Why brands should give a F*ck about trends

The biggest question I’ve been asked this year is: should brands give a f*ck about trends anymore? Trend-jacking has been celebrated as a golden ticket for brands to drive talkability and fame. Look at brands like Lidl, which time and again have successfully hacked the trend cycle. The Lidl merch range, for instance, became a cultural phenomenon – making waves at festivals and even turning into a streetwear staple. But what's really happened to the trend cycle? Are trends, as we’ve known them, really dead?

The word "trend" is a contentious one. Its meaning and impact have shifted dramatically over time. Decades ago, trends used to last for five-ten years. They were earned, bubbling up from subcultures before making their way into the mainstream. These trends had staying power because they were authentic and grounded in cultural movements that resonated deeply with people. Today, while some macro trends like Gen Z reviving avocado-coloured bathrooms survive the test of time, others fade quickly.

Micro-trends vs. Macro Impact

Trends are still relevant, but they have evolved. Micro-trends are now playing a bigger role in culture, and it’s hard for brands to keep up. Each week, we see new aesthetic shifts on TikTok and Instagram – think "blokecore," "weird girl aesthetic," or "mermaidcore." These trends explode overnight, captivating niche communities, but they often vanish just as quickly.

This summer, pop icons like Charli XCX, Chappell Roan, and Sabrina Carpenter ruled the trend cycle, and everyone has been talking about how impossible it is for brands to keep up. There’s a point of view that these trends haven’t woven themselves into culture forever like past moments and thus hold less cultural currency, but is this true? Should brands listen to this, sack trends off, and focus on something deeper and more lasting?

I have a confession: BRAT was my summer. As a queer person, I connected deeply with its raw, unfiltered aesthetic, and let's be honest, the album is an absolute masterclass in synthy, club pop. The energy of BRAT felt liberating – euphoric even. But it wasn’t just because it spoke to me personally; I loved it because it was a masterclass in curating a micro-trend and pushing it into the mainstream.

Brands, listen up – here’s how BRAT rose to such success:

Charli XCX prioritised fans, not the fame
Instead of focusing on massive shows, Charli XCX went back to her roots, performing intimate gigs at places like Dalston Superstore for her core fanbase. This authenticity sparked a wildfire on TikTok, where fans' reactions quickly took the BRAT movement viral. Brands need to take note – it was the connection to a passionate community that propelled BRAT into wider consciousness, not a marketing push for mainstream fame.

She fuelled the fire with viral moments
Charli’s Boiler Room set wasn’t just a performance – it was a cultural moment that spread across TikTok, fuelling the movement. The underground-meets-mainstream vibe struck a chord, expanding BRAT’s reach. For brands, it’s about creating moments that resonate with a core audience, fuelling organic growth rather than chasing virality for virality’s sake.

She amplified with a game-changing co-sign
Then came Charli’s "Kamala Harris is BRAT" post on X. It didn’t need millions of likes – just around 300k – but it hit a cultural nerve. Charli gave Kamala Harris credibility, turning BRAT from a micro-trend into a movement while amplifying Harris’s presidential campaign launch.

Kamala Harris didn’t just use BRAT branding to raise awareness. Charli gave her the credibility and permission to do it. The connection was built on trust, shared cultural understanding, and authenticity. Both parties benefited, and the trend transformed into a macro movement.

Where brands went wrong and how can they learn from this?

Then, the brands waded in. "BRAT Summer" was declared over within a week, even by Charli herself. But here's the thing – the subcommunity of die-hard fans never stopped pushing it forward. Charli knows this. She’s not chasing mainstream relevance – her "SWEAT" tour is sold out, and the footage is still going viral, but only within the communities it was meant to serve. BRAT, like many micro-trends, thrived in the mainstream and now comfortably exists where it belongs – within its core community.

It’s time brands re-evaluate their relationship with trends. Too often, they jump in when something goes mainstream, failing to understand the deeper cultural roots that make these trends meaningful to their communities. Worse still, they don’t recognise the negative impact this commercialisation can have on the very people who created the trend in the first place. For brands, trends shouldn’t be a quick sales tactic or a means for shallow engagement.

Instead, brands should ask themselves – how can we add value to these spaces? How can we engage with communities and understand what micro-trends stand for? Authenticity is key. Brands must learn to show up meaningfully, do right by these communities, and build genuine connections. Only then can they become part of the cultural conversation in a way that lasts.

So, should brands give a f*ck about trends?
Yes – but brands must quickly re-evaluate their relationship with them. The constant mirroring of culture without deeper understanding is harmful to both brands and communities. In fact, according to Sprout Social’s 2024 Index Report, 57% of people don’t want to see branded content in their feeds anymore. The message is clear – brands can’t ride the wave of trends without truly grasping the culture behind them. It’s time to rethink how they engage with the cultural moments they wish to be part of.

Melo Meacher-Jones, Head of Social & Influence, Accenture Song