A Bank of Knowledge

What makes Shayne Elliott and his trusted team tick?
The ANZ boss tells all

Self-acknowledged introvert Shayne Elliott seems one of the least likely big-bank chiefs, but his career has followed a path that is familiar to his fellow bankers. The ANZ CEO is a bank ‘lifer’, joining Citibank New Zealand as a management trainee in 1985. Within seven years he was the head of derivative sales in London. And after spells in the US and Egypt, he found himself in Australia in 2001, as the chief executive of Citibank, Corporate Bank. In 2009, he joined ANZ, becoming CFO in 2012. And in early 2016, he was appointed to the top spot at ANZ, where he leads a team of about 50,000 employees. CEO of the Institute of Managers and Leaders, David Pich, interviewed Shayne Elliott at a recent Outstanding Leaders event.

David Pich: How would you describe your own leadership style?
Shayne Elliott: Well, I think I’m probably an introvert. I’m actually quite shy although, funnily enough, I’m actually reasonably comfortable speaking to 500 people. I’d probably rather do that than speak to two, because there’s more distance when you’re speaking to a room [of people]. When I was CFO my team made fun of me – it was suggested that I do performance appraisals in a 500-seat auditorium, [as] that was a much more engaging conversation than having a one-on-one [with me]. I think there is a shift away from that big, charismatic, loud leadership style to one that is probably – and again, I’m not saying that’s wrong – to a more grounded, humble leader. I think good leaders are able to shift. Sometimes you do need to be really directive about what you’re doing, depending on what the crisis might be at the time, or the team. But at other times you need to be more visionary. So I think, actually, good leaders are able to change their style for the moment and the objective. But in general, my preferred style is to be quite consultative. I lead more by example and by describing what we’re trying to achieve.

DP: Talk us through some of the different styles in your leadership team, and how you interact with them.
SE: Over the last 18 months I had the opportunity to build my team. There are 12 of us on my direct team, and of that, a third came from outside the organisation, including two of them this calendar year. We have a couple of people we’ve promoted from within, and only one of the team has the same job they had a year ago. So I’ve got people who’ve been around a long time and really know what they’re doing, who don’t need a lot of hand holding or direction, and it’s more about just being clear about expectations. Then I’ve got some people who have never worked in a bank before so they need a lot more coaching and time. I have people with big opinions, and they think differently and challenge us all the time, and my job there is to actually give them space to be creative and listen to what they say. And then there are others who are naturally reserved, who need time, who digest a lot and are really thoughtful and quiet, and take time to come to a conclusion. I need to give them time and space, and not rush them, or rush the overall team to a decision without allowing them the benefit of that time to digest.

DP: There is an elephant in the room we need to get to: the bank levy. [Announced in the federal budget in May, it applies to ANZ, Westpac, National Australia Bank, Commonwealth and Macquarie. The policy was introduced on 1 July and is expected to raise $1.6 billion in the first year.] I’ve read much of what you said about the federal bank levy, and you seemed relatively fair about how you approached that. Your comments were very measured. The South Australian bank levy, when it was announced, raised some hackles. You’ve just used the word “immoral”. Or was it “unethical”? Would you like to explain that, and why you shot off the fence?
SE: I think the federal bank levy is wrong. I don’t think it’s good policy. I think it’s unfair to pick on an industry because they’re successful and say, “because people don’t like you, because you make a lot of money, we’ll tax it”. I don’t think that’s right. But, on the other hand, it has the support of all sides of politics. The people are represented by the parliament, and the parliament, across all parties, have agreed and support this. And so, our approach was to use our efforts to really have private conversations with the treasury and the government, to just talk through the implementation. We thought that was more effective than just banging the table. Actually, in my opinion, banging the table and shouting loudly would just reinforce people’s views that the banks are out of touch. Bringing in the state levy is different. Not everybody agrees with it. What is happening there is a wealth transfer underway from the rest of Australia to South Australia. I don’t think that’s right. And so what we said was, 94 per cent of our shareholders and customers do not live in South Australia [yet] they are being asked to absorb this. Because when people say, “Oh, you should absorb it,” that means the shareholders and the customers pay. It’s not a huge number. It’s not the money. It’s the principle. So we have to stand up for those stakeholders. That’s why we felt strongly about it, and felt we had to say something.

