We focused our project on raising awareness of the
lack of diversity in make-up shades available in and around the Warwick
university campus. Prior to starting our project, students from BAME groups, who represent 38.4% of students, were often unable to find make up in their
shade on campus and had to travel as far as Birmingham (over 40 minutes away)
to find make up in their shade.
The topic was particularly salient to us
as a group because we come from different ethnic backgrounds, (White British,
British African and British Asian), and share an interest in the beauty
industry. Our first approach to tackling the issue, involved talking with
Danielle, a representative from Warwick Anti-Racism society, and starting a
Facebook poll to measure general interest levels.
Following this we arranged a meeting with
Namir Chowdhury, the Ethnic Minorities Officer at the Students Union (SU).
This allowed us to collect relevant statistics on the numbers of BAME students,
and offered us a platform to pitch our ideas to representatives of the wider
student body. When it was clear that Namir was on our side we sought insight
from an external body.
This took the form of meeting Geoff
Skingsley the chairman of L’Oreal UK and Ireland, the
world’s largest cosmetics company through
a talk held through the Warwick Business School. We knew that L’Oreal produced
a 28 shade make up range called “True Match” which was designed to match 98% of
UK skintones and had an ongoing commitment to promoting diversity in the beauty
industry. We had not considered, however, the extent to which providing a
diverse range of make-up shades simply makes economic sense – a factor Mr
Skingsley highlighted to us as we spoke to him on our project after the event.
Once we had enough background research to
go into negotiations, we asked to speak to the manager of shops in and around
campus e.g. Tesco, who failed to provide shades suitable for BAME customers,
while stocking a wide range of shades for Caucasian skin tones. We took advice
from Dale Carnegie’s book “How to win Friends and Influence People” and made
sure to smile, use names, and clearly explain how adding more shades could be
in their interest.
Unfortunately, after several unproductive
phone calls with head offices of these stores (following referral by in-store
employees), we came to realise that this could be a very long process, and decided
to focus our attention on the on-campus Chemist. In meeting with the Chemist, we
highlighted the issue of lack of inclusivity in the makeup shades available
within the shop and pointed out that this did not align with Warwick’s
commitment to diversity. We waited after
sharing the problem, allowing for him to fill the silence with an expression of
agreement and desire to do what he could to bring about change. We then
provided examples of more inclusive brands to contact to provide makeup stands.
We exchanged contacts and emailed to-and-fro throughout the term, discussing
difficulties he was having with the store’s suppliers. His agreement to keep us
updated seemed to have invoked the desire to be consistent with this resolve to
improve the range of shades available and eventually a preliminary more
inclusive line of shades was introduced to the store. Upon receiving our
feed-back he acknowledged that the brand of more inclusive makeup was of a
lower standard than others sold in the store e.g. Bourjois, and committed to
seeking to introduce a higher quality and more well-known brand such as Sleek.
More recently, we took part in a student
radio show in order to raise awareness of our project, the issue of inclusivity
and diversity more generally and to empower others to seek to make similar changes
in their own local community. We are also looking into the possibility of having
an article written by a Warwick alumni and journalist for the Sunday Times so
keep your eyes peeled!
Also, our radio interview will be uploaded soon so watch this space...
Also, our radio interview will be uploaded soon so watch this space...
Research Justifications
Landscaping
– a.k.a. pre-persuasion, structuring the situation
in a way that made the Chemist more likely to be positively receptive to our
proposition (Pratkanis & Aronson, 2001). This was achieved by beginning the
conversation by pointing out the lack of makeup for our shades (Divya and
Debbie).
Negativity
effect – our emphasis on the absence of available
shades was a deliberate choice to create impact on the chemist’s evaluation of
there not being provision for non-white students. This is supported by work by
Hodges (1974), who found that negative information has a greater impact than
positive information on individuals’ evaluations of others after subjects were
provided with personality descriptors of people to evaluate.
Story-telling – this is providing a causal framework for evidence/facts. We
shared the fact that there was a lack of diversity of makeup to the chemist through
the framework of personal experience. Deborah and Divya drew attention to the
likely lack of awareness/complaint made to him due to people of colour having low
expectations and not recognizing our entitlement to visibility and inclusion in
shade availability on campus simply accepting the need to
travel further to find affordable makeup in our shades.
Source
credibility and similarity altercast – we had carried
our research prior to speaking to the chemist and were of the in-group (Abrams,
Wetherell, Cochrane, Hogg and Turner, 1990) both of BAME students who were
disadvantaged, and BAME individuals generally (like the chemist himself). This
may have been influential as Berscheid (1966) found that similarity between the
target and the influencer was effective in increasing influence if the
similarity was relevant to the issue being promoted.
Public
audience - we asked what the chemist could do about
the lack of inclusive makeup when other customers and an employee were present
in the store and observing our interaction with him. This was to apply findings
by Rind and Benjamin (1994) who found that male shoppers who asked to purchase
raffle tickets to support a nonprofit purchased almost twice as many tickets
when with a female companion than when alone.
Using
imagery to sell the idea – we emphasized the amount
of business that would be garnered by an increase in BAME customers seeking
affordable makeup if their shades were provided. This is supported by findings
by Gregory, Cialdini and Carpenter (1982) who found that customers asked to
imagine the benefits of personally having cable television and their potential
enjoyment of it were 2 and a half times more likely to purchase a subscription
from door to door salesmen than if they were merely informed of its benefits.
To summarise...
By Debbie, Divya and Elizabeth
References
Abrams, D., Wetherell, M., Cochrane, S., Hogg, M. A., & Turner,
J. C. (1990). Knowing what to think by knowing who you are: Self‐categorization
and the nature of norm formation, conformity and group polarization. British
Journal of Social Psychology, 29(2), 97-119.
Berscheid, E. (1966). Opinion change and communicator-communicatee
similarity and dissimilarity. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 4(6), 670.
Gregory, W. L., Cialdini, R. B., & Carpenter, K. M. (1982).
Self-relevant scenarios as mediators of likelihood estimates and compliance:
Does imagining make it so?. Journal of personality and social
psychology, 43(1), 89.
Hodges, B. H. (1974). Effect of valence on relative weighting in
impression formation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 30(3),
378.
Pratkanis, A. R., & Aronson, E. (2001). Age of
propaganda: The everyday use and abuse of persuasion. Macmillan.
Rind, B., & Benjamin, D. (1994). Effects of public image
concerns and self-image on compliance. The Journal of Social Psychology, 134(1),
19-25.
In video:
Malhotra, D., & Bazerman, M. H. (2008). Negotiation
genius: How to overcome obstacles and achieve brilliant results at the
bargaining table and beyond. Bantam.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.