iStock.com/Neal McNeil
March 12, 2025
Can Target Successfully Revive Its ‘Tarzhay’ Brand Image?
As part of a broader turnaround effort, Target is now zeroing in on improving its brand reputation, investing heavily in reviving its former “Tarzhay” image.
According to Forbes, the retail giant recently hosted a “Financial Community Meeting,” one wherein Target CEO Brian Cornell and senior execs outlined a plan to invest between $4 billion and $5 billion in stores, supply chain, and tech to drive — hopefully — $15 billion in sales growth over the next five years.
The plan relies heavily upon the revitalization of its former Tarzhay status as a purveyor of quality retail goods, a status which seems to have dissipated over the past few years.
“Our strategy is all about creating today’s Tarzahy, offering everyday discovery and delight for millions of families and ensuring Target is a consumer favorite for years to come,” Cornell stated.
As Walmart flourishes, attracting the wealthier consumer that used to be a Target mainstay, it remains to be seen if the red-and-white brand can successfully mount a reputational comeback.
“Of all the mass market retailers, our data shows that Target has lost the highest number of shoppers from stores to other channels such as Amazon,” GlobalData Managing Director and RetailWire BrainTrust member Neil Saunders wrote on LinkedIn.
From Target to Tarzhay: What’s Missing?
With Forbes senior contributor Pamela N. Danziger indicating that “innovative, value-focused products with an upscale vibe have been Tarzhay’s calling card,” it seems only logical that the company would redouble its investment on “newness, quality and relevance” concerning its product.
Between its strong private label sales (Good & Gather is set to become the first owned brand to reach $4 billion in value) and high-profile collabs (ranging from a food partnership with James Beard Award-winning chef Ann Kim to a beauty partnership with Ulta), Target appears to have pivoted toward increasing its credentials with cultured consumers.
DTC standout Warby Parker is set to open a handful of shop-in-shops inside of Targets that currently do not have a Target Optical on site, and a returning favorite, Champion, is launching a strategic partnership with Target that features over 500 items bearing the “Tarzhay flourish,” Danziger noted.
Target also announced plans to deepen its commitment to omnichannel, harnessing the power of AI to optimize search results and produce highly personalized and relevant product offerings to shoppers. Additionally, the Target Plus marketplace is slated to see the introduction of a swathe of new items from trending partners, including Daily Harvest, Peloton, and Honest Baby Clothing. With one-third of Target customers opening the app while shopping in store, the retailer also indicated it would be enhancing the stores-as-hub model and improving delivery times to satisfy an increasingly tech-savvy consumer.
Target’s Reputational Issues Persist, Stymying Efforts To Produce the Desired Tarzhay Rep
One major roadblock standing in the way of a complete revitalization of Target’s Tarzhay image is its continuing reputation problem, something Danziger described succinctly as the “elephant in the room.”
Following the public backlash over the company’s 2023 Pride Month offerings, Target’s corporate reputation score plummeted, reaching an all-time low of 60.9 points (out of 100) from a historic high of 76.9 mere months earlier in April. The reverse effect was observed after a pullback from LGBTQ during June’s pride month in 2024. Target’s handling of other politically sensitive issues, whether by taking a stance or avoiding one, has in general had a harmful impact on the company.
Stephen Hahn of RepTrak, a data-driven corporate reputation advisory firm, was cited by Forbes on the matter.
“You’re frustrating many of your most loyal customers. Target has always been known for good corporate citizenship. But evidence of flip-flopping on key social issues related to both LGBTQ and DEI has coincided with reputational decline,” Hahn said.
“What does Target need to do? It needs to be consistent in what it stands for. If it’s going to take a position, it must be all in and not swayed by politics and the movement of public opinion. Be true to your values. If you’re going to stand for a social issue, stand for it, don’t go into it half-heartedly, then back off,” he added.
Discussion Questions
Will Target successfully revive its “Tarzhay” brand image? What headwinds and tailwinds are most pertinent to the business case surrounding this subject?
What can Target do, if anything, to recapture the customers it lost as the brand suffered reputational damage?
What partnerships should Target pursue to increase its reach with millennials and members of Gen Z?
Poll
Loading …BrainTrust
Patricia Vekich Waldron
Contributing Editor, RetailWire; Founder and CEO, Vision First
Cathy Hotka
Principal, Cathy Hotka & Associates
Paula Rosenblum
Co-founder, RSR Research
Recent Discussions
More Discussions
How Can Retailers Crack the Gen Z ‘Riddle’?
Gen Z is becoming an increasingly important consumer demographic, but an elusive one to map. How…Does Bath & Body Works’ Scented Holiday Campaign Pass the Sniff Test?
