Thomson, a thought provoking piece.

This is an issue that I suspect most of the branding profession have been struggling with for some time. I have read many articles and blogs that bemoan the ‘gap’ between what brands say and do and indeed the thoughtful “hand-off” between left-brainers and right brainers (nicely put). The creative brief is a victim and symptomatic of this.

I have, in the past, written blogs and articles about this myself. We bloggers can congratulate ourselves for so well defining the failing. But have we cracked the problem? Really?

The problem rests with leadership, we can agree on that and we have articulated how they should behave and what they should do. But that is only half the equation. By us I mean brand strategists and practitioners. This is the elephant in the room. If we do not change the way we engage with leadership we will be in a world of perpetual ground hog day. More failed brands, more eloquent blogs.

To avoid upsetting anyone I am going to take a pot shot at myself as opposed to criticize the brand profession as a whole.

You talk of left and right brainers. That describes a fundamental dissonance in the way people think, how we cope with data and emotions. This is the root of the problem. 

I have gratified executives by intellectualizing brand - taking it to their world, deceiving them and myself into the bargain. 

I have talked about brand in words they are comfortable with, ‘reputation’ for instance. What a cop-out. 

I have allowed brand programs to proceed without cultural or organizational feasibility testing (don't rock the boat). 

I have taken the credit for the brand wheels and DNA elements that so awkwardly populate the mandatory fields in the creative brief, mystifying even me when a brief lands back on my desk. 

I have taken part in assessing and criticizing agency creative work when is “so off brand” – and am surprised when the client does not know why it is off brand. 

I have allowed clients to separate brand identity programs from staff brand engagement programs.

The sins go on.

Earlier this year I stepped back from this charade to reassess the professional practice of brand (and my career), in the light of my sins and my many wounds. Central to this thinking is: having the bravery to meet the problem head on: injecting creativity early on in the process to avoid talking about customers and staff as statistics: having the balls not to accept conservative dilution of passionate intent: flexibility and realistic expectations and most of all taking responsibility right through from strategy to the creative brief, the internal culture right through to the creative output.

Fundamentally branding is not a pick and mix. You cannot choose one element of responsibility, or tackle on in isolation.