There is a very specific kind of brand failure that only becomes visible in hindsight. Not the catastrophic kind — a PR crisis, a product recall, a founder scandal. The slow kind: the brand that spent three years chasing Gen-Z energy, borrowed the language, hired the TikTok team, posted the memes — and ended up neither culturally relevant nor true to itself. The audience it was trying to attract did not believe it. The audience it already had felt slightly abandoned. And the marketing that was supposed to feel fresh just felt desperate.

Contrast that with brands that have managed the same challenge without this outcome. Brands that speak fluently in cultural formats their original audience never used — and do it in a way that feels earned rather than performed. The difference between these two outcomes is not spend, not platform choice, and not how fast the social team moves. It is something more structural: whether the brand’s engagement with Gen-Z culture is rooted in something real about who the brand actually is, or whether it is costume.

This essay is a case-study tour of both. The giants that stayed true and the new names setting the pace — and crucially, the brands that tried and failed, and what they got wrong.

“Gen-Z does not hate brands. They hate brands that pretend. The brands winning right now have figured out how to be genuinely themselves in a format Gen-Z has made their own.”

The Rooted Giants — Old Names, New Fluency

These are the brands with decades of identity behind them. The ones where “going Gen-Z” carries real risk — getting it wrong would feel like watching a parent try to use slang. And yet each of these has navigated that transition without the cringe landing. The reason, in every case, is that they did not perform the identity shift. They found the genuine overlap between who they already were and what this generation responds to.

Rooted Giant
Nike — The Athlete’s Voice, Not the Brand’s
Earned Fluency

Nike’s product has not changed its fundamental proposition in decades: elite athletic performance, the psychology of winning, the belief that every body is an athlete’s body. What has changed is who speaks that proposition and how. Nike did not become a Gen-Z brand by sounding Gen-Z. It became one by platforming Gen-Z athletes, creators, and communities as the voice — while staying almost entirely out of the way of the cultural conversation itself.
The collaboration strategy shifted from legacy athlete endorsements (Federer, LeBron in mainstream brand campaigns) to a dense web of sport-adjacent creator partnerships — skaters, underground runners, NFZ athletes, women in sports that Nike was not historically associated with. Their TikTok presence is largely athlete-generated content, not brand-produced content. The brand comments on culture by choosing who to platform rather than by speaking directly.
Nike’s core identity — the belief that athletic aspiration is universal — is genuinely aligned with Gen-Z’s democratised definition of sport and body. The brand did not have to stretch its values to reach this audience. It had to find the right delivery mechanism. Creator-led content is that mechanism: the brand voice stays consistent, but the channel through which it reaches culture becomes the athlete’s authentic context rather than a production set.
The transfer lesson: Your brand does not have to become a creator. It has to find the creators whose authentic context is the right vehicle for what you already believe. Platforming is not the same as performing. Know the difference.

Rooted Giant
Heinz — The Accidental Meme That Became Strategy
Authentic Luck, Then Skill

Heinz did not engineer its Gen-Z moment — it discovered it. User-generated content, unsolicited memes, and organic cultural references to “a little Heinz on top” had been circulating for years before the brand noticed and began leaning into them deliberately. What makes Heinz interesting is what happened next: rather than professionalising the chaos, they kept it chaotic. The brand learned to speak meme by studying what people were already doing with the brand — and amplifying it rather than replacing it with something polished.
The “Draw Ketchup” campaign — asking people worldwide to draw ketchup without naming the brand — produced 95% Heinz-shaped bottles. The “Heinz Tattoo” campaign gathered real tattoo fans who had already inked themselves. “Ketchup Insurance” and the Heinz-EDM festival ad played completely straight, which is exactly what made them funny. They committed to the absurdity rather than explaining it.
The rule Heinz found: the more earnestly a 150-year-old condiment brand commits to something absurd, the funnier it is. They did not have to be self-aware in the performed way (“look at us, a legacy brand doing memes”). The product’s cultural ubiquity was already the joke. They just had to show up seriously. That restraint — taking the campaign premise at face value — is harder to execute than it looks and is the exact thing that fails when brands overthink it.
The transfer lesson: If your audience is already making content around your brand, that is primary research on what they find interesting about you. Start there. Do not hire an agency to invent a new angle when the angle already exists in organic UGC.

