The Behavioral Brand Revolution: Where Science Meets Strategy

Successful brands integrate psychological principles into both brand expression and product development

Apr 06, 2025

blue and green peacock feather — Photo by Milad Fakurian on Unsplash

Executive Summary:

Traditional branding focuses on rational benefits; behavioral branding works with human psychology
Behavioral science should be central to organizations, not siloed
Successful brands integrate psychological principles into both brand expression and product development
The most innovative solutions emerge at the boundaries between disciplines

When Van Rais, a leading brand designer who's led the branding of major organizations from GE to Virgin and Starbucks' visual identity, invited me to discuss behavioral brands on his podcast, it triggered a flood of thoughts about how my work in behavioral science intersects with the world of brand strategy.

As a strategic mixed-methods researcher and behavioral scientist with five years of experience bridging academia and industry, I've witnessed firsthand the disconnect between how organizations approach brand strategy and what we know about human behavior. My work across multiple sectors has given me a unique perspective on this gap—and more importantly, how to bridge it. At FM Global, I pioneered behavioral science applications in risk management, seeing how principles of psychology could transform user engagement with technical tools. Throughout my career, I've consistently found that the most effective solutions emerge when we integrate scientific understanding of human behavior with practical business strategy.

Centralizing Behavioral Science: My Journey at the Intersection

Throughout my career, I've become increasingly convinced that behavioral science shouldn't be siloed in organizations—it should be central and embedded in various aspects because ultimately, everything a business does affects humans.

I've seen behavioral science inform everything from mission and vision to brand strategy to every stage of product development, solution design, user research, testing, iteration, evaluation, and impact assessment. This holistic integration has consistently delivered better results than treating behavioral insights as an occasional add-on.

The challenge is that many organizations either don't have behavioral science expertise at all, or they restrict it to a specialized team that gets consulted occasionally. This creates a significant risk of designing products that don't ultimately solve users' problems, leading to lower retention and increased churn.

What's fascinating is how the integration model has evolved. Around 2020-2021, there was a trend of establishing dedicated behavioral science teams. Now, I'm seeing more of a distributed model where behavioral science principles are being woven into existing functions—marketers learning about social proof, designers studying attention patterns, product managers becoming familiar with habit formation.

In my experience, the ideal approach combines both models—having dedicated experts who can push the frontier of applied behavioral science while also upskilling the broader organization so everyone incorporates these principles into their daily work.

Beyond the Logic Trap: The Pitfalls of Traditional Branding

Over the past few years working in a business setting, I've observed brand strategy being dominated by the "rational agent model"—the assumption that humans are logical decision-makers who carefully weigh options before choosing products that objectively serve their best interests. This approach suggests that if we simply communicate rational benefits clearly enough, consumers will respond predictably.

But this isn't how humans actually behave. We're not rational—we're predictably irrational. Our decisions are shaped by cognitive biases, emotional responses, social influences, and contextual factors that traditional branding approaches often overlook or actively fight against.

This rational model leads to one of the most common pitfalls I've seen in business: the tendency to compare by category rather than by function. Instead of deeply understanding what their customers actually need psychologically, brands often obsess over rational metrics and look at what other successful companies are doing: "How can we become the Disney of finance?" instead of asking "What does a financial brand actually need to do for its customers?" This imitation strategy leads to a homogenization of brands that fails to address real psychological needs.

This tension between rational solutions and psychological reality plays out across industries. Consider a case that Rory Sutherland famously shares about the British railway system's approach to customer satisfaction. When passengers complained about delays, traditional thinking suggested investing millions in technical improvements to marginally reduce wait times—a perfectly logical solution. But looking at the problem through a behavioral lens revealed a much more elegant approach.

Sutherland proposed something unexpected: serving champagne to passengers awaiting delayed trains. The rationale was brilliantly simple—perception shapes reality, and enhancing the customer experience could transform frustration into delight. By offering champagne as a gesture of goodwill, the railway company elevated the waiting experience.

The results were remarkable. Passengers embraced the unexpected perk, turning delays into moments of relaxation rather than frustration. This innovative approach not only defused complaints but cultivated positive associations with the railway company, fostering loyalty and goodwill—all for a fraction of the cost of infrastructure improvements. This illustrates how traditional brands often optimize for rational metrics while missing the psychological reality of customer experience.

The Behavioral Brand Difference

So what makes a behavioral brand different? At its core, a behavioral brand is designed with principles of human psychology at its center and approaches both brand expression and product development with what Connor Joyce calls an "impact mindset" in his book Bridging Intention to Impact.

Behavioral brands work WITH human nature, not against it. They understand that behavior is driven by psychology. As Julie O’Brien describes in her framework, humans are:

Cognitive misers who conserve mental energy
Emotional beings in ways that often surprise us
Egocentric (experiencing the world in a way that over-represents our own perspective)
Deeply social and influenced by others
Highly responsive to context

When brand expression is crafted from this behavioral perspective, it naturally captures attention and achieves resonance in today's attention-scarce marketplace. And when product development follows the same principles, it focuses on driving intended behaviors rather than just measuring usage or satisfaction.

The Leaky Bucket Problem

One of the most compelling reasons to adopt a behavioral approach is the well-known "leaky bucket problem" in product development and marketing. Many companies pour tremendous resources into customer acquisition—advertising, marketing, engagement strategies—only to find that customers quickly churn because their fundamental problems remain unsolved.

