Self Congruence Theory
The Hidden Force Behind Your Brand Choices
When you walk into a grocery store, what’s your go-to brand for:
Butter?
Coffee?
Beer?
Mayo?
And then think about it, it is because it’s the cheapest or the best? Maybe just because it feels… right?
That’s what Self Congruence Theory is about. It explains why we pick brands that match who we are — or who we want to be.
Heineken or Budweiser,… or Stella, Tiger, Desperados?
Let me share something. At Heineken, I saw this play out daily. Beer, and especially lager, isn’t just beer. Even though a lot of experts can tell them apart when doing a blind tasting. The brand someone picks says something about them thought. A Heineken drinker isn’t the same as a Budweiser fan, which isn’t the same as a Stella drinker.
Neither is wrong, well maybe Bud…. 😜
They’ve all very similar, but they’re all also really different.
Here’s what really matters:
We pick brands that match:
→ Who we are now
→ Who we want to be
→ How others see us
→ How we want others to see us
Think about it.
The phone you use 📱
The clothes you wear 👟
The car you drive 🚗
Even your coffee brand ☕️
Each choice reflects a bit of you. That’s why some brands just click while others feel off. Like wearing someone else’s clothes. Yes, sure, it might look good, but it doesn’t feel right. I saw a lot of this while launching products at GrandVision:
Great sunglasses, wrong audience? No sale.
Right audience? They’d buy without thinking twice.
And those product are highly homogenous:
Weight? Similar.
Material? The same, often even the same supplier.
Color options? Black and 20+ others across every brand.
Style? Sure Ray-Ban has Aviators and Wayfarers, but at least 10 other brands have styles that are near identical.
So how do we get a brand in front of people, and in their preference zone? Well, it’s not about tricking people. You need to be matching the right brand with the right person. And not just who they actually are, often it’s about who they aspire to be (like).
Some examples:
→ Apple = creative, innovative
→ Volvo = safety-minded, practical
→ Nike = athletic, ambitious
And trust me, 80% of Apple users definitely aren’t what they aspire to be. Same for Nike. Volvo? Might be more in sync. Your brand needs to speak to your audience’s (aspirational) self-image. Not who you think they should be. Who they actually are or want to become.
Quick test:
Think about your favorite brand. Now think about why you love it? Chances are, it reflects something about you.
Though about one?
And why do you love it?
That’s Self Congruence Theory in action. Simple, right?
Want to use this in your brand positioning?
Know who your audience really is
Understand how they see themselves
Figure out who they aspire to be as a person, a human, a mom, a creative,…
Match your brand to their aspirational self-image
Be authentic, faking it doesn’t last
In all of the above there’s a mistake that often being made. People in the company confusing their aspirational buyer, with the audience’s aspirational image.
“Eehhh what?!”
Say you’re selling USB cables, screws, something boring. You might think we need to look like were selling to David Beckham, popular people, with money. Sure, might get you some eyeballs, sure might look good and sure some people renovating a room also wish they could bend it like Beckham. But it’s anything but related to the solution you’re bringing.
In the case of someone remodelling a room, they maybe just want to be like Tim the Toolman Taylor (Remember that guy? If not, no worries, character from a popular 90’s sitcom about a guy that ran a handyman show).
It needs to relate.
People don’t buy what you do.
They buy who they become when they use your product.
And nobody becomes David Beckham from using a certain brand of screws and plugs. They might become this generation’s Tim the Toolman Taylor though.
That’s all there is to it. No fancy jargon needed.
What’s your take? Which brands match your self-image perfectly?
