Traditional marketing playbooks are not designed for geopolitical tensions, rising consumer activism and uneven economic pressure-driven environments that most Middle East marketers are operating in today. These are unpredictable environments where sentiments can shift quickly and have immediate commercial effects. In such scenarios, most marketers instinctively reduce their marketing spend or completely halt their activities.
However, a new report published by FAST Ventures, ‘The Resilience Playbook: How Brands Win in Uncertain Markets’, finds that the data consistently points in a different direction altogether. Drawing from cases over the decades, it says that brands that maintain a presence during downturns tend to recover faster, retain more market share and emerge in a stronger competitive position compared to brands that went quiet during the same period. The key to marketing during crisis is not to stop but instead adapt to the change.
Need for adaptability during crisis
In a region like MENA, economic conditions are not the only factors that shape consumer behaviour, which makes adaptation more crucial. Cultural and political contexts equally influence and affect consumers’ actions.
72 per cent of consumers in Saudi Arabia and 52 per cent in the UAE say they actively avoid brands that they believe are aligned with one side of a geopolitical issue, as per the YouGov data cited by the report. This sentiment has already caused commercial impact, with Starbucks reporting a 70 per cent decline and Western beverage brands recording a 7 per cent drop in sales across the Middle East market in 2023 and 2024. These shifts reflect a market that is quick to fluctuate, where demand shifts on the basis of brand perception faster than traditional marketing planning cycles.
The report also highlights the diversity in the market when affected by a crisis. One of its key observations is that crisis impact is often not uniform. The crisis first affects the travel and hospitality sectors, leading to a sharp decline in demand, while everyday consumer categories like FMCG maintain consistent sales. The latter faces a different challenge in terms of maintaining relevance and tone without appearing disconnected from reality. Similarly, there’s a disparity in income pressure, where some consumers face salary reduction while others maintain full spending power. In such circumstances, blanket responses are ineffective; instead, brands should assess their messaging, media and investment against what different audiences are experiencing.
The cost of going silent vs being present
Periods of disruption also tend to swing in the competition’s favour. According to the report, when consumers are pushed to reconsider their choices, they don’t always return to their previous habits after making a change. It draws this finding based on the Jordan-based Matrix Cola case, where it recorded a 200 per cent increase in sales and then maintained this demand after the initial boycott period when the initially value-based switch turned into a consumer preference. This shows how brands can gain a competitive advantage and market share during a crisis by being present, visible and credible.
The report cites several research points to support the importance of maintaining a brand presence. McGraw-Hill supports this conclusion with data which shows that companies that maintain or increase marketing investment during the 1981-1982 recession achieved 256 per cent higher than those that cut back on spending. Similarly, Harvard Business Review also reported that 80 per cent of companies that reduced their marketing spend during the economic downturns failed to recover their pre-recession performance within three years of the slump ending.
From a market share perspective, Ehren-Bass Institute data suggests that going completely dark leads to a steady erosion of market share, showing a loss of 10 per cent after one year and nearly 28 per cent after the three-year mark. The recovery period in this case is longer than the period of silence itself.
Brands marketing during this time period gain another advantage: increased efficiency. Analytics Partners found that media costs were lowered during this period due to reduced competition. This allowed brands to optimise their ad spend with the same budget going an extra mile now.
The report also highlights more recent data from COVID-19 in the region that supplements these figures. During the downturn caused by the pandemic, 87 per cent of the brands in the UAE experimented with new approaches, while 89 per cent stepped up their use of marketing technology. The decline in CPMs and changing consumption patterns helped improve ROAS for brands that adapted quickly and maintained online activity. Food delivery companies in the Gulf recorded gains as they grew by 61 per cent between 2019 and 2020, with Saudi Arabia alone recording a growth of 173 per cent. This shows how brands that adapted and stayed present during the crisis come out stronger.
The four ‘A’ framework
The biggest differentiator of high-performing brands during these periods is how they adjust their approach. FAST Ventures also shared a companion guide that outlines a four-phase framework – assess, adapt, act and accelerate – to help marketers adjust and adapt to the situation in real time.
The first phase, Assess, focuses on control. This includes auditing live campaigns, reviewing automated content and checking media placements to see if they fit within the current reality and avoid them appearing alongside sensitive content. It also involves defining a minimum investment floor – the baseline level of activity that is protected regardless of external pressure.
The second phase, Adapt, centres on adjusting messaging and reallocating spend. The report advises moving away from crisis-themed promotions, celebratory and aspirational creatives to content that is useful, relevant or offering genuine support or practical help. It also suggests cutting down on broad programmatic placements and moving budgets towards owned channels that allow for greater contextual control, such as CRM, search and social.
To be prepared in advance, one of the report’s key suggestions is to map budget, channel mix and messaging for three scenarios: Base case, stress case and recovery.
The third phase is one which most brands find the hardest: Act. While the instinct to pause communications is strong, evidence suggests that staying present and showing up in a way that is appropriate is important.
The report highlights four key steps: maintaining the brand’s presence, creating content that helps, monitoring sentiment continuously and protecting brand safety. This includes keeping activity running at the minimum floor set, creating useful content and tracking what people are saying about the brand, category and competitors on a weekly basis. Lastly, checking if ads are appearing against harmful or sensitive online content.
The last phase, Accelerate, focuses on the recovery. Brands that stayed visible fare better at this stage with intact audience relationships, stronger brand memory and higher share of voice. Data from the running brand campaigns provide early indicators of recovery – about 4 to 8 weeks before revenue recovery. Brands can then move early before competitors and benefit from increasing investment before the market recovers and ahead of competitors, capturing share of voice while media costs still remain low. As a final step, the report recommends documenting information and data learned to navigate the next crisis better.
Bottom line
The decision to maintain marketing during a crisis is not about short-term conversions; instead, it builds on protection of the brand’s long-term competitive position.
Brands that cut marketing spends completely and go silent are not just cutting costs, but they’re also doing away with brand memory, visibility and relevance. These assets are cheaper to maintain than rebuilding them in the long run. In contrast, brands that remain present and adapt to the reality are more likely to retain trust and capture demand once conditions stabilise.
The report shares that resilience is less about reacting to a single crisis and more about building the capability to respond continuously. The challenge for brands is not about deciding whether to act but how quickly they can adapt.