DP: One of the roles of a leader is to explain things in relatively simple terms for those who might not necessarily understand it. What do you think a few attributes of successful leaders are?
SE: Being able to listen and take feedback. I don’t just mean personal feedback. Yes, that’s important, but also ‘listen’ to what’s happening in the environment around you. One of the areas where leaders fail is in locking into a strategy or a view. The worst thing you can do is fall in love with your own strategy, because you rationalise staying the course when maybe you should listen and maybe you should change. Another [attribute of successful leaders] is having people who are very good at being self-aware, who understand their own weaknesses and mitigate that by hiring the right people in the team.

DP: Who are the leaders you have admired over your career?
SE: I’m not one of those people who has a big hero. I look at companies that I admire, and they tend to be those companies that I see as being talent factories. The obvious candidates are Procter & Gamble, GE and Hewlett-Packard. You could go there and learn how to be a manager and leader, and then go on to other companies. That’s extraordinary. The number of CEOs who’ve come out of those companies, Procter & Gamble and GE in particular, is extraordinary. At ANZ we want to be known for a number of things, but one of them is as a talent factory, and a company that creates great leaders. I think it’s a huge opportunity for us, actually, because I don’t think enough companies do pay attention to it.

ANZ board chairman David Gonski

DP: Quite often I think that leaders, when they get into leadership positions, they forget or they overlook the importance of managing upwards. What’s your relationship like with the ANZ board and the chair David Gonski? How do you manage upwards?
SE: I think, unfortunately, that term ‘managing upwards’ has a really bad connotation. It sounds manipulative. And maybe there’s a better way of stating it. [As a leader] you actually have to manage all your stakeholders, and they’re [the board and chair] just an important one. The reason I stepped out earlier [during the interview] was because my chairman was on the phone. So I think answering their phone calls is a good start. You have to build a really strong working relationship. I’m really lucky with David [Gonski]. He is very open and transparent. He always answers his phone. We speak formally once a week. And there are weeks where we speak once a day and many times a day, like this week. So I think it’s just about having openness. I have really worked hard with my board. I’ve actually never had a board before [so] I asked some people for advice. The advice was that it’s better to over-communicate, keep people aware of what you’re doing and thinking. Make sure that, with the board in particular that you don’t get into a transactional relationship. [Make sure] there is time for reflection and discussion, and open dialogue.

“I’m really lucky with David Gonski. He is very open and transparent. I think it’s just about having openness. I have really worked hard with my board.”

DP:  You’ve talked about the importance of embracing social media. What do you see as the pitfalls of social media for leaders?
SE: Our business is digital. Money has actually been digital for a long time and all we’re doing today, when we talk about digital, is giving people the tools to be able to see , manage and move their money on their phones or in another digital way. So I think it’s important that our people are interested in technology. We’re not a technology company, we’re a bank. But a big chunk of what we do is about technology. You cannot be successful in banking today if you’re not interested in technology. I don’t think it’s acceptable to be a senior executive in a bank today and say, “I’m not on Twitter. I don’t use social media”. You’ve got to be there, because that’s the way that people live today, and that gives you all sorts of insights into people’s experience of life, and what they want. And more and more, our customers’ expectations of us are set by their experiences on social media. What are the pitfalls? Well, Donald Trump can probably tell you more about this than me, but the pitfalls are that it’s in real time. It’s really hard to retract. It’s fraught with danger.

DP:  How would you describe the culture at ANZ?
SE: It’s a learning culture, a culture that is interested in technology, and a culture that is, ultimately, diverse and welcoming and team-based. Banks historically have very compliant cultures. There’s a pretty good reason for that, because of what we do for a living. We’re good at following rules and, you know, that can sometimes get in the way of being a learning company and an innovative and technology-focused company. So that’s part of our challenge, getting the balance right.

