Government Affairs Blog

"You can no longer control your brand, only influence it"

Part of the job of a communications professional is to look after their organisation’s brand.  This will involve protecting the brand as well as promoting it.  The assumption has always been that one can control what the brand is.  You protect your brand because at some point it could come under attack. 

Last week the VP for public relations at McDonald’s explained the reasoning behind the www.makeupyourownmind.co.uk website.  He argued that organisations can no longer control their brands; all they can hope to do is to influence them. 

This requires a very different approach to current practice.  Interestingly, several recent news events illustrate the point.

One ongoing story has been the Serious Fraud Office’s investigation into BAE Systems.  Both brands have suffered from events.  There is now a rumour that the Serious Fraud Office will be disbanded.  A brand that should be associated with integrity has been undermined by outside forces.  BAE Systems says of its brand: “The BAE Systems brand has its foundations in our vision, our values and our strategy to build BAE Systems as the premier global defence and aerospace company. It is expressed through our identity, which uses design, imagery and language that is clear, consistent and compelling (reference http://www.baesystems.com/AboutUs/CorporateIdentityGuidelines/index.htm).”

Clearly BAE Systems does not wish to have its brand associated with bribery yet this is exactly what has happened because of the investigation. 

Tesco has also come under media scrutiny for its expansion across the UK high street.  Tesco and its shareholders no doubt see this as a sign of its commercial success; its critics see it as domination of a large retailer. 

When avian flu struck the Bernard Matthews farm, the eponymous owner avoided the media spotlight.  Matthews was once heavily associated with the brand, famously appearing in television commercials.  He hasn’t been in the limelight for many years and may have had very good reasons for not appearing on television now.  However, the media used this to further attack the way the company was handling the crisis.  Thus an event beyond the company’s control was allowed to worsen because no attempt was made to influence events in a way the media expected.

Compare this to another news event.  After the Cumbria train crash, the Virgin brand was threatened.  Richard Branson, always in the media, went to the scene of the crash, praised the heroism of the train driver and visited the wounded at hospital.  An event he could not control had the potential to damage his brand and he did all he could to influence the outcome.  Branson knows that Virgin is intimately associated with him so he acted accordingly. 

It is not enough to understand your brand.  It is imperative to understand how others see it and respond to that when the brand comes under attack, regardless of the rights or wrongs of the situation. 

Simon Goldie is Head of Communication at The Chartered Institute of Taxation – www.tax.org.uk - and a member of the CIPR GAG committee