Brand purpose is increasingly connected with what people buy, recommend, trust, and reject. Accenture’s 2018 global survey found that 63% preferred companies whose purpose reflected their own values, while Zeno’s 2020 global study found that consumers who perceived strong purpose were four times more likely to purchase from a brand. Yet the evidence also points to a credibility gap: only 37% in Zeno’s study believed companies generally had a clear and strong purpose.
Contents
- What consumers expect from brand purpose
- How purpose influences purchase and loyalty
- Trust, authenticity, and transparency
- How purpose varies by audience and market
- Environmental and social action
- Business value and meaningful brands
What consumers expect from brand purpose
Brand purpose is commonly discussed as a company’s reason for existing beyond making money. Kantar used that definition in a U.S. study of 2,000 consumers; the page does not state a publication year. The figures below therefore describe expectations in particular studies and periods, rather than a single universal benchmark.
In Accenture’s global survey conducted in August–October 2018, 62% of consumers wanted companies to take a stand on issues close to their hearts. The same survey found that 65% said leaders’ words, values, and actions influenced purchasing decisions. Ethical values and authenticity influenced purchase consideration for 62% of respondents. These findings place purpose in practical brand behavior, not only in a mission statement.
Zeno’s 2020 study found that 94% of consumers across eight countries considered it important that companies they engaged with had a strong purpose. However, only 37% believed companies generally had a clear and strong purpose. That contrast is central to the topic: purpose can matter greatly to consumers while remaining unclear or unconvincing in the marketplace.
The Accenture survey also identified specific organizational signals. In 2018, 76% of global consumers were attracted to organizations committed to good-quality ingredients, 65% to organizations that treated employees well, and 62% to companies committed to reducing plastics and improving the environment. In addition, 74% wanted more transparency about sourcing, safe working conditions, and positions on animal testing. These are examples of the operational details through which a stated purpose may be judged.
How purpose influences purchase and loyalty
Zeno’s 2020 global research associated strong perceived purpose with several commercial outcomes. Consumers perceiving strong purpose were four times more likely to purchase from a brand, 4.5 times more likely to recommend it, 6 times more likely to protect it after a misstep, and 4.1 times more likely to trust it. These are comparative likelihood findings from that study, not guarantees for every purpose-led company.
Zeno’s APAC research reported an even higher purchase comparison: consumers perceiving strong purpose were 7.9 times more likely to buy from the brand in a post-pandemic comparison. Because the APAC research and the global study used different populations and comparisons, the figures should not be combined into one worldwide multiplier.
The downside of a perceived purpose failure is also visible. In Accenture’s August–October 2018 survey, 36% of respondents had been disappointed by an action that betrayed what a company stood for. Nearly half of those disappointed respondents, 47%, stopped doing business with that company. A further 66% of Accenture’s global consumers believed boycotts or social-media protest could change company behavior.
Zeno’s 2020 U.S. findings similarly showed that 73% had stopped buying, discouraged others, or switched to competitors after disagreeing with a brand action. In the same U.S. research, 78% said they were likely to support or publicly share positive views about a brand when they believed in its purpose. The two results illustrate both sides of purpose-led loyalty: advocacy when a purpose feels credible and switching when behavior conflicts with it.
Trust, authenticity, and transparency
Purpose-related expectations depend on trust. Havas’s proprietary 2021 global Meaningful Brands study found that only 47% of brands were seen as trustworthy. Trust was reported for 39% of brands in North America and 24% in East Asia. Havas also found that only 34% of consumers thought companies were transparent about commitments and promises, while 71% had little faith that brands would deliver on promises.
These results make transparency a measurable part of brand purpose. A company may communicate a social or environmental position, but consumers still evaluate whether commitments are clear and whether delivery is believable. The Havas figures are from a proprietary global study and are not directly comparable with the Accenture or Zeno survey percentages because populations, wording, and field dates differ.
Kantar’s U.S. research found differences between people who valued working for a purposeful company and a comparison group. Brand purpose was important to 76% of the purposeful-employment group, versus 63% in the comparison. Also, 55% of the purposeful-employment group avoided companies that did not share their values, compared with 47% in the comparison. The page does not state the study’s publication year, so these findings should be read without assigning them to a particular year.
Edelman’s global brand-trust survey, conducted April 24–May 5, 2025, found that 80% of people trusted brands they used. It also found that 73% said trust would increase if a brand authentically reflected today’s culture. This newer result uses its own survey design and period; it does not establish a direct trend from the earlier Havas trust figures.