Bath & Body Works is kicking off a new campaign with scent being at the fore…Which Tech Will Solve In-Store Inventory Woes?
Three major tech lineups are looking to solve retail inventory problems. Which is most suited?
If Target wants to get back on track it needs to improve store standards and start getting the basics right. Too many Target stores have lost their magic and are now more of a chore to visit than a pleasure. That’s a huge issue and it’s a barrier to growth. Once that’s done they can start injecting more pep into some of their own-brands which have become a little tired and uninspiring. On top of all of this, they need to have a much more compelling grocery strategy that helps drive footfall and is not merely a recipient of footfall that happens to come in for other things.
Intrigued by your comments here Neil. I am very loyal to the store and while I agree the grocery section isn’t inspiring, I don’t think they will ever change that experience and make it more “Sprouts” like. It is a utilitarian grocery experience and fills a need complementary to the rest. I don’t like putting fruits, veggies and frozen goods in the same cart as my clothing selections.
I agree. I think grocery is a terrible move for them. It’s a seductive traffic driver, but that doesn’t translate into higher sales. And like David, I think it’s a separate trip. Also, I tried using them on line. They have zero knowledge of their own inventory. I gave up
Grocery and household is 50.8% of the sales mix. It’s a critical part of the business. It’s not either grocery or non-food. Both have to be worked on. Completely agree on the inventory and out of stocks – both are dreadful!
Agreed. I think grocery mix alone might be about 25% of their sales, which puts them behind Walmart in the 55%-60% range, Costco 35%-40%. But this shows what the upside is for Target. They don’t have to compete at Walmart or Costco levels. Even gaining another 5%-7% of grocery sales would show a healthy step up in total store performance.
Yes, food and beverage is 23% of the Target sales mix. Walmart’s 59.8% is for food, beverage, household, and personal care – which is broader than Target’s definition and is what I refer to as ‘grocery and household’. The equivalent number for Target is around 50.8%. So still plenty of upside. But, in some ways the mix matters less. It’s really just about getting both grocery and non-food working better. And it’s not an either/or thing.
Given the space allocation of grocery and essentials in stores, Target needs to make that side of the business more productive if they are to boost performance. A very high proportion of customers already do put grocery and non-food in the same cart, so that is not a big problem. What needs to be solved for is the issue that grocery doesn’t drive enough foot traffic in and of itself, and the share of wallet that Target takes in grocery is too low. The former has been a major disadvantage to Target over the past few years as the erosion of grocery traffic has acted as a drag on the impulse purchase of non-food. The latter is more of an opportunity, especially for more premium and impulse type foods.
They’ve needed to promote a compelling reason and a promise to bring customers in. State what’s in store, and why they should be a primary or even secondary grocery stop over other options (in benefits – save time, find food options the chains don’t have, get better value). This needs to be across multiple forms of media. This alone would drive traffic, but they’d better execute in store. Can’t have out-of-stocks or a limited variety and selection.
Target became a fashion destination after well-publicized partnerships with sought-after designers. Lately, though, sad styles in odd colors are the norm.Target’s pandering to the far right doesn’t help. I’d love to see it succeed, but signs are off.
Target’s fashion the last couple of years have been pretty sad. The designers it has partnered with are out there. I remember the days people lined up for hours to get designer items, now that merchandise is all over the clearance racks.
Do you real think they are pandering?
I do. In fact back when the right was boycotting them for having single bathrooms, they had killer sales, but every question on the earnings call was about the impact of that boycott (which seemed negligible)
Well said, Cathy. At one time Target had a brilliant strategy, executed flawlessly and captivated customers. They lost their way and now competition and shoppers are different.
The aspiration to re-discover the “Tarzhay” brand is fine for Target as a strategy, but it will only resonate if consumers think it does. I’m not sure that it will, at least not the same way as it did in the past. Since the Tarzhay hey-days, a lot of things have changed. Walmart has become much more formidable with an offering that appeals to a more up-scale demographic, and TJX has become the juggernaut of affordable brands. Also, as noted, Target has made a number of zigzags on political issues that have disenfranchised some of their previous loyal customers and it will take time to win them back, if they can be won back at all.
Target is always competing head-to-head with other big box stores. Their brand and image is up to the customer to decide. Target has to create a brand promise that aligns with its customers’ perceptions of the brand. That’s not always easy to do, but Target is not trying to create something new. They are trying to resurrect their former reputation.