Freedom Fighter

 

In the Institute of Leaders and Managers new book, Leadership Matters, Transparency International boss Cobus de Swardt explains why he’s just as passionate now about combatting corruption as he was fighting the scourge of apartheid in the 1980s.

Transparency International is a global movement that brings together companies, governments and business to fight corruption on a worldwide scale. Operating in more than 100 countries, its headquarters are in Berlin. Managing director Cobus de Swardt was born and raised in South Africa, where he was jailed for refusing to undertake compulsory army service. He eventually fled South Africa for Australia under significant personal danger. He has headed Transparency International since 2007.

David Pich: I think in future years people will look back on this decade and the word corruption will be commonly used. What do you define as corruption?
Cobus de Swardt: I view corruption as the abuse of entrusted power for private and personal gain. This comes in many forms. One of the most significant ways to fight corruption is to fight for greater transparency – that’s why we’re called Transparency International.

DP: What do you define as transparency?
CDS: Definitions of concepts such as transparency, corruption, accountability and integrity are actually dynamic and evolving. It comes back to your opening question really. The last few years have seen definitions shift and transparency [as a concept] is developing faster than all the others. Some people [now] refer to a much more radical transparency. I believe that in five to 10 years’ time from now, this will, again, move quite dramatically. Five years ago, little attention was being paid to things like statutes of limitations, so governments could relatively easily do deals on arms or whatever [in the knowledge that] the statute of limitation would last for 30 years or more. But if that statute of limitation is five or 10 years, it becomes a very different issue even at a government level. So transparency is about making things much more difficult to hide and bringing things out into the light. In South Africa, as young [anti-apartheid] activists in the 1970s and 1980s we always wanted to have the right to speak the truth to those people in power, but now I think that [situation] is being reversed. We now want those in power to speak the truth to us! The notion of transparency being much more instant, much more direct, and dramatically more open. For example, if you look at corporate reporting, even four or five years ago companies didn’t want to report on their activities on a country-by-country basis. They would say, “Here’s our overall global financial statement”. It was very difficult to tell what was happening at a country level. That debate about transparency now seems like it happened two decades ago, but it didn’t, it was only five years ago. And now country-by-country reporting has become project-by-project reporting.

DP: What do you think can be done to see ethics and integrity placed at the heart of decision-making in leadership?
CDS: I think that it starts with the leader. Regulation and rules need to be in place of course, but leaders must constantly think about the values they want to promote. This question is at the heart of sound leadership. It’s much easier for a leader to think about the outcomes they want to deliver, but leaders need to constantly think about the underpinning values to these outcomes. If you think about social policy in general, I would argue that most social policies are often quite devoid of a strong value-driven framework. It’s often the same with leadership. Many leaders are driven by outcomes rather than values. That needs to change.

DP: I agree that many organisations are focused on outcome and output. A lot of a leader’s decision-making is linked to output, not to value. I think that ethical leadership is about a much stronger link between outcome and value. Decision-making is such an important part of successful leadership, don’t you think?
CDS: I do think there’s a very strong element that whatever you do you should at all times feel comfortable with that decision. If, for whatever reason, your decisions were to become public knowledge, would you feel comfortable with that? That’s the test of sound decision-making. In my role at Transparency International, I often have companies say to me, “Oh, this corruption thing, it’s so complicated, our people don’t know what to do because the laws are so . . . ” And I typically say, “Just use common sense”. I recommend using ‘The New York Times test!’ Ask yourself, if the decision I make were to appear on the front page of The New York Times, would I still do it? Probably 99 per cent of times you would say yes, but it’s the other one per cent that you need to think about. Being an ethical leader is about passing The New York Times test 100 per cent of the time.

Take Two – Asterisk and Reward

Ben Luks MIML had just been appointed as marketing, product and client liaison manager at Adelaide-based IT company Comunet when he joined the Institute’s mentoring program. He was teamed up with Bob Schroder FIML, managing director of consulting firm Asterisk management, and says the experience gave him the confidence he needed to become a successful manager.

