Brand & Management Consulting

Earlier this year, following its acquisition by PwC, the management consulting firm formerly known as Booz & Company became Strategy&. The new name, legally required after Booz & Company spun off from Booz Allen Hamilton in 2008, signaled not only a new marketplace positioning but also insight into how the consulting industry is evolving.

In the years leading up to its purchase of Booz & Company, PwC was steadily acquiring other consulting firms, including Diamond and PRTM, to further expand its advisory practice. Most of these firms were swiftly integrated into the PwC master brand. However, PwC’s decision to use its most recent acquisition to communicate a broader service offering illustrates not only how the company is thinking about where the industry is headed, but also what is required to lead.

Despite the ambition of PwC and Booz & Company, the name Strategy& falls flat. According to Strategy&’s CEO Cesare Mainardi, the new name “invites conversation.” While this may be true, the name is not as “provocative, memorable or quirky” as it could have been. In fact, it seems as though the company decided to merge the name of its thought leadership publication Strategy + Business with the ampersand from Booz & Company. Using the publication to drive equity to the company brand was smart, but the name Strategy& does not articulate how these two companies are uniquely positioned to deliver the end-to-end solutions clients are asking for. Moreover, as Max Nisen pointed out in Quartz Magazine a few months ago, the ampersand is less digitally friendly as the company might have desired. Then again, so is the plus sign of Strategy + Business. Having a URL address that does not match the company’s name may seem like a minor oversight. But since Strategy& is highlighting its digital capabilities as a key differentiator, its lack of consistency between the brand name and its URLs addresses raises questions about the company’s attention to detail in the digital space.

Nevertheless the messaging around Strategy& is aligned to the shifting consulting landscape. For example, Strategy& repeatedly communicates the concept of “capabilities-driven strategy” and refers to its team as a group of “practical strategists.” The ideas of practicality, sustainable outcomes, and strategy through execution address clients’ increasing desire to realize tangible business outcomes from the strategic advice of management consultants.

In addition, Strategy& has adopted some visual elements from PwC, namely the maroon color and serif typeface. Most designers and brand professionals thought positively of the PwC visual identity system when it was introduced in 2010, so it should come as no surprise that Strategy& adopted some of those elements from its parent company. But again, the new identity is fairly consistent to Booz & Company’s old one, which is neither inspiring or disruptive.

Using a contract obligation to reposition Booz & Company was a great opportunity to communicate how Strategy& and PwC are not only stronger together, but also equipped to lead the rapidly evolving management consulting industry. Unfortunately, the name Strategy& does not convey the larger, more aspirational vision for both Strategy& and PwC. Then again, a name is only one brand asset. Had the two companies developed a robust brand strategy for how the two companies would communicate their complementary offerings and unique skill set, there would be less burden on the new name to articulate the company’s value proposition.

It’s undetermined for how long the name and brand Strategy& will exist. When discussing the matter, PwC CEO Tony Poulter said “the market will decide.” Regardless of the longevity of the Strategy&, whenever two brands come together, there is an opportunity to determine how those brands create a new entity. To do so, cross-functional teams from both sides must resolve some difficult questions. Which brand assets will be preserved? Which assets will be killed? And which ones will be created? Only when those challenging questions are resolved can firms begin to build something new and paint a compelling vision of the future.

In the short run consolidation in the management consulting industry will continue. As more companies come together to gain scale and expertise, developing a differentiated positioning will be increasingly challenging. Therefore, a name change or logo refresh will not necessarily convince clients that bigger is better. Instead companies need a robust brand strategy that aligns to not only client needs but also their unique capabilities. By applying the same rigor to their brand strategies as they do to regular client problems, consulting firms will be prepared to address today’s client needs and anticipate tomorrow’s market demands.