<p>There is a story told about the early days of British Airways’ transformation that gets the point better than any management lecture could. In the early 1980s, when Margaret Thatcher’s government wanted British Airways prepared for privatisation, Sir John King, later Lord King, was brought in as chairman. His task was not merely to make the airline look better. It was to make it fit for the market. British Airways had to be financially stronger, operationally sharper and more attractive to customers and investors. Inevitably, this also meant a major exercise in branding.</p><p>At some point in this process, Lord King began discussions with Saatchi & Saatchi, the advertising agency that would become closely associated with British Airways’ public image. As the story goes, Lord King suggested that the agency should come to the British Airways offices. Mr Saatchi responded that it would be better if Lord King came to their office instead, where a few colleagues could join the discussion. He reluctantly agreed. When Lord King arrived at the appointed time, he was met by a receptionist who seemed entirely unbothered by his presence. She looked up, registered who he was and informed him that Mr Saatchi was not yet in the office. He would have to wait. Lord King sat in reception, increasingly irritated. Fifteen minutes later, glancing at his watch, he asked whether Mr Saatchi had arrived. The answer was no. He would be told when he came in.</p><p>By now, Lord King was not merely annoyed, he was embarrassed and very angry at the discourtesy. Just as he was about to leave, Mr Saatchi appeared and greeted him warmly. Then came the point of the exercise. This, Mr Saatchi explained, was how British Airways customers felt at Heathrow. They waited in queues, they were ignored by ground staff and they saw employees behaving as though the customer was an interruption rather than the purpose of the business. If British Airways wanted to rebrand itself, it could not begin with colours, slogans and tailfins. It had to begin with the experience of the passenger. That is the essence of rebranding and it is often forgotten.</p><p>Almost anything to do with brands is naturally assumed to belong to the marketing function. That is understandable. Marketing understands positioning and communication, but rebranding is much larger than marketing. It is an organisational exercise. A company cannot promise warmth if its employees are indifferent, nor can it promise speed if its processes are slow. A new logo may be designed in a few weeks, but a new customer experience may take years to build. This is why so many rebranding exercises become a colossal waste of money. A campaign is launched and for a brief period, everyone feels that something dramatic has happened. But the customer still faces the same delays and the same indifferent complaint handling. The company has changed its appearance, but not its behaviour.</p><p>The responsibility of marketing, consequently, is not to decorate the organisation. It is to integrate it around the customer promise. Marketing must work with operations, because the brand is tested in delivery. It must also work with technology, because websites, apps and service platforms are often the first real experience of the brand.</p><p>The British Airways story matters because it makes the point vividly. The brand problem was not only what customers thought of the airline. It was what customers experienced when they encountered it. If the experience remained poor, no advertising campaign could save it. That is the test every company should apply before embarking on rebranding. What are we promising that we cannot yet deliver? What must employees do differently? Which customer irritants must be removed first? A brand is not what a company says at launch. It is what customers experience after the launch is forgotten.</p>
<p>There is a story told about the early days of British Airways’ transformation that gets the point better than any management lecture could. In the early 1980s, when Margaret Thatcher’s government wanted British Airways prepared for privatisation, Sir John King, later Lord King, was brought in as chairman. His task was not merely to make the airline look better. It was to make it fit for the market. British Airways had to be financially stronger, operationally sharper and more attractive to customers and investors. Inevitably, this also meant a major exercise in branding.</p><p>At some point in this process, Lord King began discussions with Saatchi & Saatchi, the advertising agency that would become closely associated with British Airways’ public image. As the story goes, Lord King suggested that the agency should come to the British Airways offices. Mr Saatchi responded that it would be better if Lord King came to their office instead, where a few colleagues could join the discussion. He reluctantly agreed. When Lord King arrived at the appointed time, he was met by a receptionist who seemed entirely unbothered by his presence. She looked up, registered who he was and informed him that Mr Saatchi was not yet in the office. He would have to wait. Lord King sat in reception, increasingly irritated. Fifteen minutes later, glancing at his watch, he asked whether Mr Saatchi had arrived. The answer was no. He would be told when he came in.</p><p>By now, Lord King was not merely annoyed, he was embarrassed and very angry at the discourtesy. Just as he was about to leave, Mr Saatchi appeared and greeted him warmly. Then came the point of the exercise. This, Mr Saatchi explained, was how British Airways customers felt at Heathrow. They waited in queues, they were ignored by ground staff and they saw employees behaving as though the customer was an interruption rather than the purpose of the business. If British Airways wanted to rebrand itself, it could not begin with colours, slogans and tailfins. It had to begin with the experience of the passenger. That is the essence of rebranding and it is often forgotten.</p><p>Almost anything to do with brands is naturally assumed to belong to the marketing function. That is understandable. Marketing understands positioning and communication, but rebranding is much larger than marketing. It is an organisational exercise. A company cannot promise warmth if its employees are indifferent, nor can it promise speed if its processes are slow. A new logo may be designed in a few weeks, but a new customer experience may take years to build. This is why so many rebranding exercises become a colossal waste of money. A campaign is launched and for a brief period, everyone feels that something dramatic has happened. But the customer still faces the same delays and the same indifferent complaint handling. The company has changed its appearance, but not its behaviour.</p><p>The responsibility of marketing, consequently, is not to decorate the organisation. It is to integrate it around the customer promise. Marketing must work with operations, because the brand is tested in delivery. It must also work with technology, because websites, apps and service platforms are often the first real experience of the brand.</p><p>The British Airways story matters because it makes the point vividly. The brand problem was not only what customers thought of the airline. It was what customers experienced when they encountered it. If the experience remained poor, no advertising campaign could save it. That is the test every company should apply before embarking on rebranding. What are we promising that we cannot yet deliver? What must employees do differently? Which customer irritants must be removed first? A brand is not what a company says at launch. It is what customers experience after the launch is forgotten.</p>