Why did you join the Institute’s mentoring program, Member Exchange?

Ben Luks: I’d recently been appointed to a new management position and it was the first time I’d been a manager. I realised I had to learn as much as I could as quickly as possible. The chance to join the mentoring program came at a very crucial point in my career. Bob was very generous with his time and was willing to meet with me every fortnight for about six months, which was fantastic.

Bob Schroder: I’ve been mentoring business leaders for quite a few years, mostly in the area of small-to-medium-sized businesses. This was my first experience with the mentoring program and I joined because mentoring challenges my own thinking. I find that an emerging manager sometimes faces the same issues I faced in the past as well as many different ones. Also, some challenges just look different, but are really the same ones in disguise.

What did you get out of the experience?

BL: I feel more confident in my management role compared to where I was when I started. The mentoring program gave me the skills and the ideas I needed to perform effectively as a manager and the confidence that comes with that is very important. It also gave me the opportunity to see the next steps forward in my career and to think about the bigger picture. Bob really opened my eyes to what is possible beyond my current role and where I could go from here.

BS: Well, it sounds a little bit corny, but I like to give back. I think that’s really important. I’ve had a career in management and consulting over the past 30 years. It’s been interesting and exciting and rewarding for me and I want others to have a similar experience in their own careers.

What did you learn from each other?

BL: Bob provided a different perspective on management and shared insights from his vast experience as a management consultant. The team I manage includes people quite a bit older than me, and Bob emphasised that anybody can be a manager – it doesn’t matter how old you are. If you have the ability to work effectively with people and to give them the opportunity to grow into their roles and the space they need to perform to the best of their abilities, then you can be a manager. That was a lesson I learned from the outset and it was really empowering for me and very inspiring.

BS: I enjoy interaction with bright young managers. Ben, particularly, is a bright young chap who’s on the growth path. I gained a better perspective on the way in which emerging managers think and the perspectives of the new generations of employees who will shape business in the future. That’s particularly important.

Would you recommend the mentor program to others?

BL: Absolutely. For any new manager, or any aspiring manager, the program enables you to learn skills and insights that really can only be gained from years of experience. You can’t put a price on having access to that knowledge and experience.

BS: Yes, absolutely. I’d say to anyone who’s considering becoming a mentor in the program that if you’re doing it for the expectation of significant personal or financial benefit, you need to re-examine your motives. Those things will happen, but they’ll happen by making you into a better and well-rounded manager.

Leaders can inspire or pollute teams…. what kind of leader are you?

By Phil Crenigan FIML, Managing Director, Executive Turning Point

The Background

As a Fellow of the Institute of Managers and Leaders I was delighted to accept an invitation to facilitate and lead their opening 2017 Leadership Outlook series on High Performing Teams and how to build them. This involved a significant commitment between February to April 2017 and took me to 17 locations: Sydney, Newcastle, Wollongong, Melbourne, Geelong, Bendigo, Canberra, Adelaide, Darwin, Hobart, Brisbane, Cairns, Toowoomba, Mackay, Rockhampton, Sunshine Coast and Townsville. In the process I was privileged to meet with 840 participants from every kind of business background imaginable. Big business and small business, private sector and public sector. I met with Leaders from mining, engineering, energy, private and public schools, professional services, including legal, dental, financial services and medical practices. Attendance was high from many local government teams, social services, tourism, not for profits and IT.  The one common denominator across this hugely diverse group, was their mutual interest in and need for, high performing teams.

The Context

Much of my work in the last eight years has been helping CEO’s, General Managers and Senior Executives build their own capability and self-awareness as Leaders and in turn to build extraordinary high performing capability around them. How to build high performance in teams is not taught at business school and rarely in our professional lives. (Indeed only a handful out of the 840 participants indicated that they had been through specific professional development to enable them to do this to a successful level.) Yet we all know what it feels like to be part of an extraordinary performing team and a highly dysfunctional group. As a Coach, I know that there are specific drivers and characteristics of high performing teams and this can be measured. I also know that where these drivers and characteristics are driven from the CEO downwards, engagement is high, people are inspired and performance and results in whatever endeavour the organisation is focussed on naturally follow. I provided these insights and tools at all of the sessions so participants could go away and do things immediately with their people.