Rooted Giant
Lego — Nostalgia as Permission, Not Strategy
Cross-Generational by Design

Lego’s Gen-Z relevance is a case study in how a brand avoids being trapped by nostalgia while still using it as a doorway. The insight Lego operates on: nostalgia is not an end state — it is a permission slip. Millennials who grew up with Lego now have purchasing power. Gen-Z inherits the cultural reference and adds their own layer to it — Lego builds for Minecraft aesthetics, for adult creator communities, for licensed collaborations with properties that are generationally current (Star Wars, Harry Potter, Stranger Things) rather than generationally past.
Adult Fan of LEGO (AFOL) content has been systematically integrated into the brand’s communications — not as a niche interest, but as a cultural signal that Lego is serious creative infrastructure, not just a children’s toy. The Ideas platform allows community members to design sets that get officially produced. Lego’s social content regularly features adult builders producing content so extraordinary it goes viral without any brand amplification required.
Lego’s product is genuinely generationally neutral — building with interlocking pieces is not age-limited. The brand did not have to reposition itself to be relevant to Gen-Z. It had to stop pretending the product was only for children. That was a brand decision, not a product one — and it unlocked a creative community that now does most of the brand’s cultural work for free.
The transfer lesson: Check whether your Gen-Z limitation is real or assumed. Many brands think they need to reposition for younger audiences when they actually just need to stop excluding them in their communications. Who are you inadvertently leaving out of the conversation?

The Rising Superpowers — New Playbooks, New Rules

These brands did not have to adapt to Gen-Z culture. They were built inside it. Their playbooks are different — and the lessons they offer are equally different, because what they demonstrate is what it looks like when brand identity and cultural fluency are designed together from the start rather than retrofitted onto each other.

Rising Superpower
Duolingo — The Mascot That Became a Character
Culture-First Brand

Duolingo’s social media strategy is one of the most discussed in marketing right now — and one of the most misunderstood. The brand gave the green owl mascot Duo a distinct personality (mildly threatening, oddly devoted, darkly funny about language learning guilt) and let the social team run it with almost no corporate guardrails. What sounds like a brand decision is actually a content decision: the creative team was given latitude to respond to culture in real time, in character, without every post requiring approval from someone who is not online at 11pm when the moment is happening.
The Duo character joined trending memes not by commenting on them but by inserting itself as a participant. When TikTok trends emerged around parasocial relationships, stalking jokes, or unhinged mascot energy, Duo was already there — not as a brand observing the trend but as a character living it. The account responded to users, participated in comment sections, and built a distinctly odd relationship with a following that found the bit genuinely funny rather than performatively wacky.
The key variable is speed and autonomy. When a brand requires four approvals before responding to a meme, the meme is already dead. Duolingo’s social success is partly creative but mostly structural: a team with real trust, a clear character to inhabit, and the mandate to move in real time. The character is the guardrail — not the approval process.
The transfer lesson: If you want cultural speed, the problem is usually organisational, not creative. How many people need to approve a TikTok response before it goes out? If the answer is more than two, you will always be late to every cultural moment that matters.

Rising Superpower
Gymshark — The Community That Built the Brand
Community-First Growth

Gymshark’s origin story has been told often enough that it risks becoming brand mythology — founded in a garage, grew through influencer seeding before influencer seeding was a strategy. What is less discussed is the structural decision that made it work: Gymshark did not treat creators as distribution channels. It treated them as co-owners of the brand identity. Athletes signed to Gymshark were not given scripts — they were given product and the freedom to integrate it into their genuine context.
The Gymshark 66 challenge (66 days to change your life, linked to habit formation research) generated millions of UGC posts because it was grounded in something real — not a discount code or a hashtag for its own sake. Gymshark events (pop-ups, meetups, the Gymshark World Tour) treated community in-person as seriously as community online. The brand invests in the community’s relationship with each other, not just the community’s relationship with the brand.
Gen-Z is deeply sceptical of brands that claim community but operate it as a loyalty programme. Gymshark built something that functions like an actual community — members support each other, create content for each other, identify with the values of the space rather than with the product. The product is the entry point, not the community itself.
The transfer lesson: Community is not a content calendar. It is not a Discord server you open and abandon. It is the sustained investment in people connecting with each other around a shared interest that your brand happens to sit at the centre of. If your community collapses without your content, you have an audience, not a community.

