To blend or bend, that is the question

by Karl Treacher ON 15 March 2013

There comes a time in everyone’s life when the truth makes itself known. The truth I am referring to is a personal truth regarding what you are doing with your life. Like some of you reading this, I spend the majority of my time helping organisations to get clear on who they are as a brand and community. This is usually based on their value proposition and ‘market opportunity’: where they can best make their mark given the existing landscape. But let’s take a moment to sidestep brand positioning and ask a much more important question: who are we as people and what we are prepared to sacrifice in return for a nicer car?

Blending

Humans are generally very versatile. We adapt to varying social environments and read others well. There are exceptions of course, but as a species we are socially adaptive. This skill has been developed over centuries as a necessity. A survival technique, ‘blending in’ to avoid being devoured. Terrific, you say? Look at me! Look at how clever we are? Hmm… sit down, nobody’s clapping or playing the national anthem. In more recent years, our ability to ‘blend’ has resulted in great harm and is the most common cause of what I refer to as ‘soul death’. You see, sometimes we blend beyond our means or we blend in with someone or something that we shouldn’t.

The cost of blending

At the risk of sounding like Gandhi, most of us have very little time to sit still and get in touch with our values and boundaries. If we did, we would be aware of the high cost of some blending exercises. When we blend, we call on parts of our character that may not be all that native or familiar – not our everyday character. Sometimes this is a good thing and helps us grow and develop latent facets of our personality, and at other times we stretch a little too far and, in doing so, compromise our values… often without knowing it.

Anthony Hopkins does not eat people

Remember The Silence of the Lambs (1991)? One of the lead actors was Anthony Hopkins who played pathological psychopath Hannibal (the cannibal) Lecter. To be convincing in the role, Sir Anthony had to study psychopaths and adapt and blend his native character into the archetype of a killer. Like Hopkins, we all have dormant archetypes that we can call on when need be. If we stay in character too long, however, we begin to inherit some of the character traits. While these are (usually) not quite as bad as cannibalism, they can still have a devastating effect on the climate of a workplace. In fact, most deviations from our authentic self will harm the relationships we have with those around us, along with the climate (mood) and culture.

Why we blend

We blend into our environments to (a) survive and (b) succeed. Unfortunately in corporate Australia, the overwhelming majority of organisational environments that we try to blend in with have enormous cultural problems. What is deemed ‘normal’ within an organisation is often far from normal or sustainable when it comes to the way humans need to relate and simply ‘be’. Some examples include a heavily promoted (yet often unspoken) sense of ‘professionalism’ where emotional suppression is encouraged. Another is a culture motivated by fear and a sense of scarcity (missing out). These are just two unhealthy, dysfunctional cultural issues facing some of our biggest brands. There are many more.

The point is that as highly adaptive beings, we often adapt to fit in to work environments that are essentially unhealthy communities. This compromises our ‘sense of self’, which when developed is our main channel for personal happiness. The net result: unhappy people.

The answer: bend don’t blend

Through the course of this year many of us will enter new work environments or see dramatic changes in our current work habitat. The healthiest and most sustainable course of action is to recognise what we will and won’t do in order to fit in. This can be a difficult ask, so to make it easier, here are five ways to help identify if you are bending beyond your boundaries and are in fact in the blender:

you feel nervous about sharing your personal views,
you obsess about the consequences of your actions,
you only relax when you leave work w you wake up with a headache, or
you are covered in milk, it’s loud and you can taste banana.

It’s generally a very long and hard slog to change any workplace culture. It’s much easier to change ourselves and the way we choose to relate to those around us. Identifying excessive personal compromise is important, but rejecting it can be the key to happiness… because there’s more to life than just fitting in.

Did you know: in each issue of the print edition, Marketing includes the very best opinion articles curated from our huge industry blogging community, as well as exclusive columnists writing on the topics that matter? Becoming a subscriber is only AU$45 for a whole year, delivered straight to your door. Find out more »

Getting your people behind the brand

by Christine Khor ON 21 November 2012

Public furore over Alan Jones’ recent comments highlighted how important it is to align your team’s personal values with that of the wider business.

Intensive media coverage, public outcry, social media campaigns and online commentary forced many brands associated with Jones to re-evaluate their willingness to be associated with his once-formidable reputation, sending a clear message to their employees about the types of behaviour they will and will not support.

We’re not talking ‘feel good stuff’ here. What we’re talking about is whether your workplace positively impacts the lives of those who work in it, and vice versa.