At the beginning of my journey, I was curious as to what we would discover. Would there be regional differences or different levels of emphasis by type of business? Are there great examples out there waiting to be discovered? What if we were able to codify the drivers and coach this for leaders to be successful? What are the barriers that prevent this and why? Most importantly, I was keen to test out the impact on people when they are in a high performing group and when they are not and how that plays out in their lives in a holistic sense. Finally, what is the role of the leader in all of this as they clearly have a role to play in inspiring others, don’t they’? The only preparation that participants were asked to think about prior was to think about a high performing team that they had been member of in their lives, to note the drivers around why and to recall their general disposition on life at the time. In addition, participants were asked to reflect on a bad team experience they had been a part of, make notes of the drivers around why, and also to reflect on the impact on their lives. This was the basis of the breakout session that has since taken place throughout the 17 locations in Australia. Within 45 minutes, 840 participants openly shared their reflections to both experiences, some with complete strangers and I now want to share with you their insights and the answers to my questions that became crystal clear as the tour progressed.

The Discoveries

i. High Performing Teams
As a coaching and facilitation technique with groups of people, describing “felt leadership” is a powerful conduit to insights and revelations. Participants told us, their learnings were visceral. They recalled examples of high performing teams with such strong recollections.

What the consolidated word heat map of high performing teams below confirms from 870 random examples across 17 locations are:

  1. The drivers are entirely similar which means we can codify what we need to focus on. This was the content of my third and final tool which was distributed after this exercise. It was accepted as a valid driver for every high-performance example from each participant. What the participants demonstrated to themselves is they actually know what drives high performance, because they articulated it in how it felt. Just like we remember the best teachers from 30 years ago in a heartbeat, personal recall on the high performing team experience was immediate, free flowing and energised.
  2. Being part of a high performing team had a direct and positive impact on all aspects of their lives. When it is good, it is all good and we have summaries from every table in every location. Inspired people make better partners, fathers and mothers and all round better humans in all that we do.
  3. The Leader has a clear role to play but so does purpose and direction, role clarity, continual improvement, shared values that are lived and inclusive and open transparent communication.
  4. All of the above resulted in highly engaged people and a strong enabling culture.

Workplace values that can influence a high performing team - Institute of Manager and Leadersii. Dysfunctional Teams

In turning to the dark side, the revelations were at time astonishing in their honesty and the impact on the lives of everybody. Without exception, every participant had a bad experience that was often described, as “the worst chapter of my life”, resulting in loss of relationships, confidence and esteem or health. For health read absenteeism, dread and depression. I would like every leader of people and in particular any CEO reading this article, to carefully read through this picture and to focus on the key words that are at the heart of this word map. One that certainly struck me as I worked through the tour was fear.

  1. These are the words that describe what it feels like to be in a dysfunctional team
    from 840 participants in 17 locations. Once again, it was only through the mechanism of sharing stories and / or experiences through what it “felt” like, were we able to establish this level of disclosure.
  2. The drivers in these dysfunctional teams include, inappropriate / incompetent leadership, absence of any plan, little or no trust, organisational acceptance of inappropriate behaviours, toxic culture.
  3. A profound negative impact on everybody outside of work and the worlds that they seek to play a role in.

I encourage every reader of this article to reflect themselves from their own experience how they felt when part of an extraordinary team and to note down the drivers and to do the same on a poorly led team. My sense and prediction is that your words will be in each of the pictures. The key question is what kind of leader are you and would your people agree….do you inspire or do you pollute?

Workplace values that can hinder team performance - Institute of Manager and Leaders

I would be delighted to hear from leaders and teams if this resonated, particularly CEO’s who want to make a difference going forward. It is never too late and your organisation will be more effective for it.

