Shake-up for an infallible brand

TODAY is probably as good a day as any to consider one of the most ambitious rebranding exercises the world has ever known. This is not marketing hyperbole. The brand in question is probably, at the ripe old age of 2014, the oldest in existence and, with an estimated 1.2 billion followers, it enjoys a fairly powerful position in terms of market reach.

Just more than a year ago, Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio climbed into his economy class seat on an Alitalia flight heading for Rome, a 13-hour flight from Buenos Aires. Two weeks later, on March 13, he was elected to the most powerful position in the Roman Catholic Church. He took the name Francis, went off to pay his hotel bill and immediately set about rebranding the church.

Catholics who know something about marketing contend that it is not actually a rebranding exercise so much as a brand revival. Essentially, Pope Francis wants to get back to what those in the consulting community might refer to as the church’s core business. Although, having gone “off message” several hundred years ago, it might be difficult for the 1.2 billion Catholics now to agree on precisely what is the church’s core business. Indeed, even the claim that there are 1.2 billion Catholics might not hold up to much scrutiny.

Certainly, over the past 30 or so years, tens of millions of “Catholics” must have balked at being associated with an institution that so often hit the headlines for all the wrong reasons — child abuse, sexual assault, institutionalised complicity and corruption.

It was an extreme example of what happens to an organisation when it becomes too powerful and is run by a self-appointed, unaccountable elite. And it helped to explain why the church was a shadow of its former self in its now very secular home territory of Western Europe. The church had lost touch with its market.

In his “campaign speech” to the Vatican’s General Congregation ahead of their vote to elect a new pope, Bergoglio said the church had become too selfreferential and needed to shift its focus outward. It needed to get in touch with the everyday problems of its global flock, most of whom were battling poverty and the indignities of socioeconomic injustice.

Having identified key problem areas and what the church’s core focus should be, Pope Francis set about “walking the talk” with the sort of commitment and energy that would put most CEOs to shame. He swapped the papal limo for a Ford Focus, the papal palace for a Vatican guesthouse.

With a wily eye to the infotainment obsession of the modern world, he was unashamed in his use of the media to get across his message that excess would no longer be tolerated in the church and that more had to be done to protect the poor and marginalised.

But, as with any ambitious branding exercise, not everybody is happy with the new look. Pope Francis, who is described as a “doctrinal traditionalist” — and has not actually made any changes to the church’s teachings — has apparently created considerable resentment among “conservative” Catholics.

Just as Vatican II in the 1960s caused consternation among Catholics who had adhered to the rigid strictures of the church because they believed there was no choice, today the “conservatives” are stressed by signs of some flexibility in the pope’s previously rigid infallibility. And no doubt there are powerful people in the Catholic bureaucracy who are unhappy about his more vigorous and independent management style. Things could go horribly wrong.

And how will we know if his brand revival is successful? He has shown no interest in proselytising or boosting the numbers of Catholics and he is hardly looking to make the church wealthier.

But in one very important respect he can already claim success — he has achieved worldwide recognition for his pro-poor campaign. OF course Eskom needs a bailout, “Biscuit blackout as Eskom hits crisis” (April 13). It must be the only company in the world that actively discourages its customers from using its products.

Until it has enough product to service all its customers, it will have a cash shortfall. It needs to increase turnover by selling more product to provide the cash it needs.

Those power stations are way too late and, with our burgeoning population all wanting a share of power, the shortage is going to persist for many years to come.

Any bailout should be to finance new power stations, not to cover shortfalls on income or overexpenditure on the day-today running of the business. — FOR the first time as an Eskom employee, I think that our jobs are on the line. After cutting out biscuits, they will be coming for us. I feel threatened. — THE cash flow and insufficient delivery of electricity to South African homes and business would be solved by Eskom becoming a private company. With a board and shareholders to answer to, the rot would have to stop. — ESKOM must stop wasting taxpayers’ money. It spent billions of rands three years ago on implementing an SAPS system that is not able to point out where its movable assets are at any given time.

I wonder if the minister has been briefed on this wasteful expenditure?

Eskom needs to curtail its WRITE TO: PO BOX 1742, Saxonwold 2132, SMS: 33971 E-MAIL: letters@businesstimes.co.za FAX: 011 280 5150 staff travel expenditure, privatise its non-core expenditure and get rid of deadwood staff. — IT seems as if a decision was made that “the point of departure is for Eskom to function as effectively as possible”.

Does this mean that Eskom will step back from acting as a (massively) overpaying employer and training agent for the previously disadvantaged? The head office is bloated beyond comprehension.

If this is the case, there is something very positive in this article. — HERE is an idea: how about putting a freeze on bonuses?

If this were a private organisation on the brink of bankruptcy, there would be no salary increases, no bonuses and no expense accounts. And there would certainly be no budget for expensive TV and radio advertising that merely serves to remind its customers that it is incapable of meeting their needs. — BUSINESS in South Africa is hamstrung because of the perception that the present government cannot be trusted.

Wastage and corruption are key issues, but poor economic policy puts investors at risk in the long and short term. —