Reluctance to engage the team, share the company’s vision and values and failure to celebrate the contribution of your people will make the difference between employees being brand ambassadors or detractors.

Living the brand

In an industry where reputation is everything, the top tier candidates we deal with are becoming increasingly selective about the brands, people and management styles they will and will not be associated with.

It’s crucial to ensure brand values are meaningful and relevant to those who work within them to achieve a shared purpose.

In a fast-moving world where information is readily spread and boundaries between personal and business are continually blurred, it pays to ensure your staff are aware of what the business stands for as they, knowingly or not, act as ambassadors for the brand you’ve fought so hard to build and manage.

When bringing in new talent, recruit according to the brand values. If new recruits are on board to achieve these it creates more believers in the organisation and increases the likelihood of achieving a shared vision.

Having a clear set of values consistently communicated throughout the business will instill faith in staff that you genuinely want them to achieve their very best.

A higher purpose

Some would argue that marketing professionals aren’t saving lives. But believing you are making a difference can make a heck of a difference between ticking the box and really going above and beyond for a client.

Consider whether you are providing and fostering a workplace that provides a higher purpose. Not literally, but on a day-to-day, ‘I feel I am making a difference’ kind of way.

There’s more to people than just doing their jobs. People need to encourage and motivate one another. Including colleagues in the decision-making process, encouraging brand champions to inspire others and leading by example can all make the difference between engagement and disengagement. Making staff more engaged and involved in management solutions ensure they feel there is a higher purpose and that they’re a key part of your success.

Asking for feedback is another big one, overlooked too often. Taking the time to hear the thoughts and perspectives from others within the organisation, particularly those far removed from your own role, sends a strong message about the value these individuals contribute to the wellbeing of the organisation.

A team focus

It’s not the management, but the team that realises success in any organisation. The same creativity you apply to campaigns needs to be applied to bringing out the best in your team.

Think more widely than the ‘tick the box’ stuff here. Ask yourself, are you really creating a workplace that fosters creativity and innovation amongst your team? And more importantly, can you afford to lose quality and rare talent because of potential disengagement?

I can’t recall how many times I’ve heard those in senior management positions tell me they’ve been too busy working on their product brands, or in agencyland, on the brands, values and messaging of their clients, to focus on fostering a positive, healthy and ultimately more productive working environment in their own team.

Sounds nuts, doesn’t it? But think about it. You’re so busy managing your own brands or planning campaigns for clients that you believe will change the world, you risk overlooking the workforce that can bring those great ideas to life.

Put your own ego aside. Step back and think about how important everyone’s purpose is in the business and what role they play in achieving those goals.

Hard won, easily lost

These days, brands have to work smarter at staying relevant and top of mind. The same can be said for an evolving workplace. It can take years to build an environment that champions team successes and just one action to send the wrong message.

The art of reputation management is a delicate thing, hard won and easily lost. Don’t lost sight of the bigger picture. A brand needs to stay honest, genuine and stay grounded. If they are, everything else will follow suit.

Brand culture – Martians and mohawks

by Karl Treacher ON 18 October 2012

It’s 1984. The first Apple Macintosh is released, Michael Jackson sets his head on fire, Medicare comes into effect, ‘Advance Australia Fair’ becomes our national anthem, crack is introduced into the US, one million people die from the Ethiopian famine and I am wandering around Melbourne with a mohawk. Despite the arguably more memorable events, let’s focus on my mohawk… my purple mohawk. While this may seem a very radical transgression from ‘normal’ society, in 1984 the British punk movement was alive and well and heavily influencing the youth of the world… particularly this youth.

Some 16,400 kilometres away in Washington DC, men and women wearing white shirts and black suits (with neatly combed hair) were working on space shuttle Challenger’s fourth mission.

These well-presented professionals were obviously employees of one of the US’s proudest government agencies: NASA. In 1984, NASA was at its height of technological fame and those representing NASA did so with pride.

Two years later, that very same space shuttle, now in its 10th mission, exploded 73 seconds after launch, killing six astronauts and an unlucky school teacher chosen from 11,000 applicants… all live on national and international television. Investigations into the disaster reported a technical issue (a faulty O-ring) along with what they called ‘workplace ethics’ – a reluctance to communicate up from middle to senior management.

It wasn’t until 19 years later and another space shuttle disaster (this time Columbia) that NASA admitted it had a culture problem and set out to solve it.

