Guest editorial: Understanding brand inclusivity

Abstract

Global markets increasingly diversify across lines of race, gender, sexuality, age, ability, and socioeconomic status, and inclusivity has become a key element of firms’ brand communications (Eisend et al., 2023). Inclusivity refers to the practice of providing equal access to opportunities and resources for people who might otherwise be excluded or marginalized (Arsel et al., 2022). As a concept, inclusivity focuses on recognizing and integrating diverse consumer identities, needs and experiences to promote a sense of belonging and counteract exclusion and marginalization (Patrick and Hollenbeck, 2021). Over the past decade, the rise of the “inclusive consumer” (McKinsey, 2022), along with the increasing visibility of activism movements such as Black Lives Matter and Me Too, has raised consumer and policymaker expectations for companies to step up and take action against different forms discrimination and exclusion. This is evidenced in recent reports showing that three-quarters of today’s consumers indicate that brands’ diversity initiatives influence their purchase decisions (Kantar, 2024), while diversity advertising boosts willingness to pay due to greater perceived product variety (Khan et al., 2025).Alongside customers’ growing demand for brand action towards social injustice, inclusivity has become increasingly relevant in brand communications. For today’s brands, inclusivity is fast turning from an ethical priority into a moral responsibility for both internal and external stakeholders (Patrick and Hollenbeck, 2021), and the way brands embrace (or resist) inclusivity may determine their market success (Ferraro et al., 2023). Firms such as Ben and Jerry’s, Starbucks and Nike have incorporated diverse consumer identities into their marketing practices to signal their virtue by addressing equality, diversity and inclusivity concerns (Sibai et al., 2021).Recent evidence reveals several benefits for brands when becoming more inclusive for both internal and external stakeholders. On the one hand, nurturing a culture of inclusion internally not only validates and promotes diverse viewpoints and perspectives among employees (Licsandru and Cui, 2018) but also helps individuals with multiple backgrounds and mindsets to perform to their highest potential and achieve their objectives (Nishii, 2013). For external stakeholder groups (e.g. customers), brands that display their commitment to equality, diversity, and inclusion values become more accessible to underserved communities or disadvantaged consumers (e.g. obese consumers, underrepresented racial and age groups and disabled consumers) (Kipnis et al., 2021; Burgess et al., 2023; Black and Veloutsou, 2017; Veloutsou, 2023). Moreover, inclusivity initiatives foster representation and equitable participation by expanding the diversity of the brand’s customer base, particularly among historically underrepresented groups, such as those defined by gender, age, body type, social class and religion (Arsel et al., 2022).In this cultural shift towards inclusivity and diversity, researchers have begun to explore the steps and processes for making brands more inclusive and how they can enhance perceptions of equality, diversity, and inclusion in the marketplace, particularly among underrepresented socio-cultural groups (e.g. Lu et al., 2022; Burgess et al., 2023; Branca et al., 2024). However, knowledge on which strategies brands should deploy to become more inclusive remains sparse (Patrick and Hollenbeck, 2021; Park et al., 2023). At the same time, little is known about what constitutes brand inclusivity, from a consumer or a firm perspective, while its conceptual basis as a multi-faced construct remains thin (Branca et al., 2024). Research has also only begun to examine the specific sub-dimensions of brand inclusivity (e.g. race, sexual orientation, religion and age) and their role in shaping its meaning, effectiveness and outcomes across contexts (D’Angelo et al., 2025). Moreover, limited insights exist on understanding how evolving consumer and market expectations (e.g. recent US shift away from DEI policies) shape brands’ efforts to engage in more inclusive brand communications. Not surprisingly, recent work calls for a deeper investigation into how brands can effectively support underrepresented and underserved socio-cultural groups in the current polarized market environment (Licsandru and Cui, 2018; Veloutsou, 2023; Hassan et al., 2025). Overall, brand inclusivity research would benefit from a more robust conceptual basis, as well as adequate empirical evidence to steer firms in implementing inclusivity initiatives at the strategic and tactical level.In response to these voids of knowledge, this special issue conceptualizes brand inclusivity as the extent to which a brand caters to a diverse audience, ensuring that all customers, irrespective of their background, feel represented, valued, and included. In the ten articles included, the issue aspires to conceptualize the nascent concept of brand inclusivity and explore the importance of its various dimensions; to discuss its impact on firms, consumers and various stakeholders; to propose inclusive brand strategies; and to investigate factors affecting brand inclusivity.This special issue on brand inclusivity incorporates ten articles that collectively advance understanding of what inclusivity means for brands, how it can be enabled, and what outcomes it produces for consumers, stakeholders, and society at large. Together, these articles show that inclusivity is not a monolithic concept but a multi-layered phenomenon that operates across different levels of brand strategy and across diverse dimensions of consumer identity. The contributions of this issue can be organized into two overarching themes.The first theme focuses on scaling brand inclusivity across strategic touchpoints and stakeholder groups. These articles demonstrate how inclusivity