I haven’t been riding my motorcycle for very long. Nor have I ever owned or even ridden on a Harley Davidson brand motorcycle. But that really doesn’t matter, I’m not here to talk about what bikes I have or have not sat my butt upon. I’m here to talk about marketing.
Even though I’ve never owned a Harley, they, and more interestingly, their riders, have a particular image they convey to me even as a ‘young’ rider. I want to talk a little about Harley marketing and then compare that to church marketing.
Harley Marketing
Harley Davidson motorcycles are, relative to the rest of the market, very expensive to purchase. They also have relatively expensive peripherals and accessories. Upon walking into a Harley Davidson dealership you’re struck with the fact that you can’t purchase any accessory for under $100. It’s truly an oddity.
Remember back in the late 80s when every kid had to own a pair of Nike Air Jordans? At the time they were ridiculously expensive for a pair of shoes. But they weren’t expensive because of their superior craftsmanship or their (supposed) ability to make white people jump higher. They were expensive because of the brand.
Now, I’m sure they were well made and perhaps there was some sort of psycho-somatic response in the wearer which resulted in him getting an added inch of air, but by and large they were just a shoe with the name “Nike Air Jordan” on them.
Today, men don’t blow cash on sneakers, they blow it on other things like boats, cars and motorcycles. But not just any motorcycle. It has to be a Harley. Why? Why are Harley’s ‘better’? What in them warrants the extra $5,000+ on the price tag?
Little, if anything. One could perhaps argue that they have more chrome, or they “look better” but I don’t buy into either argument. I think instead that Harley’s cost the amount of money they do because they carry a certain image. Turns out that Harley’s aren’t that much more expensive than other bikes but still are viewed as having a different image. But not just any image, a MACHO image.
Don’t believe me? I’m not the only one who thinks this way. Consider this quote from another bike rider. This author doesn’t own a Harley but has a close friend who does:
Harley Davidson is an example of exceptional marketing to the culture and values of aging baby boomers. A friend of mine, who owns a “Harley” and participates in some of the gatherings offered by the local dealership, describes the events as “costume parties for Hell’s Angels wannabes and those who dream about wilder days (theirs or somebody else’s).” Harley Davidson sells more than motorcycles, accessories, and apparel; they market an image. (From: Pursuing the Mission of God pg.5)
Harley Davidson has done exceedingly well at marketing to their target audience: men who want to appear macho. But churches have a much more difficult task because it doesn’t have just one target audience, it has multiple target audiences.
Church Marketing
For churches across America the market is changing. The group of people which the church desires to reach is growing increasingly diverse. In all the ways that matter today’s “church market” is completely different from the market even 20 years ago.
From my vantage point there seem to be at least two kinds of churches: The ones who try to market to all groups of people and the ones who try to market to only one group of people.
The first group, I think, is fooling themselves. A church can’t reach every possible demographic. There’s just no way to adequately reach out and effectively share the gospel to this vast array of people and backgrounds. The old axiom: “You can’t please everybody” is monumentally true. But even more than “pleasing” people you realistically can’t reach everyone with the gospel either.
The second group of churches, in my view, is correct. I think that as a result of our ever-diversifying culture we will see an ever-diversifying number of churches too. For example, the job market continues to grow more specialized. In the same way, churches will grow more specialized as well. Well, they’ll grow more specialized or they’ll die.
I predict that in the coming 20 years we will see more churches who cater to senior adults (especially with the growing number of baby boomers who are reaching retirement age.) We will also see more churches who focus on ministry to young people, and still more churches who focus on ministering to those for whom English is a second language. This trend, it seems to me, is inescapable.
What role will your church play in the coming decades? Will it be effective in reaching out to the lost and dying world around it or will it, in an attempt to please everyone, die a slow death, eventually closing its doors for good?
My challenge for the churches of today is to understand two things: 1) who your target audience is and 2) how to reach them in every way possible.