And solve it they did – in fact some would argue that they transformed the culture. On 6 August 2012, NASA rover Curiosity landed by remote on Mars, controlled by a 32-year-old with – you guessed it – a mohawk. That’s a long way from the ‘Yes Sir’ culture of yesteryear.

NASA’s problem is every brand’s problem

Technology today is moving faster than ever before, and for brands to keep up with, or stay ahead of, the curve, they need to be receptive, agile and innovative.

The other global phenomenon that is currently front and centre for every brand, however, is the uncertainty of the world economy. As a result, brands are balancing two opposing forces and seeking to answer the most critical organisational performance question of our time: “How do we take risks and grow… safely and with fewer resources?” The very same question that NASA managed to solve over the past decade. The answer may be simpler than you think: define acceptable risk and communicate honestly.

How a safety culture makes brands unsafe

Believe it or not, organisations such as NASA and other ‘process heavy’ brands (banks, telcos, insurance, utilities, logistics etc) have many practices and attitudes that revolve around safety and technical risk, often without meaning to develop a ‘safety subculture’. What this means is that regardless of the espoused values and brand attributes, the underlying current of the brand is focused on risk mitigation.

This becomes a significant liability when it manifests in employee behaviour. Brands that have a safety subculture usually also suffer from poor (upwards) communication and a deprivation of creative thinking… because it can be seen as ‘unsafe’ and too risky. In simple terms, this means (a) employees are afraid to tell the truth, and (b) innovation and growth is retarded.

In NASA’s case, the faulty O-ring that led to the destruction of space shuttle Challenger was apparently identified and questioned by a series of engineers, but the problem was never raised to senior levels because it was ‘personally safer’ to not create waves. By not communicating honestly, NASA’s mission, brand and people suffered, the latter paying the ultimate price.

Innovation means making mistakes and learning from them

OK, so we now know that a brand culture of safety can in fact make a brand unsafe.

What is even more obvious is that brands that ‘play it safe’ don’t grow very quickly.

To grow quickly, taking validated risks is a prerequisite, along with admitting mistakes and exploring their cause. Brands that live within hierarchical organisations will struggle to take risks, listen to new voices, admit mistakes and grow. We all know that one of the best ways to learn is to make mistakes, so how can an organisation learn if there is no appetite to hear about failure? Small failures are in many ways a gift. They identify issues and provide a case study to investigate imperfections and opportunities.

The wrap

Acceptable risk and honest communication are the basics for any successful culture. Due to the ever increasing speed of change, however, coupled with the inherent risks associated with an uncertain global economy, these two organisational values need to fundamentally dictate play. Brands that have either a low tolerance for honesty (good news cultures) or play it safe due to a safety-driven climate of ‘arse covering’ will find that they will fail to keep up. NASA diagnosed and reviewed its culture in 2004, issued new cultural priorities and embedded them over the required period of time (three to five years). The results speak for themselves. NASA landed a dune buggy on Mars via remote control from California almost a year after its launch and is currently streaming video back to Earth. Why the US Government is spending $2.5 billion on sending a go-kart to another planet when its own economy is in the toilet is a matter for another article.

Inside ‘CAN’ – the internal aspect of the CommBank campaign

by Karl Treacher ON 4 October 2012

Probably like yours, my family members have no real idea of what I do (I heard my sister once telling someone that I am “like The Mentalist, but for brands”… sadly, not even close), so whenever a new TVC launches or a brand campaign goes live I become very popular.

On the morning of 20 May, my phone ran hot. People, some of whom I have been screening for years, called to get the skinny on a series of outdoor and digital executions that presented themselves either on the freeway, or on their mobile device on their way to work. The message read ‘CAN’T’. At the time I hadn’t seen the ads, so when asked the question, “Who is behind all the CAN’T ads?” I did the only thing anyone who works in brand would: I cracked a dad joke. “I can’t be sure,” I said with a smarmy chuckle and a wink. Sure no one laughed, but, to my surprise, most people stayed on the line.

The tease

Within hours I too had been exposed to CAN’T, and within days a broad debate had begun in the world of brand and marketing around the party behind this big-budget teaser. The teaser included outdoor, digital, viral and stunt executions. Trucks with four-metre CAN’T signs, a series of intriguing viral clips, 3D chalk drawings, lollipop people and an absolute pasting of CAN’T across outdoor media indicated to most that the brand behind CAN’T was one of the majors. In addition, a new twitter identity #CANT appeared and began tweeting things like, “If a tweet is sent, but there are no followers to read it, does the tweet exist?” and “Bet you plenty of people in #Sydney #CANT get out of bed tomorrow #SydneyHalfMarathon”. The contenders were quickly whittled down to Westpac or CommBank, and before long Westpac went public announcing that it wasn’t behind the campaign. So, at this stage, the marketing community knew CommBank was up to something. The destination website whatiscant.com.au was no longer anonymous.