can be embedded in online brand communities, corporate sociopolitical activism, and multi-stakeholder ecosystems. Work in this theme reveals that scaling inclusivity requires authenticity, contextual sensitivity and systemic approaches that empower marginalized groups and build trust. The second theme turns to brand inclusivity across diversity dimensions, examining how inclusivity plays out in relation to race, sexual orientation, religion and age. These articles reveal the unique challenges brands face when addressing historically marginalized identities, as well as the opportunities to build stronger consumer connections when inclusivity is authentically enacted. By focusing on specific diversity dimensions, this set of articles highlights that the meaning and impact of brand inclusivity vary across contexts but always depend on brands’ ability to move beyond symbolic gestures towards genuine recognition, representation and belonging. The articles in each of the two themes are discussed below.The first three articles in this special issue examine how brands can scale inclusivity across strategic touchpoints – brand communities, sociopolitical activism and organizational ecosystems. From co-creating inclusive spaces within online brand communities, to navigating the risks of corporate political advocacy (CPA), to involving both consumers and non-consumers in shaping brand purpose, these articles highlight that authentic, contextually sensitive, and systemic approaches are essential for building meaningful and lasting connections with marginalized groups. Together, these studies demonstrate that scaling inclusivity requires authentic participation, contextual awareness, and collaborative structures that reinforce belonging, empowerment, and societal impact. In doing so, they move beyond a narrow focus on representation to emphasize inclusivity as a systemic, multi-actor process that shapes market relationships and cultural transformation.Hollenbeck and Patrick (2026) investigate how online brand communities can serve as platforms for co-creating brand inclusivity. Through a netnographic case study approach with two inclusive brands that have strong online communities, they reveal that brands can foster inclusion by (1) cultivating a sense of consumer belongingness in the brand community and (2) amplifying unique consumer voices within the community, which in turn (3) empower otherwise marginalized consumers to feel seen and lean into active membership in the brand community. The authors identify three best practices for cultivating consumer belongingness to such communities:Overall, these findings highlight the potential of brand communities as authentic and participatory spaces through which brands can scale brand inclusivity in ways that go beyond representation and into meaningful consumer engagement.As more brands take a stance on sociopolitical issues, Kuo and Olivia (2026) explore the conditions under which consumers show greater tolerance towards brands with controversial activism communication. Through two experimental studies, the authors show that both subjective (consumer–brand identification) and objective (nationality) group memberships moderate the effects of misaligned CPA on consumers’ brand attitudes. Specifically, domestic brands are less likely to suffer harsh backlash from misaligned CPA positions than foreign brands, particularly when consumer nationalism is high. However, when the sociopolitical issue challenges national or group norms, domestic brands may actually experience stronger negative reactions. Taken together, these findings highlight the importance of contextual and cultural sensitivity in inclusive brand activism, revealing that consumers’ tolerance for inclusive messaging is shaped not only by content but also by perceived in-group affiliations and national identity.Bansal et al. (2026) advance the conversation on brand inclusivity by extending it beyond consumers to include non-consumer stakeholders such as employees and suppliers. The authors draw on a two-stage research design combining Delphi interviews with experts and ethnographic fieldwork across four organizations in India. They propose a strategic framework for fostering inclusivity that enhances stakeholder well-being. The study reveals that inclusive branding involves three interconnected processes:The authors show that brands can act as catalysts for systemic change by embedding inclusivity into their core values and co-creating authentic narratives with diverse stakeholders. This work highlights the critical role of non-consumer participants in shaping inclusive branding and offers a practical framework for managers seeking to build stakeholder trust, empowerment and well-being.The next group of contributions delves deeper into specific diversity dimensions that shape how inclusivity could be understood and practiced. These articles explore inclusivity in relation to race, sexual orientation, religion, and age, shedding light on the unique challenges and opportunities that arise as brands attempt to engage marginalized groups. Together, they demonstrate that brand inclusivity is not a one-size-fits-all endeavour but a multifaceted construct whose meaning, effectiveness, and outcomes vary across contexts and consumer identities.One article in the special issue highlights how brands engage racial inclusivity in product design and assortment decisions. As cosmetic and fashion brands increasingly launch inclusive product lines, Naidu and Donnadieu Borquez (2025) investigate these initiatives as a firm-level strategy to signal commitment to diversity, equality and inclusion (DEI), with a particular emphasis on racial inclusivity. Focusing on industries where exclusion has historically disadvantaged consumers of colour – makeup shade ranges and clothing sizing – the authors examine why brands may still face backlash when their efforts are seen as insufficient to address structural marketplace