What's in a word? (aka Why is Messaging so hard?)

I recently read a great (old) clip of Abbott and Costello buying a computer. It is hysterical. If you haven’t read it yet, you must check it out. And it got me thinking – why is it so hard to convey what we mean? Why is messaging so difficult? This is something that we are really struggling with at Open Text and I don’t think I am revealing some big corporate secret, because Messaging has been a challenge at every company and in every industry that I have worked in. Why is it so hard? Maybe our definition of who we are, as a company, hasn’t evolved with the same flexibility that applies in our personal life. Or maybe it’s that, as people, we are expected to be multi-dimensional with lots of different interests and corporations aren’t allowed the same latitude.

In any given day, I play many diverse roles. Wife, Mother, Sister, Daughter, Boss, Subordinate, Person venting, Person giving counsel to others venting, cheerleader, thought leader, mini-van driver, runner, dog owner, etc. So how would I describe myself? Well, it depends on the situation and what is required at that moment.

Why can’t that same philosophy apply to our corporate identities? We spend so much time and energy trying to distill our messaging down to a single catchphrase that encapsulates everything we do and everything we are. I understand the importance of Brand and I am not suggesting that having a clear brand identity is anything less than critical. But the layer beneath that can be more fluid. At Open Text, we are experts in web content, back-office operations, workflow, social media, storage, e-mail management and much more. Beyond the products that we offer, we aim to provide a holistic customer experience, a fulfilling sales cycle, quick and accurate installation, superior service after the sale, thought leadership with regards to future direction of the market place and, again, much more.

I think the real challenge is finding the link, or the messaging, that ties together the different pieces into a cohesive whole so it doesn’t just feel like a bunch of fragmented tangents with no commonality. It’s easier on a personal level because all of the aspects of me are just who I am. “I yam what I yam.” For a corporation, those lines of commonality needs to be more clearly drawn so customers, analysts, investors and the press can see a vision and the executives can articulate a strategy.

So we will keep working on our Messaging. And I have no doubt that we will solve it…and then it will age and we will have to define it again. Maybe that is the lesson here. I want to keep growing and changing so that my life is dynamic. And I want the company that I work for to keep growing and changing so that its life is dynamic. So I guess “Messaging” isn’t leaving my To Do list any time soon.