Rising Superpower
Liquid Death — The Brand That Made Water Edgy
Identity as the Product

Liquid Death sells canned water. The product is not meaningfully different from any other water product. The entire brand is the identity — heavy metal aesthetic, deliberately outrageous naming conventions (“Murder Your Thirst”), celebrity partnerships chosen for cultural incongruity rather than demographic match, and marketing that seems to be for an extreme sports energy drink but is actually for the most mundane beverage imaginable. The joke is the gap between the packaging and the contents — and the joke is genuinely funny to anyone who notices it.
Liquid Death’s marketing does not promote hydration benefits. It promotes belonging to the joke. Collaborations with Tony Hawk, Martha Stewart, and various metal bands are chosen specifically because the combinations are surprising — and surprise is the currency that gets shared. Their Super Bowl adjacent content never actually ran as an ad — it was produced as an ad that was “too extreme” to air, which generated far more coverage than a real Super Bowl spot would have for the same budget.
Gen-Z’s relationship with irony and meta-awareness means that a brand that is fully in on the joke with you is more trusted than one that is earnestly trying to sell you something. Liquid Death does not pretend the water is anything other than water. It just makes the experience of choosing that water feel like a cultural decision. For a generation that curates identity through consumption choices, that is a viable and durable brand position.
The transfer lesson: If your product is commoditised, the brand is the differentiation — not the product features. Liquid Death is not selling water. It is selling a point of view. What is your product’s point of view, stated in a way that someone would choose to wear on a t-shirt?

Where It Goes Wrong — The Cringe Cases

These are harder to write about, because naming brands that failed at this is unfair to marketing teams that were trying something genuinely difficult. But the patterns are instructive enough that they need naming.

What Not to Do
The Cringe Patterns — Why Some Attempts Backfire
Structural Failures

Three distinct failure modes appear consistently across brands that have tried and failed to connect with Gen-Z culture. They are structural, not executional — meaning they are not fixed by better copy or a different platform. They are fixed by different decisions higher up in the brand strategy.
Pattern 1 — The Trend Chaser: A brand with no inherent connection to a format or meme adopts it purely because it was trending that week. The shelf life of a trend by the time a brand’s approval process has cleared is usually zero. The content lands after the moment has passed and feels like an explanation of a joke rather than the joke. The audience does not laugh — it cringes. Example archetype: the financial services company that referenced “no cap” in a tweet in 2022, three years after the phrase peaked.

Pattern 2 — The Performer: A brand that adopts the aesthetic of Gen-Z authenticity without the actual transparency that defines it. Behind-the-scenes content that is clearly staged. “Real talk” posts that have been through six approval rounds and read like a press release with emojis. The brand is trying to appear like it has no mask while wearing a more expensive mask. Gen-Z, which grew up watching influencer culture become commercialised in real time, has exceptional ability to detect this.

Pattern 3 — The Value Wash: A brand that borrows Gen-Z’s values language — sustainability, mental health, inclusivity — without making those values structural in the actual business. A brand that posts for Pride and simultaneously makes procurement decisions that contradict it. That does not go unnoticed by a generation that expects consistency between stated values and actual behaviour. The gap is always found, always shared, and always more damaging than if the brand had said nothing at all.

None of these patterns work. Each one fails for the same underlying reason: the brand is asking Gen-Z to believe something that is not true. That Gen-Z is the primary audience for a format the brand stumbled into. That the brand is genuinely unfiltered. That the brand’s values are structurally real. When the belief is not earned, the communication is read as manipulation — and manipulation from a brand with the resources to know better is not forgiven.
The transfer lesson: Before any Gen-Z-facing communication, ask one question: “Would this feel different if a 22-year-old who works here saw it?” If the answer is “yes, it would feel embarrassing,” trust that instinct. The embarrassment is a signal that the communication is performing rather than being.

The Framework — What Actually Transfers

The Transfer Test
Before your brand tries anything in this territory — run it through here
1
Find the genuine overlap — not the manufactured one
What does your brand genuinely share with Gen-Z values? Not what you would like to share — what is actually structurally true. Nike’s overlap is athletic democratisation. Heinz’s overlap is cultural ubiquity and the permission to be absurd. Lego’s overlap is genuine creative latitude. If you cannot name a genuine overlap clearly in one sentence, you are not ready to borrow the language yet. Doing so without the foundation is the fastest route to cringe.

2
Let the format serve the idea — not the other way around
The failure mode is starting with “we should be on TikTok” or “we should do memes” and then finding content to justify the format. The winning pattern starts with an idea that is genuinely interesting and then asks what format would let it land fastest. Duolingo’s meme strategy works because the character has something to say. The format amplifies the idea; it is not a substitute for one.

3
Build structural speed before you need cultural speed
Cultural moments move in hours. Brand approvals move in days. If your governance structure cannot clear a response in under four hours, you will systematically miss every moment that matters in social. The solution is not to move faster — it is to establish trust frameworks in advance: a clear voice document, a character brief, pre-approved response categories, and a small team with real autonomy. Speed is an organisational problem, not a creative one.