inequalities. Across three online experiments, they investigate consumer perceptions of product lines with more (versus fewer) options as well as product lines that cater primarily to minority (versus majority) consumers. They find that simply offering more options does not guarantee positive outcomes. Instead, consumers evaluate inclusivity based on how product assortments distribute options for minority versus majority consumers. Inclusive product lines that skew towards darker skin tones or that provide a balanced distribution of shades across skin colours are perceived as more inclusive and more moral than those that privilege lighter skin tones. These heightened perceptions of inclusivity and morality, in turn, foster more favourable attitudes towards the brand. Taken together, these findings reveal that racial inclusivity in product design cannot be achieved through token expansion of options alone. Rather, success depends on how offerings authentically recognize and elevate historically marginalized consumers.Two articles in this special issue investigate how brands navigate inclusivity in relation to LGBTQ+ communities, offering complementary perspectives on representation and authenticity. Together, they reveal that while LGBTQ+ inclusivity can enhance brand connections and social resonance, its success depends on factors such as perceived authenticity, alignment with consumer values and the broader sociocultural context in which such efforts are received.Painter et al. (2026) extend understanding of how consumers respond to LGBTQ+ inclusive advertising, specifically to ads featuring nontraditional families. Through a multi-study experimental design, they examine the effects of family type (heterosexual, gay, or lesbian), priming (sexual orientation vs control) and intimacy (explicit vs implicit) on ad evaluations. The authors find that ads portraying gay male parents elicited lower ad attitudes and purchase intentions than the ads depicting heterosexual and lesbian parents, which were not significantly different from each other. However, the heterosexual ad image elicited the strongest brand attitudes. Moreover, younger participants and those with more positive attitudes towards homosexuality reported more favourable responses to the ads. Overall, these results highlight the nuanced challenges and audience-dependent outcomes of inclusive advertising, demonstrating that while brand inclusivity initiatives can strengthen engagement with progressive consumers, they must also navigate lingering societal biases to avoid undermining brand equity.Lewis et al. (2026) examine how LGBTQ+ consumers evaluate the authenticity of brand inclusivity. Through a sequential qualitative research design, the authors identify five organizational and branding areas (i.e. marketing communications, products/brands, ownership and management, advocacy initiatives, and internal marketing) that LGBTQ+ (queer) consumers use to judge authenticity and brand inclusivity. Building on these insights, they offer the 4Cs framework (collaboration, consistency, conviction, and congruence) as a guide for organizations to build authentic and inclusive connections with LGBTQ+ communities. Taken together, these findings emphasize the importance of aligning internal values and external actions to earn trust from marginalized consumers, advancing the conversation on how brand inclusivity must be authentically signalled and deeply embedded across organizational practices.Two additional papers address inclusivity through the lens of religion, demonstrating how religious identity and value systems shape consumer responses to brands and highlighting the contextual tensions that can arise when religion intersects with other social identity dimensions.Allen and Wanjugu (2026) consider inclusivity at the intersection of religion and sexual orientation. Specifically, they investigate how the coexistence of explicitly Christian brand values and LGBTQ community support influences consumer perceptions of brands, showing that balancing sexual orientation and religious values poses unique challenges for brands seeking authenticity. Across three experimental studies, they show that authenticity plays a central mediating role: when Christian-value-oriented firms express genuine LGBTQ support, consumers perceive the brand as more authentic, trustworthy, and appealing, though political ideology shapes these responses. However, when LGBTQ support is seen as overly commercialized, authenticity perceptions decline, eroding trust and purchase intentions. By situating LGBTQ inclusivity within the context of Christian values, this research highlights how tensions between faith and sexuality complicate brand positioning. Their findings contribute to the special issue by showing that inclusivity efforts are highly context-dependent and must be authentically grounded to overcome conflicting values across different stakeholder groups.Alhouti et al. (2026) examine consumers’ evaluations of religious branding and show that an ad with a religious cue generally performs better with consumers who are religious than with those who are not. Moreover, they show that the effect of religiosity on consumers’ preference for highly religious ads diminishes when consumers have a high appreciation for diversity. Results also indicate that brands receive more favourable evaluations from consumers when including religious cues, particularly in (US) states with a high proportion of religious individuals. The preference of religious consumers for brands with religious affiliations is enhanced through their elaboration of the message. When consumers’ religiosity aligns with the religious message, increased elaboration leads to a more favourable brand attitude. Taken together, these findings reveal that inclusivity in religious branding depends on alignment with consumer values and contexts, further reinforcing that inclusivity cannot be divorced from cultural sensitivities.Two papers