IML would like your input to understand what would help you move towards a high performing team and to increase your leadership capability in this area. Take our survey today and tell us what else you would like to see to take your team to the next level: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/high-performing-teams

Transparency Will Get You Everywhere

 

Thinking about a rebrand? It’s time to listen to consumer and become the consumer. By Candice Chung

 

Here’s a question every customer wants to know about a company’s rebranding campaign — what’s in it for them?

The ability to answer this question at each stage of a rebranding exercise is key to retaining customer loyalty and creating ‘good news’ narratives.

“Once you’ve worked out your vision, mission and direction, the next step is to put yourself into the shoes of the consumer [or member],” says Barbara Pesel, Managing Director of communications agency Pesel & Carr. “In other words, you need to become the consumer and work out what they want to hear about your brand.”

Strategic empathy is crucial to getting stakeholders on side with branding initiatives. “It is really about saying to the market, ‘We’re here, we’re listening to you. We’re still relevant and this is what we’ve come up with,” says Pesel.

Some of these perceived benefits might include new product offerings, better customer access, or improved services. “Ultimately, people care about the quality of the product and their overall customer experience,” says Nicole Hartley, Senior Lecturer of University of Queensland Business School.

Transparency is another key factor. “Try to be transparent about the need to re-brand,” says Hartley. “That is, don’t just spring it on your customers, introduce it to them and let them know why this is a benefit to them.”

Above all, customers want to feel respected. According to a 2016 customer quotient study by Harvard Business Review, “Customers trust companies that they feel understand them. They respect companies that they believe respect them in return.”

This overall sense of trust can be broken down in five main elements: openness, relevance, empathy, experience and emotion. And a company’s performance on these key indicators “predicts loyalty outcomes and is clearly correlated to profit and growth”.

“The way in which brands have become very smart over the years is that they’ve stopped talking how wonderful they are, and started to focus on what makes their customers unique,” says Pesel. In the end, companies that demonstrate an ability to listen actively and apply strategic empathy will win them the kind of loyalty they need.

 

 

 

Let’s Talk Leadership: With Stephanie McConachy MIML

Stephanie McConachy MIML is part of the new generation of leaders and is passionate about equipping young managers with the knowledge and skills to manage staff and develop further in their chosen careers.

Having recently joined the Institute of Managers and Leaders Board of Directors after three years on the Emerging Leaders Board, McConachy is highly qualified to offer advice to aspiring managers and her thoughts on leadership make compelling listening.

With an established background in marketing, communications and branding, Stephanie’s experience has been varied from working in a small start-up to national law firm Minter Ellison and global firm PwC. Currently at PwC Stephanie operates in a national role acting as an advisor to senior leaders across the business on all matters of marketing.

“When I think about the leaders I admire I think, ‘who would I like to follow?’ I like leaders who take you on a journey,” says McConachy, who features in the August issue of Leadership Matters. “The best leaders are charismatic and they are great communicators.

“They care about the cause and they care about the organisation and they care about the people and they are great communicators. They take you on a journey and you want to follow them.”

In her current role, McConachy is responsible for driving the PwC marketing initiatives and presence in the South Australian market across a range of end-to-end marketing campaigns that build brand awareness and support client acquisition and retention initiatives.

McConachy believes “everyday leadership is the purest form of leadership” and she lives by the mantra of “just do it”. In other words, don’t get too caught up in the pursuit of perfection but rather just throw yourself into tasks and show people the way forward with your passion and dedication to a common cause.

Brand Is You And It Is Them

 

 

Making people want to identify with your brand is crucial to any rebranding as Candice Chung explains

 

 

At the most fundamental level, all forms of rebranding is an attempt to influence the subtle chemistry between a company’s reputation and their customer’s social identities.

“Rebranding is not merely about revamping a brand name or logo, it’s about changing a company’s message, goals and their culture,” says Nicole Hartley, Senior Lecturer of University of Queensland Business School. “This requires a vision for the brand that is inspiring to customers, stakeholders and employees.”