If any retail brand has a chance to revive itself back to its cool, Target is it. The commitment to recapture leadership in brand partnerships seems to be on the rise, deals, promotions and loyalty are getting reoriented. Two more things are required … elbow grease put into better store execution and experience, along with an investment in more impactful brand spots driving the story (promise) they want to tell.
This, unfortunately, is just the opposite: nothing is cool once the newness is worn off. That having been said – and with all due deference to Thomas Wolfe about going home again – Target is still a valuable brand recognized as being a cut above its competitors; it should build on the (somewhat justified) rep and not concentrate on contrived efforts to be 16 again.
It’s time for Target to get it together. The retailer ventured too far from its Tarzhay years by trying to be all things to all people, and clearly that didn’t work.
It’s time for Target to return to what it’s good at: easy to navigate sales floors, fun and shoppable displays, treasure hunts, designers people clamor for, and cool fashions at affordable prices. Walmart is eating Target’s lunch fashion-wise.
Still, the Target Syndrome gets me every time. I go in for one thing and leave with a cart full of stuff I hadn’t intended to buy. That’s Target’s strength. Play to that.
Because they do an excellent job of display and adjacencies. And their prices are attractive. We just shopped for Spring for our kids and the colors, styles and sizes were deep. Kohl’s on the other hand was a mess and we spent $0.
Kid’s clothes are great, women’s apparel, not so much. Target fashions have been out there, they need to refocus on what people actually want to wear.
I’m very confused. Target seems to have a different story and strategy every week. Last week2 weeks ago) it was going to invest more heavily in grocery again, to drive traffic to the store.
Now they want to be Tarzhay again. I prefer it conceptually. I think traffic driven by grocery is a trap..an unprofitable trap.
i think this is a tricky dance in the best of circumstances. In the current uncertain economic environment they’ve got to execute flawlessly. Flawlessly. There is other competition. Just as Target damaged Gap, Temu and SHEIN are damaging Target. The only way this works is rapid, perfect execution.
The “Tarzhay” brand image is associated with Target’s efforts to portray itself as an affordable yet stylish retailer.
Many consumers perceive Target as a place where they can find trendy products at reasonable prices, which makes it stand out from its competitors. Maintaining this perception, however, requires constant innovation and adaptation to changing consumer tastes, which can be both a challenge and an opportunity.
By collaborating with up-and-coming designers, Target can create exclusive, limited-edition collections that attract fashion-forward customers. In addition, offering personalized shopping experiences, such as AI-driven recommendations, can enhance customer engagement and loyalty.
Offering exclusive collections through collaboration with popular designers is one strategy to keep the product lineup fresh. As well as staying ahead of trends, Target can respond quickly to consumer preferences by investing in market research.
Last but not least, enhancing the in-store and online shopping experience can reinforce the brand’s image as an accessible yet chic destination.
It should be noted that up-and-coming designers can pose risks, such as a mismatch with Target’s brand identity, causing confusion among loyal customers. It’s also possible that a designer’s collection won’t resonate with Target’s broader customer base, resulting in unsold inventory.
The reputation of Target could also be adversely affected by controversies or negative publicity regarding a designer.
Target is in a completely different competitive environment that it was in the heights of the “Tarzhay” days. Back then, Walmart was flat and boring while Shein and Temu didn’t even exist. Now, ‘Walmart fashion’ is kind of a thing, and we all know how many $$$ the Shein and Temu are siphoning out of the market. All that siphoning is coming out of somebody’s hide…like Target, JCP, Kohl’s. And in markets where Primark is opening, I’d say they too participate in stealing market share. So yeah, Target had a bullseye painted on their back (what a great pun…!!!) and the market took aim.
Based on all that, I’d say Target has a formidable task ahead of them, under the best of circumstances. Walmart is not letting up any time soon. De minimis rule changes, if they ever really stick, will help, but Shein and Temu have built great foundations. And Primark will continue it’s march.
Another question. How many Target owned brands would survive in the mall as stand alone stores? Are their owned brands strong enough in the eyes of the customer to play in that arena? Are they legitimately brands, or are they well done private labels? There’s a difference. When Target was on a roll, it was easy for me to say they had well done owned brands. Now I wonder if the “brand” moniker is deserved. ???
For years, Target vs. Walmart was one of the core stories in retail. Target had a firm grip on higher-income shoppers who disliked the store experience at Walmart. Walmart owned the lower-income demographics, where their value message resonated well against Target. During my 30 years at Target, we lived in a state of détente. Target struggled to gain traction with Walmart customers, while Walmart had difficulty attracting Target guests.
Then came COVID. Both companies were well-positioned to quickly implement curbside pickup and omnichannel services, and they were rewarded for it. Both performed exceptionally well.
