Effectively Communicating Brand Identity
Diversity makes for a great company. That much I wholeheartedly believe to be true. However, differing opinions, backgrounds, and personality types can cause friction when attempting to formulate a cohesive corporate vision. Not only does this inhibit intra-company business; corporate disparity may leach into the public’s view of the company. So how do diverse individuals come together to form a unified front that represents the company as a whole?
One way this is accomplished is through the traditional Corporate Structure — Board of Directors, Shareholders, Executives, Management, Staff, so on and so forth. By eliciting power from status, individuals are persuaded to act in a way that the company figureheads set forth. These figureheads use tools in order to unite their employees, such as: Mission Statements, Core Values, Goals, and the aforementioned Corporate Vision. Companies utilize this approach because — in short — it works. However, there has become a new point of contention in this seemingly perfect plan: the advancement of instantaneous communication and the development of social media.
It used to be that corporate communication was not only rare, but very controlled. Let’s consider business prior to the existence of radio. Newspapers and other written communications were the main interface a company would ever have with its users, including advertising efforts and packaging. Unless a company made the news for something negative, publications could be thwarted, likely prior to their release. For example, for an individual to learn about a company, this information had to be offered up in the form of an interview, press release or a leak from the inside. Apart from an insider sharing privileged knowledge about the company with the press, information was fairly easily kept to a few regulated measures which kept the company in control.
As technology advanced, radio and photography allowed journalists more freedom in their endeavors; subsequently, companies were left with gaps in their once secure grasp on corporate messages. Fast-forward to today: Companies are faced with a constant battle of instant-communication and its effects. Anyone who has an opinion about the company may convey it directly over the Internet to whomever they wish via any medium they choose: social media, email, blogs, videos, etc. Corporate communication strategies went from 2–3 variables to an infinite number of variables in a matter of 120 years. That is a lot of change for one structure to bear — is it possible this change has left gaps in the classical corporate structure?
Considering the idea of a unified corporate front as earlier presented, there are certain positions within a modern company that allow this to be possible. Today’s companies have Public Relations teams to tackle issues dynamically in real-time. They employ Social Media Managers and other marketing departments specialized to particular media channels. They also have Brand Managers that handle the actual implementation of the corporate message we previously discussed. But what all of these positions boil down to for the purposes of this article are as follows: silo-driven positions that are designed to execute the same message in different ways.
The issue is just that — silo-driven positions. The moment individuals are divided by a particular task or channel, communication begins to blur and become cluttered. Additionally, the individuals executing the communications are largely entry-level or mid-level employees, making for a long game of “telephone” from the top to the actual execution of the message. That is the problem: too many levels between the original Corporate Vision and the execution of the Corporate Message. By the time the message reaches the staff who communicates it, so many opinions and adaptations have soiled it that it is no longer pure. The message is not the same as it would have been had it come directly from those initially involved.
How does a company stop this from happening? As companies like Zappos have found, breaking down silos can be effective in managing communication barriers. Also, the removal of traditional titles and ranks allows for fewer levels of approval before a message is sent, leading to clearer, more composed thoughts. In order for a company to succeed in the modern-era of business, the status quo must be challenged and perhaps even overturned. Once barriers like titles and departments are minimized, a more lateral style of corporate communication can be established; thus allowing a company who is, in effect, “on the same page.”
__________________________________
Megan Plis is the Marketing Associate & Social Media Manager at Plansmith in Schaumburg, IL. Follow on her Twitter at @megansummerplis and connect with her on LinkedIn at https://www.linkedin.com/in/meganplis .