Abercrombie & Fitch Employment Trends:
Discrimination vs. Self-Selection
Made famous by its quintessentially American collegiate
style and seemingly flawless models, Abercrombie & Fitch’s brand imaging is
one of the strongest and most distinguished in the market.
In fact, the personality of this brand is so deep set, it
poses the question, is it down to discrimination or self-selection that
in-store staff all seem to encompass the look of the archetypal A&F model?By undertaking a series of (possibly not so) subtle observations on a random sample of employees at Saville Row’s Abercrombie & Fitch store, I was able to confirm the fundamental aspect of my theory; they were all tall, slender and very attractive…
In order to detect any differentiation between looks of Hollister and A&F staff, I repeated the observational task on a smaller scale. Their depiction of the ‘perfect Hollister girl’ was evident throughout London’s store and Reading’s recently unveiled Hollister store, with features such as hair, shape and facial structure a noticeably recurring factor.
The results really speak for themselves…
A&F / Hollister
|
Gender
|
Approx.
Height
|
Approx.
Dress size
|
Approx.
Age
|
Aesthetic
Rank /10
|
|
1.
|
A&F
|
Male
|
6’3’’
|
M
|
20
|
9
|
2.
|
A&F
|
Female
|
5’6’’
|
S / M
|
19/20
|
8/9
|
3.
|
A&F
|
Female
|
5’5’’
|
S
|
19/20
|
7/8
|
4.
|
A&F
|
Female
|
5’5’’
|
S
|
21
|
7
|
5.
|
A&F
|
Male
|
6’1’’
|
M
|
21
|
8
|
6.
|
A&F
|
Male
|
6’3’’
|
M / L
|
22
|
9
|
7.
|
A&F
|
Female
|
5’9’’
|
XS / S
|
22
|
9
|
8.
|
A&F
|
Male
|
6’0’’
|
M
|
23
|
8
|
9.
|
A&F
|
Male
|
5’9’’
|
M
|
22
|
8
|
10.
|
A&F
|
Female
|
6’0’’
|
XS
|
21
|
8
|
11.
|
A&F
|
Male
|
6’2’’
|
M
|
19
|
8
|
12.
|
A&F
|
Female
|
5’8’’
|
S
|
20
|
7
|
13.
|
A&F
|
Female
|
5’6’’
|
XS
|
21
|
9
|
14.
|
A&F
|
Male
|
6’1’’
|
M / L
|
25
|
8
|
15.
|
A&F
|
Male
|
6’0’’
|
M / L
|
20
|
9
|
16.
|
Hollister
|
Female
|
5’7’’
|
S
|
24
|
8
|
17.
|
Hollister
|
Female
|
5’3’’
|
XS / S
|
17
|
9
|
18.
|
Hollister
|
Female
|
5’6’’
|
S
|
19
|
7
|
19.
|
Hollister
|
Male
|
6’2’’
|
M
|
20
|
9
|
20.
|
Hollister
|
Male
|
6’0’’
|
M / L
|
18
|
8
|
The answer as to whether self-selection is the key factor to
the attractive staffing trend, was in the results from the public research. A
group of 35 sixth formers were asked to anonymously give their size and height,
and mark on a scale how likely they were, given that they were available to
work, to apply for a job at Hollister or Abercrombie & Fitch…
The results showed little sign of a correlation between
size, height and their decision, but it became apparent that self-selection did
exist in the situation as over half the girls and just under a quarter of the
boys said they would not apply, purely because they did not believe they fitted
the ‘image policy’ or the ‘typical mould’.
When asked to leave their reasoning for their position on
the scale, those who said they would be likely explained that, if they needed a
job, they would apply to as many places as possible. However, the people who
dashed anywhere around ‘not at all’ and ‘unlikely’ expressed a similar concern.
I quote, “they look for a certain image”, “my appearance rather than my ability
would be judged”, “wouldn’t fit the ‘mould’”, “prejudiced towards unattractive
people” and, my personal favourite, “I find their business practices abhorrent,
they are satirical misfits with delusions of how cool they are”…
This is clearly a rather controversial topic but it’s also
one that is very interesting. How is it that A&F are so blasé about it but
seem to get away with it all the time? Is the evident self-selection in the
small scale sample as prominent in a large scale sample? And how have
Abercrombie & Fitch made such a strong brand image in their employees
without being discriminating in the first place?...