4
Platform the community, do not perform for it
The brands winning longest are the ones investing in surfacing what their communities are already doing — not producing content that tries to represent that community from above. Gymshark’s best content is made by its athletes. Nike’s best content is made by the athletes it signs. Lego’s best content is made by AFOLs. The brand’s role is editorial curation and amplification, not production. When the community stops producing content worth surfacing, that is feedback about the community investment — not a signal to produce more brand content.

5
Make your values structural before you make them visible
This is the most uncomfortable one. Gen-Z does not reward stated values — it rewards demonstrated ones. If your brand’s sustainability commitment lives in a microsite and your packaging, supply chain, and sourcing tell a different story, the microsite will backfire. The sequence matters: make the real change first, then tell the story. Telling the story before making the change is not brand strategy. It is the fastest way to become a case study in greenwashing or purpose-washing.

What Transfers — and What Doesn’t

What Works
What actually transfers from these brands to yours

The specific voice of your brand deployed at cultural speed — not a different voice, yours, faster

Platforming the community’s content rather than replacing it with brand-produced content

Genuine transparency about what the product is and isn’t — no brand has ever lost by being more honest

Collaborations that create genuine surprise — not partnerships that match demographics, partnerships that create interesting contrasts

Committing fully to the creative premise — Heinz’s campaigns work because they are completely straight-faced about the absurdity. Half-commitment is worse than no commitment.

Structural autonomy for the social team — not oversight, trust frameworks that allow speed within the brand’s actual character

What Doesn’t
What to leave in the brief that you never execute

Trend adoption that requires explaining the trend to your approval chain before you can use it

Slang in contexts where it was written by someone who does not use it in their actual life

Value statements that are not structurally true — sustainability claims without supply chain evidence, inclusivity language without representation in leadership

Production-quality content posing as lo-fi authenticity — Gen-Z knows what a $50K “candid” shoot looks like

Meme formats used three weeks after peak — the gap between “this is trending” reaching the CMO and the campaign going live is almost always too long

Community-building that is actually a loyalty programme with a Discord attached — Gen-Z joins communities, not programmes

The Real Question Underneath All of This

The brands that navigate Gen-Z culture well are not the ones with the best social media teams. They are the ones that have done the harder work first: being genuinely clear about who they are, what they believe, and what is non-negotiably true about them — and then finding the cultural formats that let that truth surface fastest.

The Rooted Giants — Nike, Heinz, Lego — did not have to become different brands. They had to become more honest ones. More willing to show the edges of their identity that corporate communications had been smoothing off for years. The Rising Superpowers — Duolingo, Gymshark, Liquid Death — built identity and cultural fluency simultaneously because they never had to unlearn the performed version first.

The failure cases — the trend chasers, the performers, the value washers — all share one thing: they reached for Gen-Z engagement before they had done the identity work that makes engagement feel genuine. You can borrow the format without borrowing the credibility. You cannot borrow the credibility. You have to earn it — and the earning happens long before the first TikTok goes out.

“The question is not ‘how do we speak Gen-Z?’ The question is ‘what is genuinely true about us that Gen-Z would find interesting if we were honest about it?’ The answer to the second question is the content strategy.”
One final thought on authenticity: “Authenticity” has become a brand buzzword — which is ironic, since the performance of authenticity is exactly what Gen-Z finds least credible. The brands winning here are not working harder on their authenticity. They are working harder on knowing themselves — their actual values, their genuine limits, what they are actually willing to defend when it is inconvenient. That self-knowledge is what makes the communication feel real. The format is secondary. The foundation is everything.

Brand Voice
Want to pressure-test
your brand voice?
Book a free 15-minute call. Tell me how you currently talk, who you’re trying to reach, and where the gap feels widest. I’ll tell you which of these brand patterns is closest to what you’re working with — and where the quick wins are versus the structural work that needs to happen first.
Book a Brand Voice Call →
Follow on LinkedIn →

Brand & Business Brand Strategy Brand Voice Cultural Marketing Duolingo Gen-Z Marketing Gymshark Liquid Death Nike
💼
Follow for more on marketing, business & strategy
I write about what it actually takes to build a real point of view — no recycled tips, no engagement-bait contrarianism.
Follow on LinkedIn →
📞
Want a second pair of eyes on your positioning?
Book a free 15-minute call. We'll pressure-test your brand's positioning and story together.
Book a 1-on-1 Call →
📖
Read next: The Story of Estée Lauder: Grit, Glamour, and the Woman Who Made Beauty a Business
Brand Creation: Not Mr. Estée, Mrs. Estée Estée Lauder wasn’t born into luxury. Born Josephine Esther Mentzer in 1908 in Queens, New York, to…
Read the Essay →