Tracking Number: ICA-7-10798
18
other stakeholders and did not secure legitimacy. The radicalness of the name played badly with
a conservative organization unprepared to take a leap into the future, precisely because that
future was never made plain to them, through a blurred strategic and vision process and an even
more opaque communications approach.
This has been an exploratory study based on a single case study and so should some caution be
exercised with regard to the findings. Examining these effects longitudinally would increase the
strength of future studies as too would the use of contrasting observations from multiple cases
seem to enhance the notion of replication.
Concluding Remarks
Corporate re-branding and business status changes in a major UK communication firm provides
a key instance of an attempt to ensure enhanced legitimacy both internally and externally to core
constituencies, leading to the redefinition of organizational identity and image. In order to
effectively facilitate transformational change, communication strategies will not succeed if done
piecemeal. They should be done in the form of an integrated framework, thereby broadening
horizons toward a holistic approach toward the entire organization.
This research study shows that communication strategies in change process stem from a clear
understanding of ‘where we are’ and ‘where we head for’ and henceforth bridging the gap with
communication mechanisms. Their essential elements include audience-driven focus, succinct
messages delivered in an informal way, two-way communication, and rich channels of media
employed. Paralleled with this change initiative, it implicitly involves the intention to embody a
new portfolio of ‘redefined and reinterpreted’ corporate identity and image through a new name
and business status. However, in practice, an influential avenue to a change identity, which is a
changed image, becomes a fiasco within two years after the implementation put in place.
Convention