Why

Some of the other banks (and Greenpeace) quickly became clued in, looking to take advantage of the hype. One bank in particular was reported as ‘ambushing’ CAN’T. Queensland based Heritage Bank moved quickly to buy Google sponsored searches with a reactive turn of phrase: ‘Heritage Bank – we can do things the big banks can’t.’ ANZ reacted on Twitter, tweeting, “#Can’t work out the best way to reach your financial goals? We may be able to help.” Greenpeace took a more traditional path of brand hijack/piggyback, releasing a full-page ad in mX titled ‘CAN’T’, appealing to commuters around the proposed coal mining plans in the Great Barrier Reef. When interviewed after the fact, CommBank chief marketing officer Andy Lark saw the reactive effort of the other banks as serving to strengthen the level of public interest, and was quoted as saying the guerrilla activity “added fuel to the fire”. Lark suggests that, unlike the single-stunt based teasers often associated with challenger brands, this teaser was thought-provoking, started conversations and “had people wondering ‘what is this about?’ as it built in momentum over the course of a week”.

Positive

The day CAN’T became CAN

Following seven days of broad conversation and conjecture, on 27 May CommBank came clean by introducing Australians to ‘second screen’ technology press ads, along with a hotly debated 60-second TVC featuring a poem read by Golden Globe winner Toni Collette (activated again two months later during the Olympics). The second screen press ads created significant noise. From tech hubs appreciating and critiquing News Australia Sales’ handiwork, to my local café, where I saw what looked like a group of people reading the paper through an iPad, people were talking about it. The CAN poem read by Toni Collette was polarising, with the Sydney Morning Herald suggesting that viewers “Can’t stand it” and yet a positive majority was recorded from several blogger polls, and CommBank spruiked its popularity. “Hundreds of schools and hospitals have approached us for a copy of the poem, many saying that it is life changing,” says Lark.

Other interesting executions in CAN’T becoming CAN included a rather fun mobile and homepage interactive experience, where users had the opportunity to shoot or ‘blow up’ the T in CAN’T. Blowing up the T is a strong visual representation of the campaign concept. When asked what the campaign is about, along with the motivation behind it, Lark replies, “We play a big role in people’s lives and the stages within. While we may not directly drive life decisions, it’s CommBank’s role and responsibility to support our customers in their dreams, hopes and ambitions… not only in product and service, but also attitude, hence CAN.”

Lark adds that CommBank is all about helping people move forward. “Having great creative to grab people’s attention and share our position is just the start,” he says. “The banking industry has been quiet for a long time and people need a positive message and a brand they can believe in. We are that brand.”

Some months prior to launch, Lark and his leadership team – Monique Macleod, Jessica Myers, Andrew Campbell and Tamisine Heath – took to the streets personally to investigate consumer views about the banks and CommBank. “When M&C Saatchi introduced the ‘CAN’ campaign, it provided a simple and motivating solution to the challenges presented through our research. CAN is great instinct backed by data,” says Lark.

How CAN can…

So, now that I was clear on the campaign strategy, teaser and campaign executions, it was time to look into how CommBank delivered on its promise, from the inside out. According to CommBank executive general manager of sales and service, Fred Pollock, who was instrumental in driving the internalisation and internal engagement of CAN, the first and most obvious proof point is the concierge. “We worked methodically over a period of weeks to ensure our people could deliver CAN from a service perspective. Some of the more visible examples of this are our concierge service and our people’s attitudinal shift,” says Pollock. Pollock goes on to reference several internal, service-focused initiatives designed to demonstrate that CommBank people are ready to demonstrate they CAN. “We have transformed the way we treat our customers… to an extent that ‘can’t’ is now a dirty word. It is important that our language, both inside and out, reflects our brand and our attitude.”

Technology is one of the other key areas in which CommBank has invested to help deliver CAN. According to Lark, CommBank Kaching, CommBank Property Guide and Everyday Settlement technology solutions lead the way in helping enable CAN. “All three apps are designed to help people progress in their lives faster and with less hassle.” He believes that the momentum behind CAN is sustainable and will be driving a host of new products and services all focused on bringing a positive sense of abundance and opportunity to CommBank customers.

