Do Marketers Want Active Loyalists or Passive Loyalists?

Whether consumers are either emotionally attached to a brand or are just too plain lazy to switch to another brand, the term loyal is something that marketers strive for. However, what is it that they actually want? Do they want active loyalists or passive loyalists?

A perfect outcome in the realm of launching a brand, creating brand identity and equity, marketers want a loyal band of followers that will stick with their brand. I was in CVS the other day with my Father getting allergy symptom relief. We walked over and the brand Claritin was sitting next to the CVS brand. The only difference between the two? The CVS brand was about $5 cheaper. Surprisingly, my Father chose the Claritin. Perfect example of an active loyalist. My Father has used Claritin for years and has an emotional connection towards it, so he'll keep buying the Claritin instead of the cheaper version.

Obviously marketers dream of their brands gaining followers who love the product, but the term loyal does not always mean that is the case. A passive loyalist uses the product just because it's easy and switching brands is too difficult. My boyfriend's cell phone carrier is Sprint, which leads to frequent lost calls and text messages that don't send. He could easily switch carriers, but it is a hassle. So, he stays with Sprint.

Yes, it is true that active loyalists are expected to speak about the brand through word-of-mouth to friends, family or co-workers. They try to influence the purchase of the brand they're loyal too, but if they try to influence others, does that mean they are easily influenced? If they are easily influenced then maybe there could be a time that the active loyalist is persuaded to pursue another brand. Vice versa, the passive loyalist is lazy in terms that they'll never switch brands. So, back to the original question I asked at the beginning; Do marketers prefer active or loyalists?