity

PDF

Crisis communication & natural disasters: communication plan for Rome, Italy in the case of an earthquake

PDF

Personal branding and lifestyle bloggers: can blogs become brands?

PDF

The visual literacy explosion: a brief history, relevant cases and commonly accepted practices

PDF

Creating a moment of time: Earth Hour, transnational grassroots movement and hybrid organization

Asset Metadata

Creator Savastano, Emily M. (author)

Core Title Utilizing brand personality while engaging Millennials on Twitter

School Annenberg School for Communication

Degree Master of Arts

Degree Program Strategic Public Relations

Publication Date 11/12/2014

Defense Date 11/11/2014

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag brand personality,Millennials,OAI-PMH Harvest,Twitter

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Tenderich, Burghardt (committee chair), Brabham, Daren C. (committee member), LeVeque, Matthew (committee member)

Creator Email emsavastano@gmail.com,esavasta@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c3-516693

Unique identifier UC11297638

Identifier etd-SavastanoE-3082.pdf (filename),usctheses-c3-516693 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-SavastanoE-3082.pdf

Dmrecord 516693

Document Type Thesis

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Savastano, Emily M.

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA