Menu

Business Hacks

ChatGPT Image 4 ago 2025, 10_16_19

Kill the Process

, , , ,

Hey workplace revolutionaries—

Imagine a company where no one needs permission to act. Where bureaucracy isn’t a ladder to climb, but a relic to discard. Where people matter more than processes.

Sounds idealistic? It’s already happening. Quietly. Boldly. Around the world.

Welcome to the era of Humanocracy.

Why we need a new model

Let’s face it: most companies today still run on managerialism—the belief that control, measurement and top-down structure are the keys to performance. But control doesn’t scale creativity. And measurement rarely fuels meaning.

The result? An epidemic of disengagement.

Gallup’s 2022 global workplace report showed that nearly 79% of employees are either not engaged or actively disengaged.

In Europe, that number is even worse.

Bureaucracy is draining energy, time, and life out of our organizations. A 2017 Harvard Business Review study estimated that organizational drag costs the US economy over $3 trillion annually in lost productivity.

What if we stopped managing people, and started unleashing them?

Contenuto dell’articolo

What is Humanocracy?

The term comes from Gary Hamel and Michele Zanini’s book Humanocracy, a manifesto for replacing corporate bureaucracies with people-first operating systems.

But it’s more than a management theory. It’s a rebellion against the industrial-age belief that humans are unreliable and need to be controlled by systems.

Humanocracy means:

  • Designing organizations around trust, not control
  • Letting teams self-organize, self-manage, self-correct
  • Recognizing that humans, not systems, create value

It doesn’t mean anarchy. It means responsibility without babysitting. It doesn’t mean no structure. It means structure that adapts to people, not the reverse.

 

Who’s doing it?

Haier (China)

This isn’t a trendy startup. It’s the world’s largest appliance company, with 80,000+ employees.

Under Zhang Ruimin, Haier broke itself into 4,000 autonomous micro-enterprises. Every unit sets its own goals, manages its own budget, and shares in the profits.

They eliminated most middle management roles. They built an internal platform economy before the term even existed.

Outcome? Revenue quadrupled. Time-to-market shrank from months to weeks. And employees? They feel like entrepreneurs.

Buurtzorg (Netherlands)

Founded by Jos de Blok in 2006, Buurtzorg reinvented home care by giving power back to nurses.

No call centers. No complex hierarchies. Just small self-managed teams (max 12 nurses) deciding how to serve their communities.

Result: higher client satisfaction, 30% lower costs for the Dutch health system, and virtually no burnout.

Buurtzorg’s motto? Humanity over bureaucracy.

NER Group (Spain)

A network of companies in Basque Country that share one radical rule: democracy at work.

Employees set salaries collectively. Leadership rotates. Profit is shared. Meetings are open. Financials are transparent.

The goal is not just economic performance—but dignity, equality, and joy at work.

This isn’t a co-op. These are for-profit, industrial companies outperforming their competitors.

But does it work?

Before we dive into the data, let’s give credit to one of the most important movements spreading this mindset: Corporate Rebels.

Founded by Joost Minnaar and Pim de Morree, Corporate Rebels is a global research and consulting project that started with a simple mission: visit the world’s most progressive workplaces and share what they learned. They’ve compiled insights from over 150 trailblazing companies, from Patagonia to Handelsbanken, and turned those lessons into a framework for radically human organizations.

They don’t just write about change. They help build it.

Yes. And not only in niche or creative sectors.

According to Corporate Rebels, which has documented dozens of progressive companies across the globe, humanocratic models consistently show:

  • 2–4x higher employee engagement
  • Lower absenteeism and turnover
  • Faster innovation cycles
  • Stronger customer loyalty

The key? Trust replaces surveillance. Purpose replaces compliance. Accountability flows sideways, not just downward.

And it turns out, people don’t need a boss to do their best work.

They need meaning.

Contenuto dell’articolo

What’s stopping us?

Fear.

Fear of losing control. Fear of being obsolete. Fear that without hierarchy, chaos will erupt.

But most chaos comes from hierarchy: miscommunication, bottlenecks, pointless meetings, corporate theater.

The irony? Bureaucracy feels safe, but it’s deeply fragile. It collapses under complexity. Humanocracy, on the other hand, is adaptive by design.

The bigger risk is to do nothing.

Humanocracy doesn’t mean anti-structure. It means pro-human. It invites us to rebuild organizations that reflect the messiness, brilliance and unpredictability of real people.

Let’s be clear: this isn’t about being nice. It’s about being smart. When people are free to contribute fully, business grows stronger. Culture grows deeper. Work feels like something worth doing.

We don’t need more frameworks. We need more courage.

Let’s build companies that are as alive as the people who make them.

Until next time, stay free.

Alex

At Kredo, we help organizations design systems that empower people—not just control them.If you’re ready to kill the process and build real culture, let’s talk.

dark

What Marketers Can’t Teach, the Dark Web Does

, , ,

Hey net divers—

You know what’s most interesting about the dark web? It’s not Silk Road, illegal goods, or encrypted chat rooms. It’s the fact that marketing is alive and well there. And, sometimes, it’s better than what we see in the open.

In a realm where almost everything is illegal, promotion becomes a matter of survival. What’s really for sale isn’t just drugs, weapons or data—it’s trust, anonymity, speed, and credibility.

The dark web is an underground economy. But its communication techniques are surprisingly enlightening.

The Dark Web Has Better UX Than You Think

In 2022, Oxford University released a study on AlphaBay and other darknet marketplaces. The conclusion? Their usability often surpassed that of official government portals.

Clean interfaces. Detailed reviews. Refund policies. Smart filters. Encrypted customer service. It felt like Amazon—only you could buy stolen identities instead of headphones.

At its peak in 2017, AlphaBay had over 400,000 users and nearly $1B/year in Bitcoin transactions. All this… without a single above-the-fold CTA.

Sellers weren’t anonymous shadows. They had brands: ASCII logos, slogans, tone of voice, visual identities. Some even offered “free samples” to first-time clients.

The most fascinating part? Loyalty. Built not with rewards, but with raw credibility.

Contenuto dell’articolo

Reputation is the New Currency

With no laws, no tracking, and no refunds guaranteed, the only thing that keeps you alive is trust.

On Silk Road, the seller known as “Tony76” had immaculate feedback and fast shipping. He became a legend. Then vanished—taking hundreds of thousands in Bitcoin with him.

Branding, reputation, reviews: it was all a performance. And it worked.

Dark web vendors master the art of illusion. Sound familiar? It should. Not so different from your average thought leader on LinkedIn.

Marketing Without Rules

No compliance. No KPIs. No GDPR. No reporting decks. Just pure demand generation.

Popular tactics seen in forums like Dread or The Hub include:

  • Narrative social proof: fake testimonials crafted like mini-stories.
  • Criminal FOMO: “10 dumps left before the DB is gone.”
  • Anonymous design systems: neon colors, black backgrounds, glitchy aesthetics.
  • Invite-only scarcity: access to top sellers reserved for trusted users.
  • Gamified trust: reputation scores, badges, ranking systems.

It’s not that different from a Klaviyo funnel. Only faster, leaner, and scarier.

Contenuto dell’articolo

The Legitimacy Paradox

Marketing was made to help legitimate businesses grow. Yet it often becomes most powerful in places where legitimacy doesn’t exist.

The absence of structure fuels radical clarity.

If you can sell a product you can’t name, in a place you can’t map, to people you can’t meet… maybe your strategy is actually solid.

Real-World Case Studies

  • White House Market: no-violence policy, minimalist UX, encrypted support like AppleCare.
  • Versus Project: responsive design, modular backend, gamified tutorials.
  • Dark.Fail: curated onion link database, run like a niche content blog with banner ads and editorial updates.

These platforms had influencers, fanbases, and top sellers with cult-like reputations. Not on Instagram—but on Empire Forum.

Contenuto dell’articolo

Dark Lessons for Bright Marketers

  1. Clarity beats clever. In risky environments, no one reads twice.
  2. Reputation is everything. No cookies. No retargeting. Just trust.
  3. Change your tools. Could you sell if Google, Meta, and email were banned?
  4. Minimalism converts. Visual simplicity = faster trust.
  5. Function wins. If it doesn’t help you buy, it’s gone.

So in the end..

In the dark, some things are easier to see.

The dark web strips away legal shields and ethical façades, exposing the raw mechanics of persuasion. What remains is brutal, efficient, and—if you’re willing to look—educational.

Because when attention is a matter of survival, every pixel counts.

Until next time, stay lucid.

Alex

If you’re good at selling on LinkedIn, congrats.

But if you’re curious about how trust is built where no algorithm can help you—then you’re our kind of marketer. At Kredo, we study the edge cases to make the center sharper.

Let’s talk.

1751526576016

Corporate ADHD: Why Brands Can’t Focus (And Customers Can Tell)

, , , , , , , ,

Hey attention crash-testers—

Ever walked into a meeting with five priorities? Congratulations, you have zero.

Brands are burning out. Not because of lack of ambition — but because they can’t sit still. One quarter it’s Gen Z. The next it’s TikTok. Then it’s sustainability. Now it’s AI. And don’t forget NFTs, because someone’s cousin made a million with a pixelated llama.

We’re not iterating. We’re twitching.

And like a sleep-deprived intern juggling Slack, Zoom, and a boss yelling “BE MORE DISRUPTIVE,” brands are living through a full-blown attention crisis.

The result? Customers feel it. Employees drown in it. Strategy dies because of it.

The Corporate ADHD Epidemic

Let me tell you a story. A few years ago, I was consulting for a mid-sized fashion brand in Berlin. They called us in because “they wanted to rebrand.”

Classic.

But by week two, they weren’t sure if the priority was expanding their menswear line, launching a podcast, building a Roblox activation, or going full vegan.

I remember asking the CEO in a workshop, “What’s the one thing your customers come to you for?”

He paused. Looked around. Then said: “Aesthetics?”

It was a question.

This is how it always starts: with a loss of focus disguised as opportunity.

Their Instagram became a random mess of half-baked campaigns. They launched a capsule collection no one understood. Eventually, their loyal base started drifting. They weren’t angry — just… confused. Within 12 months, revenue was down 23%.

This is what happens when you confuse busyness with progress. When you chase everything, you dilute everything.

Contenuto dell’articolo

The Illusion of Agility

Corporate ADHD hides behind words like “agile” and “fast-moving.” But real agility isn’t about reacting to every trend. It’s about knowing when not to.

A 2023 Deloitte report found that only 17% of brands that adopted “rapid pivot” strategies post-Covid saw long-term growth. The rest either plateaued or regressed. Why? Because in most cases, the pivot wasn’t rooted in strategy — it was panic rebranded as responsiveness.

Take CNN+. Remember that streaming service? Neither does anyone else. It launched in 2022. Died in 2022.

Why? Because CNN tried to play Netflix without understanding their own audience’s media habits. They mistook the content boom for a license to diversify, instead of asking the obvious: Do people want more CNN… or better CNN?

Case Study: Oatly’s Focused Weirdness

Now, let’s flip it.

Oatly is weird. Purposefully so. You might think of them as just “the oat milk brand with the loud packaging.” But behind the chaos is ruthless focus.

Their tone is eccentric, but consistent. Their messaging — from TV spots to carton sides — always reinforces the same identity: irreverent, plant-based, anti-corporate.

In 2020, they had a 70% market share in Sweden’s alt-milk category. Globally? They became a symbol of how to be everywhere without being everything.

Even when expanding into Asia, they didn’t dilute. Same fonts. Same humor. Same activist edge. That coherence makes them recognizable — and trustworthy. You don’t need to love oat milk to know what Oatly stands for.

That’s strategic focus. Not rigidity. Not sameness. Focus with personality.

Contenuto dell’articolo

Saying No

In 2022, I was working with a startup in the food tech scene — a scrappy team of twelve, great product, good energy. They’d just closed a decent seed round and were drunk on potential. At our kickoff meeting, the founder burst in late, phone still glued to his ear, and launched into a monologue:

“We want to expand into Germany, open a pop-up in London, relaunch the website, hire a Head of Brand, start a podcast, and explore a metaverse experience — oh, and maybe do something with NFTs.”

I remember blinking, sipping my lukewarm espresso, and saying, “Pick one. Then we’ll talk.”

They weren’t thrilled. They paused the project. I think the CMO even rolled his eyes.

Three months later, I got an email. Subject line: “We should’ve listened.”

The campaigns had flopped. Social was a ghost town. Developers were building two unfinished landing pages at once. Everyone was exhausted. They’d burned through half the budget, chasing noise over clarity.

It was a classic case of cognitive overload disguised as ambition. And saying no wasn’t just advice — it was the only act of strategic mercy I could offer.

Focus isn’t sexy. But it’s the only thing that scales.

Contenuto dell’articolo

Symptoms of Corporate ADHD

  • You’re launching five things and maintaining none
  • Your team is burned out but directionless
  • You’re on every social platform — but with no strategy
  • Quarterly goals shift monthly
  • No one can articulate your brand’s core narrative in one sentence

According to a 2024 PwC survey, 64% of marketing leaders say their biggest struggle is “too many simultaneous priorities.”

So How Do You Treat It?

Here’s the checklist. Stick it to your office wall:

  1. Define what you don’t do — Strategy is subtraction.
  2. Audit your narrative every quarter — Are you still telling the same story?
  3. Build fewer things, but finish them — Launch less. Land more.
  4. Reward long-term KPIs — Not just engagement spikes.
  5. Make ‘no’ a default option — Kill ideas fast. Before they become projects.

I’ll leave you with this.

A few years back, while consulting for a lifestyle brand drowning in half-launched projects, I remember sitting in a dim-lit boardroom covered with sticky notes. The walls screamed potential. But none of it stuck. Each note represented a “priority” — which, by definition, meant none really were. The founder looked at me, wide-eyed, and asked: “So… which one do you think we should go all in on?”

I replied: “Which one would still matter if TikTok disappeared tomorrow?”

Silence.

That’s what focus sounds like.

In a business culture that rewards noise, focus is an act of rebellion. It means resisting the dopamine hit of constant novelty. It means building something — slowly, consistently — until it matters. And it means having the courage to stay boring long enough for your audience to trust you.

Because customers don’t leave because you’re boring. They leave because you’ve lost the plot.

Until next time, stay grounded.

Alex

If your brand feels overwhelmed by too many ideas and zero clarity, we can help. At Kredo Marketing, we turn chaos into strategy — and ambition into results. Let’s talk before your audience drifts away.

Hand drawing illustration set of development

Digital Darwinism: Why Most Brands Aren’t Evolving

, , , , , , ,

Hey evolutionary misfits—

Some brands evolve. Most just mutate. And the difference between the two?

Survival.

In the natural world, evolution is adaptive. It’s a response to the environment. But mutation? It’s random. It’s the business equivalent of slapping a TikTok account on a B2B software firm because “everyone’s doing it.”

Welcome to the age of Digital Darwinism, where tech moves faster than strategy, and survival isn’t guaranteed by innovation — but by relevance.

The Law of the Jungle Is Now the Law of the Feed

Evolution doesn’t reward the strongest or smartest. It rewards the most adaptable. And in marketing, adaptability doesn’t mean chasing trends — it means responding to user behavior, technological shifts, and cultural context with intention.

Blockbuster. In 2000, they laughed Netflix out of the room. In 2010, they were bankrupt. Not because streaming killed them overnight — but because they failed to adapt while their customers did.

It’s never the comet. It’s always the inertia.

Mutation Marketing: A Dangerous Game of Brand Roulette

We see it every day: brands mimicking each other like confused parrots. Suddenly, everyone’s “disruptive,” using the same shade of blue, writing like Duolingo, and putting “AI” in places it has no reason to be.

That’s not evolution. That’s panic-induced mutation.

A McKinsey study in 2023 found that 61% of rebrands failed to improve customer perception.

Why? Because they weren’t strategic responses.

They were stylistic overhauls without ecosystem thinking. If you’re just re-skinning your brand without re-thinking your relevance, you’re not evolving.

You’re molting.

Contenuto dell’articolo

Kodak vs. Fujifilm

Let’s rewind to the early 2000s. Both Kodak and Fujifilm were dominant forces in the film photography world, staring down the barrel of digital disruption.

Kodak had the upper hand in brand recognition. They even invented the digital camera back in 1975 — and shelved it to protect their film business. Their corporate DNA was deeply tied to physical film, and their internal culture was allergic to cannibalizing it.

Fujifilm, on the other hand, saw the writing on the wall and treated digital not as a threat but as a signpost. They invested heavily in R&D and diversified, leveraging their core capabilities in chemicals and imaging into medical diagnostics, regenerative medicine, and cosmetics (see: their successful skincare line Astalift). By 2012, they had cut their film business down to just 1% of total revenue — and thrived.

Kodak filed for bankruptcy in 2012. Fujifilm grew.

It’s not that one had better tech. It’s that one had the cultural flexibility to adapt — and the strategic foresight to redefine itself.

Both giants. Both hit by the rise of digital photography. One died. The other pivoted.

Kodak clung to film like a security blanket. Fujifilm, meanwhile, leveraged their chemical expertise to branch into cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, and healthcare imaging. Today, Fujifilm is thriving.

Same threat. Different reaction. Different outcome.

Evolution is not about protecting the old. It’s about leveraging what’s core to adapt to what’s next.

Your Org Chart Is Fighting Evolution

It’s tempting to think evolution is a matter of tools. Better software, new platforms, smarter automation. But what if the real obstacle to evolution isn’t your stack — it’s your structure?

Most companies are built like machines: hierarchical, rigid, optimized for repeatability. But digital ecosystems are more like organisms — fluid, messy, adaptive. And when a machine meets an organism, guess who bends?

Legacy org charts are the biggest blockers to adaptive change. Why? Because they’re designed to preserve stability, not embrace flux. Consider how ideas travel inside a traditional company: a junior UX researcher has a brilliant insight from user testing. That insight needs buy-in from a PM, who needs approval from a director, who then waits on quarterly alignment from the brand VP. By the time it gets greenlit, the customer behavior has already changed.

According to a 2023 Capgemini report, companies with highly siloed structures were 42% less likely to complete digital transformation initiatives compared to those with cross-functional teams and flatter hierarchies.

Even when companies talk about agility, they often just repackage old structures with new terminology. “Squads” that still need director approval aren’t agile. They’re theatre.

And let’s not forget the human layer: job titles as identity, turf wars over brand ownership, resistance to anything that threatens legacy metrics. These aren’t just annoyances — they’re evolutionary handbrakes.

If your org chart rewards maintaining the status quo, you’re not set up to evolve.

You’re set up to ossify.

Contenuto dell’articolo

What Evolutionary Brands Actually Do

  • They experiment with intent — Testing isn’t about novelty. It’s about feedback loops
  • They hire anthropologists, not just analysts — Data shows you what. Anthropology shows you why.
  • They invest in internal evolution — It’s not just the brand. It’s the mindset.
  • They question legacy success — What worked five years ago might be the anchor today.

Look at Spotify: continuous redesigns, regional personalization, and AI-curated listening that adjusts to your mood.

That’s brand evolution in real-time.

Checklist: Are You Evolving or Just Twitching?

Think of this as your brand’s evolutionary stress test — a diagnostic to understand whether you’re adapting with purpose or just convulsing at every passing trend. Mutation is easy. Evolution is hard. Let’s find out where you stand.

  1. Do you have a test-and-learn loop integrated into marketing? Not just A/B testing banners, but systemic loops that influence product, communication, and UX? Brands like Booking.com run thousands of experiments weekly — what’s your volume?
  2. Are you tracking cultural shifts — not just industry trends? It’s easy to follow what competitors do. It’s harder (and more valuable) to decode cultural codes and shifts in user sentiment. Are you tuning into Reddit, TikTok, and Discord — or just reading LinkedIn posts?
  3. Is your design changing with user behavior or despite it? Figma’s rise wasn’t just because of design tools — it aligned with how distributed teams work. Is your design evolving from user input, or is it dictated by the latest Dribbble trends?
  4. Do your values evolve or just your color palette? Rebrands often change the visuals, but keep dated slogans and outdated tone. Patagonia evolved their messaging with climate urgency — have you evolved yours?
  5. Are your KPIs driving relevance or just performance? Are you tracking Net Promoter Score without understanding what drives it? Do you know why your bounce rate is high or just that it is?

The goal isn’t to tick boxes. It’s to trigger honest reflection. Because evolution requires discomfort. Mutation just needs panic.

and the winner is…

Brands don’t go extinct because the market changed.

They go extinct because they didn’t.

In the age of Digital Darwinism, clarity beats chaos, strategy beats novelty, and intentional evolution beats blind mutation.

Until next time, stay adaptive.

Alex

Want your brand to evolve, not just mutate?

Let’s work together to build strategies that survive the next wave.

👉 KREDO  is Here!

72

Nobody Reads Anymore (Especially Your Boss)

, ,

Hey radical readers—

You’ve probably seen it happen: a report is sent, beautifully designed, meticulously written — and promptly ignored. Slides are skimmed, memos glanced at, emails flagged but never reopened.

And somewhere in the corner office, a decision is made based on a gut feeling or a quick chat — not your 38-page strategy deck.

Let me tell you about Klaus— don’t google it; It’s not his real name 🙂 — a German director at a logistics company I once consulted for.

Klaus ran operations like a chessboard, thinking ten moves ahead. But when it came to internal communication, he had one rule: Keep it short. Nobody reads anything longer than a WhatsApp message.

At first, I thought he was being cynical. Then I watched him in action. He’d skim executive summaries with the speed of a TikTok scroll, ask for bottom-line implications in Slack, and make million-euro calls based on bullet points.

Klaus wasn’t lazy. He was busy.

And, as I soon realized, he was far from alone.

We’re drowning in content, not starving for it

According to McKinsey, the average manager spends nearly 28% of their time reading and responding to emails— that’s over 11 hours a week.

Add Slack, Teams, dashboards, newsletters, KPI summaries, and you’re talking about a cognitive flood.

Contenuto dell’articolo

Reading has become a form of luxury. Deep attention is now a scarce resource — and we’ve trained ourselves to survive without it.

Research from @Gloria Mark, professor of informatics at UC Irvine and author of Attention Span (2023), shows that office workers switch windows or applications every 47 seconds.

Her research, grounded in years of observation and digital behavior tracking, reveals just how fragmented our attention has become. Her work has been featured in The New York Times, HBR, and beyond — because it strikes a nerve:

we’re operating in perpetual interruption.

That means your lovingly crafted report is competing with calendar invites, push notifications, and someone asking “Got a sec?” from across the open space.

And in this context, long-form anything starts to feel like an act of aggression.

The fetish of brevity is not the same as clarity

Here’s the twist: while people want short content, they also want to understand complex ideas quickly. This is where things get tricky.

You cut. You condense. You simplify.

But in doing so, you might also lose the nuance, the friction, the insight that made the thing valuable in the first place.

The result? Executive summaries full of buzzwords, stripped of soul. LinkedIn carousels masquerading as strategy. Infographics that look good but say nothing.

Simplicity is powerful — but only when it reveals. Not when it hides.

As French philosopher Pascal once said (ironically, in a letter): “I would have written a shorter letter, but I didn’t have the time.”

Contenuto dell’articolo

Reading is not dead. But deep reading is rare.

A Nielsen Norman Group eye-tracking study — NN/g is a UX research firm founded by Jakob Nielsen and Don Norman, both legends in human-centered design — found that users typically read only about 20% of the words on a web page during an average visit. They use visual scanning patterns, jumping between bolded terms, subheadings, and bullets.

This behavior doesn’t mean people are stupid — it means they’re overwhelmed.

Which is why the real skill isn’t just writing shorter. It’s writing structurally.

Like this:

  • Start with a hook.
  • Deliver one insight per paragraph.
  • Use white space like it matters (because it does).
  • Layer depth without demanding attention.
You’re not writing for people who are disinterested. You’re writing for people who are overstimulated.
Contenuto dell’articolo

But here’s the real problem: your boss might not want to read.

Here’s a spicy stat: IBM once found that 90% of all data created by businesses is never analyzed or used.

Now, some of that is noise. But a lot of it is reports, feedback, documentation, research — in short, the stuff that should have made decisions smarter.

Why is it ignored?

Because reading slows things down. Because text invites debate. Because nuance complicates decisions.

Reading means having to consider alternatives, acknowledge uncertainty, and admit that maybe — just maybe — we don’t have it all figured out.

But fast decisions need simplicity. Which is why decks get skimmed and dashboards win.

So what can you do if you still believe in thinking?

You learn to speak insight in the language of urgency.

Here’s how:

  • Package big ideas in small containers. Think tweets, not essays.
  • Build layered content: TL;DR up top, insight in the middle, nuance at the bottom.
  • Use visuals — but only when they carry meaning, not just decoration.
  • Write for one reader, not a committee.

And most importantly: measure clarity, not just impact.

Because sometimes, your job is not to be read. It’s to be understood.

And if that means putting your ideas on a napkin or a WhatsApp message, so be it.

What’s your trick to get your message across in a world that doesn’t read?

Drop it below. Or better: send it in emoji.

Until next time, stay readable.

Alex

If you’re still writing 30-page reports in a world that wants 3-second decisions, you’re not failing — you’re speaking the wrong language.

At Kredo, we help you turn complex thinking into clear action.

👉 Let’s simplify things: https://kredo-marketing.com

2148952304

The Paradox of Corporate Jargon: How Complicated Language Became a Survival Tool

, , , , , ,

Hey semantic explorers—

I once sat in a meeting where a VP spent 14 minutes explaining that we were “initiating a synergy-driven ecosystemic transition toward scalable operational realignment.”

What he meant was: we’re changing the org chart.

Nobody laughed. A few nodded.

The more complex his words became, the more seriously he was taken. The fewer people understood, the more people agreed.

Welcome to the modern workplace, where using big words has become a survival strategy — and where clarity is not a virtue, but a liability.

Let’s be honest: nobody talks like that at dinner. You don’t tell your partner, “Tonight I’m initiating a caloric intake optimization protocol.” You say, “I’m ordering Thai.”

But in business? Abstraction is armor.

The use of inflated, intellectual-sounding words often signals not intelligence, but insecurity. When clarity might expose a flawed idea, vagueness keeps it afloat.

“People fear being simple because simple is naked. It forces a conversation about substance.”

And substance is risky.

There’s a kind of performative complexity that lets you sound impressive without being understood. And when nobody understands, nobody pushes back. That’s not just communication — that’s strategy.

Contenuto dell’articolo

The Language of Access and Power

The French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu called it linguistic capital. The more you master the “code” of a system, the more access you get.

In corporate culture, that code isn’t poetry — it’s phrases like “scalability roadmap,” “value chain optimization,” “cross-functional integration.”

What’s the difference between saying “Let’s make this simpler” and “Let’s optimize the interface touchpoints”? Nothing. Except the latter sounds like you went to business school. And that’s the point. Language becomes a proxy for competence.

“If I can’t decode you, you must be smarter than me.”

This is how mediocre thinkers rise: they master the code before mastering the craft.

Strategic Vagueness and the Safety of Smoke

The more ambiguous a plan, the harder it is to measure. And the harder it is to measure, the harder it is to criticize.

Take this real example from a Fortune 500 internal memo: “We will deploy a dynamic reframing of our customer-centric paradigm to enable agile ideation.”

What does that even mean? Literally nothing. But it gives the impression of movement while saying nothing specific — which is perfect, if you want to avoid accountability.

This isn’t rare.

Stanford’s behavioral linguistics lab found in a study that the more abstract the language in performance reviews, the less likely negative feedback was to be included. Simplicity, apparently, feels too sharp. Too confrontational.

It’s no surprise, then, that abstraction becomes a shield. The vaguer you are, the safer you stay.

Contenuto dell’articolo

Steve Jobs was known for ruthless simplicity — “Real artists ship,” “It just works,” “1,000 songs in your pocket.”

Yet for every Jobs, there are ten consultants billing €200/hour to design “cross-platform activation frameworks.”

Why? Because clarity is threatening. It eliminates excuses. It closes the door on bluff.

Remember the Theranos pitch decks? Beautifully written, slickly vague. Had they stated clearly what they couldn’t prove, they’d have never raised a cent.

Sometimes, obscurity isn’t just style — it’s survival.

If you’re one of those people who thinks words should meanthings, here’s the bad news:

the game is rigged.

But the good news? Clarity, when used well, can become your signature.

You don’t have to play dumb. You just have to talk real.

Things to try:

  • Replace three buzzwords in your next presentation with real verbs. Watch the room.
  • Ask your team what a term really means — then wait.
  • Write your next strategy in one paragraph. No nouns longer than 10 letters.

Because in a field addicted to linguistic smoke, real words cut through like fire.

What’s the worst example of corporate nonsense-speak you’ve ever heard?

Drop it below. Let’s build the Museum of Jargon! 😉

Until next time, stay sharp.

Alex

At Kredo Marketing, we help brands simplify their message and amplify their difference. No Jargon. Just positioning that cuts through.

1719820147993

Beauty. How Much Is It Really Worth?

, , , , ,

Hey there, Business Hackers!

Welcome to another edition of Business Hacks & Theories! If you enjoyed our last issue, “The Surprising Power of the Endowment Effect in Business,” get ready because this time we’re diving into a fascinating exploration of a very tangible asset in the business world:

physical beauty.

How much is beauty worth? What are the economic implications of being attractive? And, importantly, what are the social and moral considerations of this phenomenon?

Buckle up and let’s uncover the economics and ethics of attractiveness!

Imagine waking up one day to find that you’re suddenly considered incredibly beautiful. The world reacts differently: people are kinder, more attentive, and opportunities start to appear. But how much is this really worth in economic terms? What are the deeper social and moral implications? Let’s explore this complex issue through a detailed analysis.

The “Beauty Premium”: An Intangible Yet Tangible Asset

The “beauty premium” refers to the economic advantage that attractive individuals often enjoy. Research by economists like Daniel S. Hamermesh shows that attractive people can earn 10-15% more than their less attractive counterparts.

Let’s break this down.

Suppose the average annual salary is $50,000. With a beauty premium of 10%, this individual could earn an additional $5,000 per year. Over a 40-year career, with a 3% discount rate, this results in a Net Present Value (NPV) of around $114,702.59.

Career Opportunities and Promotions

Beyond salary, beauty can influence career trajectories. Attractive individuals often find it easier to secure jobs and promotions. Assuming promotions bring a 15% salary increase, three significant promotions in a career could add another $22,500 to lifetime earnings.

Salary increment per promotion=$50,000×0.15=$7,500

Total increment per promotion=3×$7,500=$22,500

Contenuto dell’articolo
© Freepik

 

Beauty also affects consumer behavior.

Companies use attractive people in advertising, exploiting the “halo effect,”where the attractiveness of a spokesperson influences the perception of the product.

For instance, an attractive influencer might boost sales by 10%, increasing annual revenues by $100,000 if total sales are $1,000,000.

Let’s see now what Halo Effect is.

Psychological Bias: The Halo Effect

The “halo effect” is a cognitive bias where our overall impression of a person influences our perceptions of their other attributes. Attractive individuals are often perceived as more competent, intelligent, and friendly, regardless of their actual abilities.

Analysis of the Halo Effect:

  • Hiring Decisions: Recruiters may unconsciously prefer attractive candidates, assuming they possess superior qualities.
  • Performance Evaluations: Supervisors might give higher ratings to attractive employees, skewing merit-based evaluations.
  • Daily Interactions: Positive perceptions can lead to better social and professional opportunities for attractive individuals.

The Economics of Beauty

The beauty industry is vast and diverse, encompassing a wide range of products and services that cater to different aspects of personal care and aesthetics. The demand for cosmetics, including makeup, skincare, and haircare products, is continuously growing. This growth is driven by constant innovation and the ever-evolving consumer desire for new trends and products.

Aesthetic treatments are also on the rise, with non-invasive procedures like Botox and fillers becoming increasingly popular. These treatments reflect a societal trend towards maintaining a youthful appearance without undergoing major surgery. Despite the costs and risks associated with plastic surgery, invasive procedures such as facelifts and liposuction continue to be in high demand. This highlights the lengths to which individuals are willing to go to achieve their desired look.

Moreover, there is a significant shift towards sustainable and organic beauty products. Consumer awareness and concerns about environmental impact are driving this trend, leading to a burgeoning market for eco-friendly and organic alternatives.

Economic and Social Costs

While the beauty industry is undeniably lucrative, it comes with substantial economic and social costs. One major issue is the financial pressure individuals feel to spend large amounts on beauty products and procedures in order to meet societal standards of attractiveness. This pressure can lead to significant personal expenditure and financial strain.

Additionally, the environmental impact of the beauty industry cannot be overlooked. The production and disposal of beauty products contribute to environmental degradation, posing a significant challenge to sustainability efforts.

Lastly, the relentless pursuit of beauty can have severe psychological consequences. Many individuals experience issues such as body dysmorphia and low self-esteem as a result of the constant societal emphasis on physical appearance. This psychological toll underscores the complex interplay between beauty, economics, and personal well-being.

Entrepreneurs Who Capitalized on Their Looks

Numerous individuals have capitalized on their looks to achieve remarkable business success. One notable example is George Clooney, who leveraged his good looks to become a highly successful actor, producer, and entrepreneur. Clooney’s charisma and charm helped him build a diverse career, and he ultimately sold his tequila company, Casamigos, for a staggering one billion dollars.

Similarly, Gisele Bündchen used her supermodel status to establish a thriving business empire in the fashion and beauty industries. Her iconic presence on the runway and in advertising campaigns has not only made her one of the highest-paid models in the world but also a savvy entrepreneur with successful ventures in skincare and lingerie.

Kim Kardashian is another prime example of someone who has turned her beauty and media presence into a multi-million-dollar business. Leveraging her massive social media following, she has launched successful lines of cosmetics, clothing, and more, solidifying her status as a formidable businesswoman.

David Beckham, the renowned footballer, has also utilized his looks and fame to secure lucrative endorsements and launch his own lines of fashion and grooming products. Beckham’s appeal and style have made him a global icon, allowing him to transition smoothly from sports to business with great success.

Wrap-up

Beauty has a tangible and significant economic value, influencing earnings, career opportunities, and consumer behavior. However, this reality creates inequalities and injustices based on a superficial trait, supported by psychological biases like the halo effect.

Addressing these injustices requires increased awareness and targeted interventions to ensure that everyone, regardless of physical appearance, has equal opportunities for success and economic recognition.

This includes fair hiring practices, merit-based performance evaluations, and education that promotes self-esteem and diversity.

Ultimately, while beauty can open doors and offer economic advantages, society must work to ensure that these doors are open to all, based on skills, abilities, and merit rather than physical characteristics.

Stay savvy, and see you in the next issue!

1719387643617

The Surprising Power of the Endowment Effect in Business

, , , ,

Hey there, Business Hackers!

Welcome to another edition of Business Hacks & Theories! If you enjoyed our last issue, “Why I Celebrate Failures: Robert H. Goddard’s Journey,” get ready because this time we’re diving into another fascinating aspect of behavioral economics:

the “endowment effect.”

Yes, that little bias that makes us overvalue what we already own. Ready to discover how this influences the business world?

Let’s get started!

What is the Endowment Effect?

Imagine you receive a special pen at a corporate event. It’s not just any pen; it’s engraved with your name, a gift specifically for you. Now, if someone offered to trade it for an equally expensive but non-engraved pen, you’d likely refuse. This pen isn’t just a writing tool; it’s become a part of you, a symbol of the recognition you received. This is the endowment effect in action: a cognitive bias that leads us to overvalue what we already own.

The endowment effect was brought to light in the 1980s by Richard Thaler, but its psychological roots run deep. The theory behind it is that we assign greater value to objects we own compared to those we don’t, primarily due to emotional attachment and loss aversion. Losing an owned object is perceived as more painful than gaining the same object if we didn’t own it.

Before the advent of behavioral economics, traditional economics viewed the consumer as a rational optimizer. According to this view, consumers made purchasing decisions based on a rational analysis of costs and benefits, aiming to maximize their total utility. This theory assumed that people were perfectly informed, logically consistent, and immune to emotional or cognitive influences.

Contenuto dell’articolo
©Freepik

Issues with Economic Predictions: This traditional view led to often inaccurate economic predictions. For instance, it was expected that consumers would respond promptly and rationally to price changes, but real reactions were often slow and non-linear. Economists were puzzled by why consumers didn’t switch suppliers or products even when better offers were available.

Examples of Predictive Failures:

  • Real Estate Prices: Traditional theories couldn’t explain why homeowners were reluctant to sell during market downturns, preferring to keep their properties despite depreciation.
  • Marketing and Launch Prices: New product launches often failed because companies didn’t consider consumers’ attachment to existing products.
  • Discount Policies: Temporary discount campaigns were less successful than expected because consumers tended to value their owned products more highly than new offers.

Understanding Real-World Implications

With the groundwork laid, it’s crucial to explore how the endowment effect manifests in practical scenarios. Understanding its real-world applications not only highlights the pervasiveness of this cognitive bias but also sheds light on its profound impact on economic behavior and market dynamics. Let’s dive into some concrete examples and studies that reveal the surprising ways the endowment effect shapes our decisions.

Thaler’s Coffee Mug Experiment: Thaler conducted a famous experiment where participants were given a coffee mug and then asked how much they would sell it for. Surprisingly, participants assigned a much higher value to the mug when it was theirs compared to when it wasn’t.

The Sports Tickets Case: Another interesting example involves tickets to sporting events. People who own tickets to a major game often refuse to sell them even at prices much higher than the purchase price. This behavior is a clear sign of the endowment effect: the ticket is not just a piece of paper but represents the future experience and emotion of being part of the event.

Real Estate Market: In the real estate market, homeowners tend to overvalue their homes compared to potential buyers. This can lead to unrealistic asking prices and difficulties in closing transactions. A survey showed that sellers often add an “emotional premium” to their property’s value, complicating negotiations.

Value of Personalized Gifts: Personalized gifts, like photo mugs or engraved jewelry, are especially appreciated by recipients. Even though the market value of the item may be modest, the perceived value is much higher thanks to the endowment effect. This is widely exploited in the marketing of personalized products.

Contenuto dell’articolo
generated by me with DEll-E

Economic Implications

The endowment effect has profound economic implications that extend beyond the simple perception of the value of objects. It influences various aspects of business and consumer behavior, reshaping how decisions are made in the marketplace. Let’s delve deeper into some of these implications and explore how they manifest in real-world scenarios.

Resistance to Change

In the business world, the endowment effect often manifests as resistance to change. Employees and managers tend to overvalue current processes and practices compared to new proposals, even when the latter could be more efficient or innovative. This phenomenon can significantly slow the adoption of new technologies or methodologies.

For instance, consider Kodak, a company that was once a giant in the photography industry. Despite the clear shift towards digital photography, Kodak clung to its film-based business model for too long, valuing its established processes and infrastructure over new digital opportunities. This resistance to change, fueled by the endowment effect, contributed to the company’s eventual downfall when it failed to adapt to the digital revolution.

Marketing and Sales

Marketing strategies frequently exploit the endowment effect to increase sales. Companies often offer free trials or unconditional refund policies, allowing consumers to try products risk-free. This tactic makes consumers feel as if they already own the item, and once the product is in their hands, it becomes harder to return it due to the endowment effect.

For example, Amazon Prime offers a 30-day free trial, giving users access to its vast range of services, from streaming to free shipping. This trial period allows customers to experience the benefits of the service, making them more likely to subscribe once the trial ends, as they have started to perceive the service as part of their routine.

Investment Valuation

Investors can also be influenced by the endowment effect in their financial decisions. They tend to hold onto stocks they own even when it is clear that selling would be more advantageous. This behavior, known as the “endowment effect bias,” can lead to suboptimal investment portfolios.

Take the example of Warren Buffett’s investment philosophy. While Buffett is known for his long-term investment strategy, he also emphasizes the importance of not getting emotionally attached to stocks. He advocates for rational decision-making and frequently advises against letting the endowment effect influence investment choices. However, many investors still struggle with selling stocks at the right time due to their emotional attachment to their holdings.

Negotiations and Bargaining

In negotiations, the endowment effect can lead to impasses. The parties involved often overvalue what they are offering compared to what they are receiving, complicating the achievement of agreements. This is particularly evident in real estate negotiations and business-to-business transactions.

A practical example can be seen in the merger talks between major corporations. During the failed merger negotiations between Pfizer and AstraZeneca in 2014, AstraZeneca’s management significantly overvalued their company’s worth, influenced by their attachment and the endowment effect. This led to Pfizer’s offers being rejected multiple times, ultimately causing the negotiations to collapse.

The endowment effect is more than just a cognitive bias; it is a window into the complexity of human decision-making and our emotional nature. Recognizing and understanding it allows us to better navigate daily interactions, both personal and professional.

Imagine being able to use this knowledge to improve your marketing strategies, optimize your negotiations, or simply better understand consumer behavior. The endowment effect teaches us that value is not just a matter of price or utility but also of perception and emotional attachment.

Reflecting on this bias can help us make more informed decisions and be less influenced by our emotions. It can lead us to be more aware of our attachments and to consider alternatives we might otherwise have dismissed. And in an increasingly complex and interconnected world, this awareness is an invaluable resource.

So, Business Hackers, next time you find yourself evaluating something you own, ask yourself:

“Am I truly considering its real value, or am I influenced by the endowment effect?”

This simple question could make a big difference in your decisions.

Stay savvy, and see you in the next issue!

Alex

1719215810126

Why I celebrate Failures: Robert H. Goddard’s Journey

, , , ,

Hey there, business enthusiasts! Welcome back to “Business Hacks & Theories”. Last time, we uncovered the inspiring journey of Momofuku Ando,—>(check this article here) the inventor of instant noodles. This week, we continue our series “Lessons from Failure” with the fascinating story of Robert H. Goddard, the father of modern rocketry.

Our society’s obsession with success often leads to unrealistic expectations and pressures to emulate others’ achievements. This phenomenon, known as social emulation, can cause significant personal and financial setbacks. Understanding and studying failures is crucial for a more realistic perspective and informed decision-making.

Robert H. Goddardwas born in Worcester, Massachusetts, in 1882. From a young age, he was fascinated by space travel, inspired by H.G. Wells’ “The War of the Worlds.” His dedication to pursuing space flight became fixed on October 19, 1899, when 17-year-old Goddard climbed a cherry tree to cut off dead limbs.

As he gazed at the sky, his imagination soared. He later wrote:

“On this day I climbed a tall cherry tree at the back of the barn … and as I looked toward the fields at the east, I imagined how wonderful it would be to make some device which had even the possibility of ascending to Mars, and how it would look on a small scale, if sent up from the meadow at my feet. I have several photographs of the tree, taken since, with the little ladder I made to climb it, leaning against it. It seemed to me then that a weight whirling around a horizontal shaft, moving more rapidly above than below, could furnish lift by virtue of the greater centrifugal force at the top of the path. I was a different boy when I descended the tree from when I ascended.

Existence at last seemed very purposive.”

Despite severe health issues that confined him to bed as a teenager, Goddard used this time to read extensively and develop his scientific ideas. In 1907, while still a student, he conducted his first rocket experiments, resulting in a notable mishap that nearly burned down a school building.

Contenuto dell’articolo
Robert H. Goddard – Portrait

Undeterred, Goddard pursued his passion for rocketry with relentless focus. In 1914, he received patents for a multi-stage rocket and a liquid-fuel rocket. Despite initial failures and public mockery, he continued to refine his designs. His perseverance paid off in 1926 when he successfully launched the world’s first liquid-fueled rocket. This modest achievement laid the groundwork for modern rocketry and space exploration.

One of the most poignant stories about Goddard involves his 1926 rocket launch in a cabbage field in Auburn, Massachusetts. The rocket, which he named Nell, stood just over 10 feet tall and flew for a mere 2.5 seconds, reaching an altitude of 41 feet and landing 184 feet away. This modest flight was the first successful launch of a liquid-fueled rocket and marked the birth of modern rocketry. The local press, however, was not impressed, and Goddard faced ridicule from both the media and his peers.

During World War II, Goddard’s work on rocket-assisted takeoff technology significantly advanced military capabilities. Known for his humility, Goddard often funded his research personally and worked in seclusion to avoid public scrutiny. One memorable quote from Goddard encapsulates his optimism:

“It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow.”

This quote reflects his enduring optimism and determination.

Goddard’s pioneering work inspired future generations of scientists and engineers, paving the way for the Apollo moon landings and beyond. His legacy is honored through institutions like NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center, which continues to advance space exploration

Contenuto dell’articolo
Goddard’s First Liquid Fueled Rocket / Clark University Robert H. Goddard Archive

Lessons from Goddard’s Failures

  1. Perseverance Against Odds: Goddard’s journey underscores the importance of persistence. Despite numerous setbacks, he never gave up, leading to revolutionary advancements in rocketry. His early experiments often ended in failure, but each attempt brought him closer to success.
  2. Innovation from Passion: Driven by his passion for space travel, Goddard’s relentless pursuit of his dreams led to groundbreaking innovations, despite widespread skepticism. His dedication to his vision highlights how deep passion can fuel innovation even when faced with considerable challenges.
  3. Learning from Failure: Goddard saw each failure as a learning opportunity, refining his methods and designs through constant experimentation. For instance, his initial attempts at launching rockets resulted in explosions and misfires, but he meticulously documented these failures to improve future designs.
  4. Impact Beyond Success: Goddard’s contributions laid the foundation for the space age, influencing generations of scientists and engineers. His work demonstrated how perseverance and innovation in the face of failure can lead to advancements that benefit all of humanity. The principles he developed are still used in modern rocketry.

In “Lessons from Failure”, I aim to highlight how failure is a crucial part of the journey to success. Each story delves into the struggles, resilience, and eventual triumphs of individuals who have turned failures into stepping stones.

Join me on this journey, and perhaps find the courage to face your own failures with renewed determination.

What if your next failure is the seed of your greatest success?

Thank you for joining me on this exploration of Robert H. Goddard’s inspiring journey.

Stay tuned for more insights and hacks to boost your business acumen in the next issue of “Business Hacks & Theories”!

With Love, Alex 🙂

2148188145

Burn It Down to Build It Right: The Truth About Extreme Rebranding

, , , , , , ,

Hey bold believers—

This is our 100th edition of Business Hacks & Theories, and I just want to say:

Thank you. ❤️

Over the past months, we’ve explored the weird, the brilliant, the broken, and the beautiful corners of marketing, branding, economics, and behavior.

We’ve dissected logo psychology, algorithmic traps, chaos packaging, and branding in VR. This space has grown into a place for critical thought, honest analysis, and a touch of provocation. And today, we’re doing all of that—but with scalpel precision. Because this is no ordinary topic.

To mark this milestone, we’re diving into Extreme Rebranding—not a color palette update or a typeface refresh, but the kind of radical brand transformation that alters a company’s DNA.

The Theory Behind the Transformation

Extreme rebranding isn’t about chasing trends—it’s about restoring narrative control. It emerges when a brand’s existing identity is no longer compatible with its environment, its audience, or its ambitions. This level of change is a strategic decision rooted in semiotics, behavioral economics, and corporate survival instinct.

At its core, a brand exists to signify consistency, trust, and differentiation. But when that meaning collapses—due to cultural shifts, technological disruption, or reputational decay—the semiotic value of the brand turns against itself.

The old signs become liabilities.

Extreme rebranding becomes the only viable form of detox.

It has to work on three levels:

  • Symbolic: the brand must communicate rupture, signaling that something fundamental has changed.
  • Operational: the internal practices and business strategy must evolve in sync.
  • Emotional: the audience must be brought into the new narrative in a way that feels meaningful, not manipulative.

In that sense, rebranding at this scale is more akin to identity therapy than graphic design. And every brand that survives it does so by confronting a central tension:

continuity vs. reinvention.

The case studies that follow are not the story. They are the evidence. Each one shows how theory translates into execution—and what happens when the execution hits (or misses) the mark.

Contenuto dell’articolo

Burberry – From Gangwear to Global Luxury

Burberry’s transformation is a masterclass in reclaiming cultural capital.

By the early 2000s, the brand’s iconic check pattern had become associated not with British elegance but with counterfeit markets and football violence.

The brand wasn’t just outdated—it had become stigmatized.

The leadership duo of Ahrendts and Bailey didn’t simply refresh the aesthetic. They pulled off a full semiotic reboot: digitally native campaigns, streamlined product architecture, runway credibility, and above all, narrative clarity.

The brand told a new story—about British design, digital luxury, and modern heritage.

This case illustrates how effective rebranding requires coherence between symbol (visual), strategy (distribution and pricing), and story (heritage reimagined for now).

Contenuto dell’articolo

Dunkin’ – Cutting the Donuts, Sharpening the Focus

When Dunkin’ dropped “Donuts” from its name, it was signaling something deeper: a strategic repositioning away from legacy product definitions and toward lifestyle utility. In economic terms, Dunkin’ stopped defining its category as a “donut chain” and embraced its place in the $80B global coffee economy.

The rebrand worked because it aligned with consumer behavior and market data. Coffee was the high-frequency, high-margin product.

Everything—from store design to app UX—reinforced the new identity: fast, efficient, caffeinated.

What this shows: a successful extreme rebrand doesn’t just change the name—it changes the value equation.

Contenuto dell’articolo

Old Spice – Absurdity as a Strategic Weapon

Old Spice’s reinvention under Wieden+Kennedyis one of the boldest cases of brand surrealism deployed for market gain.

The process began with a fundamental assessment: the brand was irrelevant to younger audiences and stuck in a cycle of nostalgic inertia. Axe had cornered the youth market with provocative edge, while Old Spice sat dusty on the shelf.

The rebranding was conducted in carefully orchestrated phases. First, the agency identified the need to completely reverse the tone. Instead of mimicking the hyper-sexual tone of Axe, they leaned into absurdity, irony, and unexpected self-awareness. The now-legendary campaign “The Man Your Man Could Smell Like” wasn’t just an ad—it was a thesis statement.

Next came execution across media: video ads, social interaction, and product naming followed the same exaggerated, playful language. Each point of contact reinforced the shift. Then came product line expansion and packaging redesign, which broke from traditional masculinity tropes and embraced bold color, clean vector graphics, and irreverent names.

Internally, the brand voice was recalibrated to allow creative freedom while staying within a surrealist narrative. The key to success? Consistency in the chaos.

Audiences not only accepted the shift—they celebrated it.

Old Spice didn’t just refresh its look. It reprogrammed its semiotics. It taught its audience how to interpret it anew. That’s not just a rebrand—it’s cultural sleight of hand with a sales boost.

Pfizer – Rebuilding Trust After Global Spotlight

Pfizer didn’t choose to rebrand—it was forced to. The pandemic made it a protagonist, and with attention came scrutiny. The company had to shift from industrial anonymity to public trust.

The challenge wasn’t just visual—it was philosophical.

The new branding, with its DNA-helix symbol and fluid identity system, signaled a repositioning: from corporate pharmaceutical to mission-driven biotech innovator.

The tone softened. The story changed from “we make drugs” to “we unlock breakthroughs.”

Here, the rebrand became an act of reputation recontextualization—using visual cues and narrative pivots to change not just perception, but public expectation.

Rebranding Is a Systemic Intervention

Extreme rebranding isn’t a project.

It’s a systemic intervention. It forces every function—from HR to product to comms—to align around a new organizing idea. Without that alignment, the rebrand is hollow.

What the best rebrands teach us is that branding is not the cherry on top of strategy.

It is strategy—visualized, embodied, and deployed.

So if you’re considering a rebrand, ask yourself: Are you repainting the walls—or rethinking the foundation?

Thanks for staying with me for 100 chapters of this wild marketing journey.

Here’s to the next 100.

Until next time, stay iconic.

Alex

🔥 Thinking about a rebrand? At Kredo Marketing, we help brands evolve with clarity and depth.

💬 Let’s rewire your identity—strategically.

Load More