When organizations and brands are in the process of changing their identity, I’ve noticed a tendency that it’s easier for executives to focus their energy on “breaking the change to the world” through measured marketing communications, rather than creating a prior strategy of bringing the inner-vested into the identity conversation early on. People naturally want to know “why are we doing this, and what’s in it for me?”
In communicating the aspects of identity change, is your focus on the inner (employees and shareholders), or the outer (more marketing)?
There are powerful market forces that shape identity change. Corporate identity changes are often driven by the CEO as a response to forming the outer market’s perceptions of the value to their enterprises, particularly after a merger or acquisition. Brand identity changes are usually driven by circumstances in the outer media and sales channels. These outer drivers are powerful forces indeed. Identity changes have an equally compelling effect on people inside the organization who will be tasked with contributing to “a new idea” they may know little about.
When you provide the reasons why your identity requires change, it’s imperative to have these ideas resonate positively within your organization first, before the outer world. When that happens, it’s like putting Miracle-Grow on the seeds of your brand image. People on the inside must believe the changing organizational or brand identity will have a positive impact on their lives before they’ll be an influential-buzz-generating machine twittering away in our transparent digital age. The reason most successful brands seem to have an inner glow about them is no accident.
Having an internal communications strategy in place at the very beginning of the process, is fundamentally important for a successful outcome. Better when clarity begins the process.
What’s your take on this?