Jars

The CAN culture

As with any service-based promise, the underlying culture of an organisation is without question the determiner of effective, sustainable brand promise delivery. If CommBank doesn’t have the well-developed behaviours and systems designed to support this optimistic promise and promote the desired culture, customers and employees alike could be left scratching their heads.

Pollock says, “We have spent months preparing the best part of 40,000 people for this new brand position. We monitor our customer experience weekly and have seen a significant uplift in customer satisfaction in the short time since we launched CAN.”

He goes on to share many of the internal symbols and practices that he believes are pulling the CommBank internal culture in line with the brand. He refers to operation initiatives like mass employee training and leadership development along with communication initiatives like a ‘can’t’ swear jar, that collects dollar coins every time an employee says ‘can’t’.

Other high impact employee communication executions referenced include an employee viral video, a CAN manifesto, Can-Plan notepads and a series of experiential initiatives that required CommBank employees to sign up and get behind the new promise and engage with the culture.

When it comes to the question of whether CAN is a campaign or a new organisational position, Lark and Pollock both agree that while CAN began as a campaign idea, it has “taken on a life of its own inside CommBank, one of positivity and opportunity”. CommBank believes that CAN will go a long way in helping Australians see it as a support entrusted to manage the key things people rely on to move ahead in their lives: their money.

Culture and where the wild things live

by Karl Treacher ON 8 August 2012

I am rearing two long-necked turtles. Our vet said the most important thing to remember when keeping turtles is water quality. If the water pH and temperature becomes unfavourable, the turtles will quickly become ill, contract diseases and eventually die a long, slow and painful death. Culture in the workplace can be compared to the water habitat of my reptilian dependants. In fact, it is a very good analogy. The healthier the culture, the more the employees that make up the business thrive.

What does ‘good’ look like?

One of the easiest ways to identify a healthy culture is by examining organisational performance. After all, organisational culture primarily exists to help organisations perform. So, aside from a company’s share price, much can be gleaned about culture- influenced performance by reviewing an organisation’s reputation. For the sake of ease and the purposes of this article, let’s use the AMR 2012 Corporate Reputation Index. While many have questioned the validity of the AMR index, likening it more to a brand recall instrument, some of the observations appear intuitively accurate.

I have selected a few brands that have witnessed dramatic shifts, based primarily on changes to their culture.

First, Telstra moved from 60th position in 2011 to 45th. This was one of the largest shifts across the index and to my mind reflects the new energy and direction resulting from the brand refresh. Leadership is a key contributor to culture, and the cultural impact of the appointment of brand guru Mark Buckman (Telstra’s chief marketing officer) should not be underestimated.

Next, Virgin moved from 13th position in 2011 to sixth. When you talk to the people at Virgin, they don’t use corporate jargon to explain the shift, they simply say, “It is our people who put the magic back into flying.” In this country no brand demonstrates branded, culturally-aligned customer experience better than Virgin. All service brands should take a good hard look at the cultural structure and practices of Virgin.

What does ‘not so good’ look like?

Finally, let’s take a quick look at a brand that slipped 18 positions from seventh to 25th… yep, Virgin’s competition in the air, Qantas. Formally Australia’s most iconic brand, Qantas, as we know, has struggled of late and, culturally, the story couldn’t be worse. Leadership decision-making is the most obvious symbol of culture, and leading a brand to be ‘at war’ with its pilots, engineers, baggage handlers and ground staff over work conditions is cultural suicide. Enough said.

What’s this got to do with turtles?

Just as all animals in the animal kingdom are sensitive to their environment (so much so that they suffer and, in many cases, die if their habitat is compromised), so too are employees. Without meaning to state the obvious, humans are also members of the animal kingdom and, like it or not, are governed by many of the same environmental influences as turtles, monkeys and birds. By taking this broader, more holistic view of organisational culture, organisations can begin to more quickly understand what needs to be done to support employees and bring a sense of tribal security and belonging to a culture.

Here are a few ways to help reframe your thinking around internal branding and culture, likening what most of us consider to be a corporate practice more to the way of the wild:

1. Leadership. In the corporate world, ‘leadership’ is seen as a management progression with financial responsibilities. In the animal kingdom, leadership has a very simple translation: to protect and grow a community through various natural challenges. Corporate leadership is no different. One of the ways that alpha animals lead packs most effectively is by establishing rituals that demand accountability and individual growth from within. Demonstrative growth. In the business world, this means ‘delivery’.

