Gripping the tentacles of brand trust

What do an octopus, the Nike Swoosh, and a snowstorm have in common? They all had me thinking about the nature of trust in the last few weeks.

Let me explain.

The headline for the latest annual Edelman Trust Barometer bore this alarming (but perhaps not surprising) proclamation: ‘Trust is In Peril As Society Slides from Grievance into Insularity’.

The report outlines that due to a heady mix of economic displacement, spread of misinformation, and fear of AI technology, we’ve entered an era where distrust is the default instinct and optimism has disappeared.

What a way to start 2026.

Against this backdrop, what’s the state of consumer trust towards brands? What is trust comprised of, how is it built and sustained, and how does it link to effectiveness?

A complex mix of the emotional and the rational

Brand trust can feel like a nebulous concept; you know it when you see (or rather, feel) it, but it is difficult to define exactly. Most would acknowledge that it is a multi-dimensional measure. It has both a rational lens – ‘I trust you will do or deliver what I expect’ - and emotional – ‘I trust you to act with integrity and do right by me’.

For many years I had the privilege of working on Nationwide, comfortably in the top 1% of trusted brands in the UK (source: WPP Media’s BAV, the world’s largest, longest-running brand perception database.)

Marketing leaders at Nationwide used the term ‘competence and character’ – you need both to truly earn consumer trust.

Do the thing well, but do the right thing too.

A driver of growth but an interdependent measure

Earning trust matters. A lot. A new long-term analysis of IPA Effectiveness Databank campaigns shows advertising that significantly increases brand trust is highly effective at driving business growth. Between 1998 and 2024, the most effective for-profit trust-building campaigns in the Databank reported an average total of 65% more very large business effects – such as sizeable increases in sales, market share or profit – than the average of all for-profit campaigns in the Databank.

Whilst the exact composition will be unique to each business, brand equity modelling we’ve synthesised for clients has identified trust as one of the most interconnected brand measures; it was driven by up to 10 different brand perceptions, and itself was a direct driver of consideration. So, trust is critical, but not straightforward.

Or maybe it is.

Media choices can disproportionately influence trust

I’m a media planner so I would say this, but media choices have a disproportionate impact on trust, perhaps more so than any other brand perception. This is because trust has to be imbued. Behaviour and body language conveys it more than direct communication from the subject. (The minute someone says ‘Trust me’, you doubt whether you should.)

Thus, many of the well-established principles of media planning apply:

The power of signalling: certain channels and environments deliver a halo of trust onto the message. Broadcast channels are costly signals and are generally more trusted. Social platforms consistently rank as the least trusted.  

Social proofing and the importance of oversee and overhear: the unspoken understanding that you can’t tell lies in public. Richard Shotton has shown belief is 43% higher for a commitment made publicly than privately.

The company you keep: There is an implicit brand rub from what and who you appear next to.

Effective frequency levels: The illusory truth effect means the more you hear a message (true or not), the more likely you are to believe it.

And finally, the power of other messengers: Who backs you, and their credibility. This could be endorsement from established media mastheads or influential mavens on the ground.

On top of this, characteristics such as clarity of message, language transparency, and tone of voice are important creative-led elements in building trust.

Conveying trust in turbulent times

Let me come back to the octopus, the Swoosh and the snowstorm (which I realise sounds a bit like a children’s storybook).

Octopus Energy manages to be a consumer champion in a category mired with distrust. Central to its long-term strategy is consistent and explicit endorsements from customers and industry bodies like Which? and Trustpilot, in the most public of channels, out of home.

Having just been in market for a new pair of trainers, I was reminded that Nike is one of the most mentally available brands in the world. Nike builds trust not by sponsoring athletes, but forging high-profile, long-term partnerships with them. The Nike Training Club and Nike Run Club apps build communities and establish ambassadors on the ground. At both ends, Nike creates social proofing effects in spades.  

Finally, the snowstorm. A colleague in our government team at WPP Media shared Zohran Mamdani’s recent BlueSky social post, the night before a huge snowstorm was due to hit NYC. In it, the mayor explained how public services were ready to be mobilised to deal with the impact and keep the city running safely.

It sparked much discussion in our team about the artful blend of relatability and authority in this piece of official government communication. It was clear and transparent, but it plainly asked New Yorkers to play their part, too. It was a social contract in a social post.

What these examples from three very different ‘brands’ all demonstrate is the potent mix of character and competence in building trust. Alongside that, the use of proven behaviours and body language to cement it amongst their audiences.

So next time you see yet another doom-laden headline on today’s trust crisis, think about what your brand could learn from the octopus, the Swoosh or the snowstorm in building and maintaining trust in the turbulent times ahead.

The opinions expressed here are those of the authors and were submitted in accordance with the IPA terms and conditions regarding the uploading and contribution of content to the IPA newsletters, IPA website, or other IPA media, and should not be interpreted as representing the opinion of the IPA.