To ensure an overall alignment of visions, first, a company needs to understand what it represents to its customers. “Specifically, what does this brand say about them and their social identities?”

Our social identity refers to a self-curated sense of who we are, and the groups we belong to. For instance, those who cycle to work may identify with people who stay fit; they may also identify with being environmentally conscious. Each of us contains a multitude of social identities, which in turn become powerful triggers to our consumer behaviour.

 

“Successful rebranding is about surprising or delighting customers in a thoughtful and authentic way.”

 

“When consumers identify with a social group that has a well-defined, positive image, they tend to select products that most clearly broadcast membership in it,” according to a recent report by Harvard Business Review.

“Toyota’s [environmentally-focused] marketing for its Prius hybrid car provides an example of how to do this well. By September 2014 the Prius accounted for over half the hybrids ever sold in the United States.”

As Revelian CEO Cherie Curtis pointed out in her recent ‘Change’ podcast with Institute of Leaders and Managers CEO David Pich, “brand is an interactive thing”.

“How much do your members/clients want to attach their identity to your brand? That is the biggest endorsement they can provide,” Curtis says. “It’s about people wanting to associate themselves with that brand.”

Most big rebranding mishaps result from companies not taking the time to understand their customers’ attachment to the brand, says Dr Hartley. “Wanting to merely inject a bit of modernism into a brand is not enough.

“Successful rebranding is about surprising or delighting customers in a thoughtful and authentic way.”

New Name, New Opportunities

 

How successful rebranding can open up new markets for your business. By Candice Chung

 

Regardless of the core business of a company, one of the main aims of of rebranding is to change the expectations you’re setting for your stakeholders.

Companies typically find themselves at a strategic crossroad in response to changing market conditions or increased competition, says Nicole Hartley, Senior Lecturer of University of Queensland Business School. Or they may consider rebranding as a way to support growth strategies that involve moving into new markets – extending their appeal to a wider range of clients, a different gender or age group.

No matter the reason, there is one common thread between all successful rebranding campaigns. “Rebranding done well involves acceptance and continued brand loyalty by your established consumer market,” says Dr Hartley.

Below are some stand-out examples of Australian companies that have broken new grounds by re-energising their brands while maintaining customer loyalty, according to Dr Hartley.

Virgin Blue In 2010, the company renamed and repositioned themselves as Virgin Australia. This was in response to a drop in market share and revenue after entering the market as a low cost airline. Keen to compete in the upmarket business and leisure segment, they repositioned the brand with a new culture and a new customer experience. The comprehensive rebrand led to a name change and focused on a more contemporary look and appeal.

 

‘Rebranding does well involves acceptance and continued brand loyalty by your established market’ – Dr Nicole Hartley

 

Woolworths’ notable 2009 logo relaunch involved a signatory new W for Woolworths, styled with a green apple and accompanied by a new tagline, “The Fresh Food People”. The rebrand hits back at the growing perception that a large percentage of Woolworths’ food was imported. Importantly, it reflects the company’s commitment to fresh produce, which was proudly Australian grown. Their additional commitment includes showcasing the baked goods section within the stores, so shoppers could see fresh food production in action.

ANZ wanted to focus on delivering a brand image that pushed them from being a domestic to an internationally recognised brand – particularly in the Asian markets. A new tagline for the bank – ‘We live in your world’ delivered on this in their 2009 campaign. They also launched a new logo that spoke to a more diverse population. The use of a lotus as the main image “represents ANZ in all its markets regardless of language”, and signifies cultural resonance with the Asian market.

Super Retail Group’s 2012 rebranding campaigned aimed at making a clear distinction between two of their flagship brands – Amart (All) Sports and Rebel Sports. The shift was to rename Rebel Sports as ‘Rebel’ – repositioning it as a premium sports retailer, while enhancing the focus on a female sports enthusiasts market. Rebel Sport had been identified as overly masculine, and the revamp of Rebel (with a new yellow and black logo), together with an effort to make its product offerings more women-friendly, ultimately helped to expand its female market.