In recent years, however, things have changed. Walmart introduced Walmart+, which has been widely successful and is one of the factors working against Target’s success. Customers now have access to Walmart’s full assortment delivered to their doorstep (or their cupboard and fridge if they choose that option). Walmart also maintained better fill rates than Target, where out-of-stocks have been a problem. That reputation has become a narrative now, even if Target has made the right corrections.
Target’s positioning on social issues has created additional complications that have impacted traffic and sales.
The end result is that Walmart has gained market share at Target’s expense. They’ve made inroads into customer segments that were mostly out of reach just five years ago. Target now faces the challenge of rebuilding its brand perception and reclaiming that market share. It won’t be easy to do that without a solid value proposition and a really important differentiated experience for their guests. The good news, they have a strong brand. They still have Tarzhay panache. They just need to leverage it better and create a compelling counter experience from their competition.
Agreed on brand. They have it still. Too bad they’ve squandered it or sent mixed messages to customers. The good news is they can recapture the brand and performance. They don’t have to compete at WalMart volumes or their prices. Probably much like when you worked there, they just need to bring in the segment of customers who know they are getting a good value (quality for the price, and some noticeable deals) and execute well in store operations. And along the way, they need to tell customers again of that “value-cool equation”. Shoppers want to be reminded of their good experience and the compelling reasons why they shop a store.
I am OK with Tarzhayas a strategy. But, three or four decades, wasn’t it a tongue in cheek joke on the name?
A mass merchant with a pleasant shopping experience, brilliant merchandising practices, seamless integration capabilities that also offers savings on every trip through mobile and payment solutions, and yet they are getting hammered for not taking “the right stand” on social and/or public policy issues. This is maddening. There is no solution for these negatives “in store”. And you certainly don’t want to come out publicly to somehow convince your detractors that you are sincere when it comes to being a good corporate citizen – slings and arrows will still come your way. No PR firm can overcome a perception – real or exaggerated. Not an easy place to be, but the doors are open every day and it is all about the consumer making choices on where they choose to go and be loyal.
Target has gone through several cycles in recent years, whipsawing between its legacy as the aspirational discounter and its need to compete with Walmart. Without losing some focus on commodities (which draw traffic and visit frequency), Target needs to get back in its lane and stay there.
Tarjay is the last thing Target needs right now. It needs to move on, it’s perceived as a higher cost option for shoppers & whether that’s true or not it’s what consumers believe. It needs to fix its operational issues & find a new marketplace positioning. It can’t be Walmart – that’s never worked – but it can’t be Tarjay either anymore.
I think the Tarzhay thing is a little dated concept now. This renewed pressure will be a great time to evolve, introduce new partnerships and fresh perspectives. Their private label businesses are doing well, the products are quality, the packaging and design are well done. Many of them could be strong stand alone businesses.
The headwinds, especially for appealing to younger consumers, are the small, boutique DTC brands popular via social media. If Target can continue to bring the relevant ones in through thoughtful curation, it can minimize risk for consumers otherwise considering the myriad of DTC brands.
As for reputation damage, I believe consumers have short memories (think Bud Light). Regarding partnerships, good collaborations with brands, influencers and creators can help the reputation issue in addition to increasing their reach with the millennials and Gen Z.
The brands they sell will define their future. There is no hope sans the proper brands.
They NEED to pay attention to quality! IMPROVE that . All over the store.
ALSO, What happened to the limited offerings in cooperation with Designers?
Perhaps that is simply Not possible these days but I think they should try! That WILL bring people IN and result in sales. It used to be standard with them, but that was a long time ago.
I honestly haven’t heard “Tarzhay” in a long time from anyone.
Target should start by making checkout faster and more convenient while tackling theft and shrink. Expanding self-checkout with better monitoring, adding mobile scan-and-go, and improving curbside pickup can reduce wait times and create a smoother shopping experience. Smart security measures, like discreet loss prevention and better store layouts, can help reduce theft without making stores feel unwelcoming.
Next, Target should ensure its DEI efforts feel authentic and aligned with customer expectations. Not sure who at Target thought rolling back their DEI efforts would go over well with their customer base.
For product selection, Target needs to keep up with trends while maintaining affordability. A mix of everyday essentials, exclusive partnerships, and localized products can keep shelves fresh and appealing. Ultimately, doubling down on a fun, stylish, and seamless shopping experience will help Target stay a top choice for shoppers.
Consumers seek affordability and reliability. To restore brand trust, Target brand can keep investing in own brands for affordable innovation and its supply chain to ensure its curated assortment stays in stock.