Brand interest vs my interest: exploring shades of corporate symbiosis

We’ve been working with a High St bank and with a large charity. There is an ‘interest dimension’ operating, from those companies felt to act exclusively in their own interests, to the detriment of others (eg debt collectors?) to those who act exclusively in others’ interests (eg a church mission?).

Of course most organisations operate in the middle, acting in their own interests (necessary for survival, of course) and in the interests of key stakeholders, such as consumers. Our theory is that the perceived 'interest balance' of organisations, the extent to which they are seen to value and to act in our (consumers') interests, is increasingly important. Brands must get the symbiotic balance right.

There are perceptual degrees of difference which echo those of biology. In a parasitic relationship, one member of the association benefits while the other is harmed. Then there are different kinds of symbiotic relationships, which ‘lean’ one way or the other. Amensalism is a relationship where one species is inhibited while the other gains. Commensalism is where one benefits and the other is not significantly harmed or helped. Mutualism is the relationship where both parties derive a benefit.

In nature and in the commercial world there are no examples of a species acting in the interests of another species to its own detriment, but the middle area is the key battle ground for hearts and minds. The clear message from our work is that people are happy for an organisation to benefit from their custom as long as (a) the benefit to the organisation is reasonable and visible and (b) they personally benefit at least as much.