2. Systems. The systems that govern the ‘way’ organisations work (IT, human resources practices, unspoken protocol etc) can easily be trivialised as administrative support, when really these systems have an enormous say in whether a business strategy works or doesn’t. In the wild, the systems that exist within a community of animals determine whether they live or die. Pack leaders quickly appoint roles that serve the greater purpose, very much like organisations resourcing to deliver on a business goal or strategy. There is a clear understanding of how each role relates to another, along with the relevant support required for each role to succeed.

3. Learning and development. When we think of L&D, most of us envisage a workshop, a facilitator and individually wrapped Mentos mints. Sometimes we feel that L&D is a chore, other times a privilege, largely depending on the topic (and facilitator). This is due to a lack of perspective around the reason behind the genre: learning initiatives.

In the wild, animals either learn or they become dependent and vulnerable. Not too long after that, they are a set of ribs being picked at by vultures.

4. Communication. The emphasis of internal communication has also lost its importance, often giving way to a campaign of entertainment. While humour is a very effective information transfer mechanism, there is much to be learned from the very pointed, focused communication methods that exist within groups of animals. What they lack in creativity they make up for in consistency.

There is never any doubt around the intent or meaning behind internal messaging within a community of animals.

The wrap

Culture exists to enhance performance. No business goal or marketing strategy will ever realise its potential without the careful alignment of the culture behind it. The brands that understand and demonstrate this are enhancing their reputation and performance, while those that continue to miss the fact that ‘ culture determines their fate’ slide off into a Qantas-like corporate horror story.

Culture: organisational performance in foster care

by Karl Treacher ON 19 July 2012

The rightful parent of culture is the CEO and executive board. However, a general knowledge deficiency, along with an incorrect order of priorities means that organisational culture more often than not lives in foster care: Human Resources (HR). The obvious issue here is the well-documented image problem that HR has across the globe, along with the inability for most HR departments to be empowered to manage broad and sustained cultural change. So, instead of culture being an A-list organisational celebrity, it can unfortunately show up on a long and not very impressive D-list along with the likes of corporate social responsibility and the social club fun run.

What is culture?

Wake up! Organisational culture is a term that describes the way things are done within an organisation. This means how the people that make up every organisation are productive and the way the business operates in every aspect. Yes, every aspect. Things like the way leaders lead, system design, compliance, workplace and team structure, process management, brand, marketing, pricing, customer experience: every aspect!

Organisational culture is determined by a company’s behaviours, symbols and systems – which come from a deliberate or, more often than not, an unintentional set of values.

Dysfunction

There is an old and also proven saying that 80 percent of culture change programs fail. I would be surprised if this percentage wasn’t actually much higher. Basically until culture becomes a standing C-Suite agenda item, it can’t succeed. The decisions made by an organisation’s executives are key cultural symbols and guide ‘how things get done’. This by definition means culture.

While culture remains a ‘program’, living with HR – or anywhere other than the key decision-making body – it can’t be sustained. In the early 2000s, one of Australia’s largest banks launched a very successful culture program across something like 30,000 people. It was heralded as the exemplar culture case study for five or so years. The reason it worked was simple: it came from the top down. Culture was considered to be the key element of the organisation (which it is for every organisation) and it was integrated and inclusive – being driven by the employee population. And when you look at why it eventually dissolved after a few years and now is simply a series of branded folders in a basement, we need to look at culture leaving the paternal home (executive suite) and being relegated to a line item on an HR ‘program’ of work.

There are many other reasons organisational culture is suboptimal (or in many cases toxic):

‘It’s too hard to understand… so let’s not try. What we can do is talk about organisational strategy and brand values.’ The fact that they both depend 100 percent on culture to perform is something that often gets overlooked,
‘Let’s launch a quirky internal communications program that proclaims our values.’ Every organisation has an ‘espoused culture’ but that doesn’t determine how things actually get done, or
‘Apple has a great culture. Let’s do what they do!’ Every brand has unique brand values that need to be mapped to cultural values, which then drive specific, culturally aligned behaviours, symbols and systems.

The wrap

There are many, many more reasons why organisational culture across the globe is undervalued, and why companies suffer in many ways because of this. Is your brand/ organisation sending the one thing that determines your success off to live with weird Uncle Willie? As a marketer, part of your role is ‘brand experience’ – how customers experience your brand. Yep, you guessed it – culture again. If you aren’t sure how your organisation’s culture drives your brand/customer experience, then I suspect your organisational culture is making model trains in the back shed with Willie.