article2

Cats, dogs and the internal brand

The position of MD should come with much more than a good salary package and prestigious business card, it should come with a series of health warnings. Cautions about popularity going down as well as up, blame being as easy to catch as the common cold, and feelings of profound loneliness accompanying big decisions, should be presented as standard!

The successful MD must have the ability to balance both hard and soft issues as well as the books, not least of which means ensuring the other directors carry out their individual and collective duties - not a challenge for the faint hearted!

Getting the best out of this eclectic group and their respective departments is a feat designed to test the skill and resilience of any MD. It is a complex and paradoxical affair, where a price must be paid for each individual quality that is expected of directors. Encouraging strong leadership brings strong opinions. Supporting individual initiative promotes individual recognition, and setting personal targets and rewards drives independence. It is easy to see how directors become protective of their area and allow silos to develop, which in turn dilutes efficiency.

Cats and dogs
Conventional wisdom encourages us to build teams that behave like pack animals, dogs for example, picking up the scent and moving faithfully as one in a common direction.

And guess who we put in charge of our pack? A cat! Territorial, often decidedly stubborn and with an agenda of their own. Such is the nature of the stereotypical director.

They are expected to be responsible for their area and a leader within their team, whilst 'competing' with other directors for everything from budget to project ownership and recognition. Is it any wonder that their respective departments often struggle to communicate effectively and co-operate with each other?

Without a common focal point against which the actions of directors and their teams can be measured, it is very difficult to ensure holistic commercial effectiveness.

Managing the packs!
We invest significant resource into team building to increase effectiveness within the workplace, yet therein lies another paradox. Teams by nature require their own identity and sense of belonging, making them different from other teams, and as with 'man's best friend', difference promotes indifference and even conflict. We encourage them to perform as a unit and yet get frustrated if they defend as a unit when in conflict with other teams. Silos are 'packs' and eliminating them and their core behaviours goes against nature. They must be appropriately trained and skilfully managed, whilst being encouraged to have their own identity and expected to take responsibility for its impact on others.

In essence, every department should be considered a 'brand' and expected to perform as any good brand should, with a clear customer-focused purpose, and a reputation for reliability in meeting 'brand' promises.
As for the directors, getting their active support to a brand strategy means convincing them that any initiative will not dilute their personal standing by creating a 'me too' culture. Instead they must be convinced that success will enhance their individual status and allow them some territory.

The brand contract
Think of the brand as a 'contract' between the organisation and its customers and stakeholders, which defines what is being promised, how it will be delivered, its quality and appropriate value. As with any contract, it should have well-defined terms of operation and measures of success, along with a clear understanding of the penalties for failure - i.e. loss of customers and damaged reputation. In other words, a brand is not just about look, feel and style (all of which are important), it is also about obligation and unequivocal delivery of promises.
Agreeing the brand contract on this basis demands consultation, negotiation and most importantly a 'spirit' of goodwill between parties in order to ensure everyone is agreed on purpose, and with the same interpretation of value.

By taking this same brand-led approach to addressing departmental and team performance, particularly given everyone's familiarity with 'brand', servicing and value as consumers, we can achieve powerful results.

The internal challenge

Defining the brand contract is one thing, living up to it presents much more complex issues to address, and requires attention on three key fronts:

1.Identifying differences in perception, measured through gap analysis, and how they impact upon stakeholder behaviours and actions

2.Agreeing departmental accountability through a process of purpose definition, aligning activities, streamlining tasks and creating values-driven metrics

3.Ensuring the ability exists to generate, manage and communicate 'brand' information that drives knowledge and capability across all customer touch points

For example, unless departments are aligned in terms of activity, quality and communication needs, silos may drift so far apart as to create a defensive culture that relies upon 'blame' and excuses. Once this happens, accountability, and therefore performance, drops with departments easily able to claim they are the innocent victims. Translated, this means that they see change as someone else's responsibility, and denial becomes second nature.

For directors, accepting responsibility and the need for change is hampered by competitiveness and 'feline' pride, whilst with departments it can be seen as a threat to routine and sense of belonging, along with a fear of the unknown that can easily create 'pack' paranoia.
This is why highlighting perception gaps is essential for tackling denial and providing a framework for addressing departmental alignment, whilst helping individuals to readjust to the challenges of the 'new' world.

Gluing all of this activity together requires an ability to 'talk' to each other and a willingness to listen.

Communication
The problem with the word ‘communication’, is that it is a catch-all that is too easily thought of as an internal marketing exercise. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Communication is about giving and receiving accessible information that is of sufficient quality as to be defined as knowledge. This in turn must be relevant enough and in a form that can easily be translated into know-how. If these criteria can be achieved, along with a clear understanding of stakeholder needs, then excuses for poor performance can be curtailed and performance measured against actionable criteria.

5 key questions to consider when developing your internal brand strategy

1. Can you value your reputation?
Do you have a realistic understanding of the differences in perception that clients and staff have of the business in order to address the effect upon attitudes and commitment?

2. Are you living your brand?
Do you agree on how you should be seen, the rewards this will bring and the practical / people issues to address in order to build an inclusive customer-focused plan?

3. Can you swim with the flow?
Do you have an accurate picture of how the business 'flows', where customers' touch the brand from pre-sales to after-sales and the vulnerable points of the customer journey?

4. Are you really accountable?
Have you defined the key 'customers' of each department, understood their needs and addressed inappropriate tasks and/or excuses that dilute customer benefits?

5. Are you all joined-up?
Do your departments 'fit' together, provide and receive the knowledge needed to be successful and can you monitor and measure their contribution effectively?