explore how brands can advance inclusivity for consumers, addressing both structural and cultural dimensions of et al., 2025). Together, they highlight that age inclusivity requires not only for accessible and but also efforts to narratives and foster belonging for and (2026) investigate how companies can build age inclusive The authors three forms of work that foster belonging of in the this research that brand inclusivity is not only about but also about and cultural extending the special with how brands can foster authentic belonging among marginalized et al. (2026) the concept of branding as a strategic concept to address the needs of and counteract in the on they the branding framework through a of and The framework how and firms to inclusive practices for consumers. strategies as central to and and inclusive communication. By not as a but as a growing and diverse consumer with the article highlights both the and the social responsibility of inclusive These findings emphasize that brand inclusivity must for showing how can branding a strategic for firms and insights from the ten articles in this special propose a framework for understanding brand inclusivity. This framework highlights the and that brand the and practices through which brands inclusivity is and the outcomes for consumers, stakeholders, and of brand inclusivity. The framework that brand inclusivity at the intersection of organizational values, and stakeholder and that its success depends on authentic and systemic across communications, and communities. the outcomes from consumer belonging and empowerment, to stakeholder to brand and societal showing that inclusivity is both a strategic and a moral a conceptual framework for research on brand the has in and examining inclusivity across a variety of contexts, the contributions in this issue also highlight that understanding of inclusivity remains and move the research must to conceptual the diversity dimensions and explore the conditions under which inclusivity leads to meaningful outcomes for consumers, stakeholders, and The framework have a for such up opportunities to and extend its through diverse In what highlight several that can further on brand inclusivity.This special issue several key diversity dimensions, including and Donnadieu sexual orientation et al., et al., religion and Wanjugu et al., and age et al., and However, dimensions For is a critical but of inclusivity, the that with the minority group with unique needs and research should investigate how brands can design and experiences that are not only accessible but also to disabled consumers. At the same time, more insights are as to how firms can their brand more inclusive for consumer groups who are social visibility but by marketing other identity such as socioeconomic status, status, and identities that multiple marginalized also greater these dimensions would understanding of inclusivity by highlighting how brands can respond to the of consumer identity and inclusivity is as an and positive of a research could also examine the of inclusivity For might explore initiatives reinforce forms of exclusion by marginalized groups or by how consumers inclusivity across cultural Kuo and Olivia and Wanjugu (2026) and et al. (2026) highlight that inclusivity responses depend on group and Building on research could when inclusivity and when it across different and political This is relevant in the current where inclusivity is increasingly and in the between internal and external inclusion work a and for et al. (2026) 4Cs framework on internal but more work is on how organizational diversity, such as inclusivity, inclusive and shapes external brand inclusivity. studies could examine how internal and external efforts or and the of such for consumer trust and This would also the to research on how inclusivity is not only by consumers, but also by and in the value extending the work of et al. who highlight the importance of non-consumer stakeholders, and and Patrick who show how within brand communities belonging. In doing so, research could provide a more systemic of how inclusivity is within and beyond the with brand increasingly by research should explore and as of brand inclusivity. strategies exclusion or consumers evaluate inclusivity when by and what forms of design, or can brands avoid structural biases in these would the inclusivity into the where branding is increasingly research on brand inclusivity has in the current social and political (e.g. backlash against DEI initiatives in the tensions that turn brand inclusivity from a virtue into a and context-dependent As recent political have inclusivity into a little about how inclusion in response to sociopolitical For how consumers such inclusivity through or what extent does the US cultural backlash and inclusion As firms are scaling from DEI while internal inclusion and 2025). This requires further from a brand image does strategic or from inclusivity messaging brand trust and consumer what extent can firms a strategy achieve among these the opportunities that for advancing knowledge on brand inclusivity. in this benefit from perspectives that across and research on inclusivity to not only to branding but also to broader diversity, and social special issue is step in what be a and growing of on brand inclusivity. with this special issue to advance understanding of brand inclusivity by diverse conceptual and The contributions demonstrate that inclusivity is both a strategic and a moral and they reveal the ways in which inclusivity can be across brand touchpoints as well as across different dimensions of diversity. research to build on the insights and critical raised while also the to dimensions of diversity and the evolving challenges of inclusivity in and would to the Veloutsou, for the to this special all the authors who their work and the whose and this to how these articles further research and and how they contribute to broader and on the role of inclusivity in