 

Rebranding an Aussie icon

 

From retaining relevance to winning market share, there is a lot to be gained from an effective rebranding campaign. Here’s what we can we learn from Bonds — the Aussie retail giant that has continued to reinvent itself over the past century.

 

By Candice Chung

 

Designer Coco Chanel once said, “In order to be irreplaceable, one must always be different.” While the celebrated icon and businesswoman may have been addressing the fashion world, her game-changing advice is just as relevant when it comes to managing corporate image.

For established companies, one way to redefine their point of difference — and remain competitive in a changing market — is through strategic rebranding.

“Ultimately, rebranding gives you an opportunity to communicate, and to go out to your stakeholders again with a good story.” says Barbara Pesel, Managing Director of communications agency Pesel & Carr. “It’s really about saying to the market, ‘We’re here, we’re still relevant, and more importantly — we’re listening to you.’”

Before attempting a rebrand, however, it’s crucial that the company has a strong grasp of its core DNA. Pesel defines this as the sum of an organisation’s vision, mission and values. “Vision is about long-term goals. Mission is what you’re going to do to get there. And your values are your guiding principles.” A sudden or unexplained shift away from any of these factors can risk alienating core customers.

In recent years, a handful of major Australian brands have attempted to reinvent themselves with varying degrees of success. Woolworths notably relaunched its logo in 2009 to focus on ‘freshness’, Virgin Blue moved away from its low-cost origins by repositioning itself as Virgin Australia in 2010, while Radio Shack failed to attract a younger clientele by changing its name to The Shack in 2009.

 

‘Rebranding is really about saying to the market, ‘We’re here, we’re still relevant, and more importantly — we’re listening to you’

 

One household name that has continued to excel at brand reinvention is Bonds. From its early days as a small manufacturer of women’s hosiery in 1915, to its introduction of the iconic Chesty singlet that put them on the map in 1920, the company has evolved into an established leader in today’s $2.5 billion underwear business.

Throughout its 100 year-plus history in the retail market, Bonds has successfully remodelled itself from a masculine, working class icon to a quintessentially Australian brand that appeals to all ages and gender. “Our brand values are at the heart of everything we do,” says Bonds Head of Marketing Emily Smalls. “We design comfortable, great-fitting products, we innovate with the changing consumer landscape and we ensure our communications reflect our brand values.”

For Bonds, those core values are authenticity, inclusivity and a sense of irreverence. And it’s the company’s ability to translate their DNA across an ever-expanding product range that allows it to grow without losing its following.

Bringing Sarah Murdoch on board as an ambassador in 2001 was a watershed moment in Bonds’ 102-year history.

“Rebranding done well involves acceptance and continued brand loyalty by your consumer market,” says Nicole Hartley, Senior Lecturer of University of Queensland Business School. “Two elements come into play here: understanding your key markets and being transparent about the need to rebrand – [in other words], letting your customers know why this is a benefit to them.”

One of the ways Bonds has managed to achieve this is through an effective use of ambassadors. For instance, the introduction of Sarah Murdoch as the face of Bonds has been instrumental in the launch of Bonds Bras and the Female Chesty in the early 2000s; as has the hiring of Pat Rafter to re-energise its male underwear range. Since then, Bonds has continued to introduce new products with personality-driven campaigns fronted by the likes of Rachel Taylor, Miranda Kerr and rapper Iggy Azalea — each reflecting a different facet of the company’s distinctly Australian DNA.

“Ambassadors put a very human element to a company’s image,” says Pesel. “When you think about it, Bonds is all about the first thing you put on in the morning and the last thing you take off. Their ambassadors are people who are able to embody the everyday experience and allow their customers to identify with it, too.”

Above all, the brand has remained agile while upholding its reputation because of a simple reason, says Pesel: “The key thing with Bonds is that it has never tried to be anything but itself. This sense of reliability, along with their ability to put themselves in their customer’s shoes, is ultimately what sets them apart.”