How purpose varies by audience and market
Purpose does not have the same role for every audience. In Zeno’s APAC study, 85% of respondents considered purpose when considering a job with a brand. The figure rose to 90% among Gen Z and millennial respondents. Purpose also entered investment decisions: 83% of APAC respondents considered it when deciding whether to make financial investments in a brand.
Belief that brands actually had strong purpose varied by country in the same APAC research. Between 47% and 61% of consumers in China, India, and Malaysia believed brands had strong purpose. The corresponding figures were only 33% in Singapore and 28% in Australia.
| Audience or market | Brand-purpose finding | Measurement period |
|---|---|---|
| APAC respondents considering a job | 85% | APAC post-pandemic comparison |
| APAC Gen Z and millennials considering purpose in employment | 90% | APAC post-pandemic comparison |
| APAC respondents considering purpose in investment decisions | 83% | APAC post-pandemic comparison |
| Singapore consumers believing brands had strong purpose | 33% | APAC post-pandemic comparison |
| Australia consumers believing brands had strong purpose | 28% | APAC post-pandemic comparison |
Edelman’s 2025 survey found another market-related distinction: trust in domestic brands exceeded trust in foreign brands by an average of 15 points across its global markets. In the same survey, 60% of boomers aged 61 and older said they would be less likely to buy if a brand ignored a societal issue. Audience age and brand origin can therefore matter alongside the purpose message itself.
Environmental and social action
Consumers often connect brand purpose with tangible social and environmental action. Accenture’s 2018 global survey found that 62% were attracted to companies committed to reducing plastics and improving the environment. It found that 65% were attracted to organizations that treated employees well, and 76% to organizations committed to good-quality ingredients. Transparency expectations covered sourcing, safe working conditions, and animal-testing positions for 74% of respondents.
Havas’s 2021 global study found that 73% believed brands must act now for society and the planet. It also reported that 53% were willing to pay more for a brand that took a stand. These figures describe attitudes in that study; they do not show that every consumer paid a premium or that taking a stand automatically produced sales.
The Havas 2023 global report showed skepticism alongside demand for action. Seventy-two percent were tired of brands pretending to help society while only wanting money, and 59% would stop buying from companies that did not respect the planet or society. The gap between these figures and purpose claims is a warning for marketers: social language without credible behavior may intensify distrust.
Business value and meaningful brands
Several publisher-reported measures connect meaningful brand performance with business outcomes, although they use proprietary definitions and comparisons. Havas reported in its 2023 global report that its most Meaningful Brands performed 57% better than average brands on personal benefits. It also reported that its top-rated Meaningful Brands outperformed the stock market by 222% in 2023. These are Havas comparisons for its Meaningful Brands framework, not a forecast for an individual business.
Kantar’s 2014–2023 global database attributed 45% of typical pricing-power drivers to Meaningful, 49% to Different, and 6% to Salient. Kantar also reported that brands with high Meaningful Difference could command prices up to two times as high, and that brands with more consistent perceptions had a 111% growth advantage. The database period is 2014–2023, so these figures should not be described as a 2025 or 2026 forecast.
Havas’s 2024 global report highlighted a broader relevance challenge: 74% of brands could disappear and people would not care. In that report, 69% said they would not let tough times keep them down, 56% felt more in control of their lives than a year earlier, and 59% felt optimistic about their future. Those context measures describe people’s outlook; they are not direct measures of purpose performance, but they help explain why usefulness and meaning remain important brand questions.
Technology is part of the current trust environment as well. In Edelman’s 2025 survey, 55% used generative-AI platforms, and among those users, 91% used them for shopping in some way. For brands, this means purpose claims may be encountered while consumers research, compare, and decide through new interfaces. The survey does not establish that generative AI causes stronger or weaker purpose perceptions.
Taken together, these statistics show a consistent pattern across different studies: consumers frequently say purpose matters, but they are also sensitive to authenticity, transparency, market context, and evidence of action. The studies are descriptive and not directly comparable because their populations, countries, wording, definitions, and field dates differ. The source pages are Accenture’s 2018 consumer study, Zeno’s 2020 purpose study, Zeno’s APAC research, Havas’s 2021 report, Havas’s 2023 report, Havas’s 2024 report, Kantar’s purpose research, Kantar’s brand-building report, and Edelman’s 2025 brand-trust report.