This happens because organizations fail to understand the actual behaviors that drive value for customers and for the business. All organizations fundamentally exist to change behavior—companies combine what behaviors they monetize, how they change those behaviors, and how they do it at scale.

When these elements aren't aligned through a behavioral science lens, we end up with products that fail to drive the behaviors that matter most.

From Workshop Sticky Notes to Evidence-Based Innovation

Another challenge I've observed in many organizations is reliance on ideation processes that lack scientific rigor. Teams gather in workshops, put sticky notes on whiteboards, group ideas, and vote on solutions. While this approach generates diverse perspectives, the winning idea is often either the one proposed by the most powerful person in the room or the most intuitively appealing one.

For behavior-change challenges, this approach is particularly problematic. We already have a wealth of research on human behavior that can inform which solutions are likely to work for specific problems. Not leveraging this knowledge means we risk wasting time on solutions that evidence already suggests won't work.

Behavioral science doesn't replace creativity—it channels it toward approaches with higher probability of success. It allows us to be more strategic when ideating, rather than "throwing spaghetti at the wall" or "pressing the accelerator while having a foot on the brake" (metaphors I've heard countless times in business settings).

Bringing It All Together: Brand + Behavior + Product

Creating truly effective behavioral brands requires bringing together several key elements:

Brand Expression: Using Kai D. Wright's LAVEC framework (Lexicon triggers, Audio cues, Visual stimuli, Experience drivers, and Cultural connections), we can craft brand expressions that align with how humans naturally process information and form emotional connections.
Behavioral Design: Applying principles of behavioral science to product development ensures we're addressing the true barriers and motivators that influence user behavior, rather than just building features based on what people say they want.
Impact Assessment: Moving beyond vanity metrics to measure whether our products are actually driving the intended behaviors that solve real problems for users and create sustainable value for the business.

When these elements work in harmony, we create products and brands that feel almost effortless to engage with—they work with our natural tendencies rather than against them.

How to Start Applying Behavioral Science to Your Brand Today

If you're convinced of the value but unsure where to begin, here are five practical steps:

Adopt an impact mindset: Start by defining the specific impact you want to create—what measurable behavior change will deliver value to both customers and your business? This becomes the north star for both brand expression and product development.
Map the behavioral journey: Document the current steps users take toward your target behavior, identifying friction points and motivational gaps. Look at both functional product elements and brand touchpoints that influence this journey.
Align brand expression with cognitive processing: Ensure your brand elements work in harmony to support your target behaviors:
- Language: Use clear, concise language that reduces cognitive load
- Audio: Consider how sound cues can trigger emotional responses or serve as behavior prompts
- Visual: Design with attention patterns in mind, highlighting key behavioral cues
- Experience: Remove friction from touchpoints that lead to your target behavior
- Culture: Ensure your brand values align with social identity motivators for your audience
Synchronize product function and brand promise: Treat brand and product as two sides of the same coin—your brand creates expectations and emotional connections, while your product delivers on these promises through functional design. When misaligned, users experience cognitive dissonance that impedes behavior change.
Test and measure real behaviors: Begin with small experiments that measure actual behavioral outcomes, not just attitudes or perceptions. This applies to both product features and brand elements—test them in tandem to ensure they're reinforcing the same behavioral goals.

The most powerful behavioral brands achieve harmony between what they say (brand expression) and what they do (product function). When both dimensions are guided by the same behavioral science principles and focused on the same target behaviors, you create a seamless experience that naturally guides users toward valuable actions. This integration eliminates the common disconnect where marketing promises one experience but the product delivers another.

Moving Forward Together

The future belongs to organizations that can successfully integrate behavioral science into both their brand strategy and product development. This integration isn't just a nice-to-have—it's becoming essential in a world where attention is scarce and customer expectations continue to rise.

As AI continues to transform how we understand and influence behavior, these intersections will become even more critical. AI tools can help us analyze patterns in user behavior at unprecedented scale, but they need to be guided by sound behavioral science principles to ensure they're optimizing for the right outcomes.

My podcast "Deep Thoughts with Michelle Handy" has been an opportunity to explore these connections through conversations with experts across disciplines. These discussions have reinforced my belief that the most innovative solutions often emerge at the boundaries between fields.

Having navigated both academic and industry environments as a behavioral scientist, I've developed a toolbox of approaches that work at this intersection. My research and conversations with practitioners across industries have continually reinforced that organizations succeed when they recognize that all business challenges are fundamentally behavioral challenges. The companies I've worked with that embrace this mindset consistently outperform those that maintain traditional silos between brand, product, and behavioral insights.

Whether you're a brand strategist interested in behavioral science or a behavioral scientist curious about brand strategy, I encourage you to explore this fascinating intersection. The future of business depends on our ability to bridge these disciplines and create products and brands that truly work with human nature, not against it.

I've been inspired by many brilliant thinkers while writing this piece, including Van Rais, Dan Ariely, Connor Joyce, Rory Sutherland, Matt Wallaert, Kai D. Wright, and Julie O'Brien. Their work has shaped my thinking and approach to behavioral branding.

Michelle’s Substack

Discussion about this post