Why Iconic Brands Struggle With Innovation
When a company markets its product’s long, iconic heritage, consumers are reluctant to buy a new variation
2 min
Emphasising a product’s heritage can be a powerful marketing tool. Think of brands like Coca-Cola or Converse’s Chuck Taylor All Star sneakers.
But the strategy could have a big drawback, according to research . When a brand emphasises its past, customers are less likely to buy its updates and innovations. A food company that heavily promotes its classic recipe, for instance, could have a tough time getting customers to buy a new variation on the product. The reluctance is particularly strong if people think the brand has stood the test of time and is authentic the way it is.
When you change an original product, it challenges why many people like the product in the first place, says Rosanna Smith, an associate professor at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign and one of the paper’s co-authors.
“We call it the curse of the original, and the question is how to update a product that is considered an icon without enraging your customers,” says Smith.
The shock of the new
In one part of the study, 418 participants read about a fictional hand-cream company and its top lotion. Participants were either told the company was established in 1917 with “deep roots in the old world French apothecary” or that it was established in 2017. Then the participants were either told the hand lotion was developed when the company was founded or was a new and improved version of the original.
All participants tried the same lotion and rated it on a nine-point scale, with nine being most favourable. When it came to the 1917 company, people rated the classic formula much higher than the new one: The original got a 6.68, while the new one averaged only 6.09. In other words, people didn’t like a venerable brand that tried to innovate as much as a brand that stuck to its roots.
Meanwhile, participants who were told the company started in 2017 rated the original and improved hand creams similarly.
“One big limitation of heritage branding is that it makes it harder to innovate,” says Smith. “But there are ways to lessen the effect.”
Back to basics
For instance, in another experiment, 602 participants read about Fratellino, a fictional Italian-food brand launched in 1911 when founder Martina Fratellino began selling tomato sauce from her front porch. The participants were told the brand would be improving its original tomato-sauce recipe.
The people were then divided into three groups. The control group was told the company was proud to introduce the new formula. The second group was told the new sauce was a bold departure from the original recipe, while the third was told the change was inspired by traditional techniques Martina used to create her tomato sauce in 1911 and that the change was a return to the company’s beginnings.
The authors found that participants in the control group rated the new tomato sauce less favourably than the original, giving it a score of 6.0, compared with 7.2 for the original. Simply doing something novel hurt the tradition-heavy company. The new product did even worse among people who heard that it was a bold departure: The new item got a 5.57, compared with 7.19 for the original.
But in the third group, where the change was framed as grounded in the product’s origins, the scores for the original and new tomato sauces didn’t significantly differ.
“Stressing the connection to the brand’s origins may have made the update seem more authentic,” says Smith.
Copyright 2020, Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved Worldwide. LEARN MORE
A long-standing cultural cruise and a new expedition-style offering will soon operate side by side in French Polynesia.
The pandemic-fuelled love affair with casual footwear is fading, with Bank of America warning the downturn shows no sign of easing.
The pandemic-fuelled love affair with casual footwear is fading, with Bank of America warning the downturn shows no sign of easing.
2 minThe boom in casual footware ushered in by the pandemic has ended, a potential problem for companies such as Adidas that benefited from the shift to less formal clothing, Bank of America says.
The casual footwear business has been on the ropes since mid-2023 as people began returning to office.
Analyst Thierry Cota wrote that while most downcycles have lasted one to two years over the past two decades or so, the current one is different.
It “shows no sign of abating” and there is “no turning point in sight,” he said.
Adidas and Nike alone account for almost 60% of revenue in the casual footwear industry, Cota estimated, so the sector’s slower growth could be especially painful for them as opposed to brands that have a stronger performance-shoe segment. Adidas may just have it worse than Nike.
Cota downgraded Adidas stock to Underperform from Buy on Tuesday and slashed his target for the stock price to €160 (about $187) from €213. He doesn’t have a rating for Nike stock.
Shares of Adidas listed on the German stock exchange fell 4.5% Tuesday to €162.25. Nike stock was down 1.2%.
Adidas didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.
Cota sees trouble for Adidas both in the short and long term.
Adidas’ lifestyle segment, which includes the Gazelles and Sambas brands, has been one of the company’s fastest-growing business, but there are signs growth is waning.
Lifestyle sales increased at a 10% annual pace in Adidas’ third quarter, down from 13% in the second quarter.
The analyst now predicts Adidas’ organic sales will grow by a 5% annual rate starting in 2027, down from his prior forecast of 7.5%.
The slower revenue growth will likewise weigh on profitability, Cota said, predicting that margins on earnings before interest and taxes will decline back toward the company’s long-term average after several quarters of outperforming. That could result in a cut to earnings per share.
Adidas stock had a rough 2025. Shares shed 33% in the past 12 months, weighed down by investor concerns over how tariffs, slowing demand, and increased competition would affect revenue growth.
Nike stock fell 9% throughout the period, reflecting both the company’s struggles with demand and optimism over a turnaround plan CEO Elliott Hill rolled out in late 2024.
Investors’ confidence has faded following Nike’s December earnings report, which suggested that a sustained recovery is still several quarters away. Just how many remains anyone’s guess.
But if Adidas’ challenges continue, as Cota believes they will, it could open up some space for Nike to claw back any market share it lost to its rival.
Investors should keep in mind, however, that the field has grown increasingly crowded in the past five years. Upstarts such as On Holding and Hoka also present a formidable challenge to the sector’s legacy brands.
Shares of On and Deckers Outdoor , Hoka’s parent company, fell 11% and 48%, respectively, in 2025, but analysts are upbeat about both companies’ fundamentals as the new year begins.
The battle of the sneakers is just getting started.
Micro-needling promises glow and firmness, but timing can make all the difference.
Three completed developments bring a quieter, more thoughtful style of luxury living to Mosman, Neutral Bay and Crows Nest.
