Aliases and other forms of deception.

Well, that's it. I have had enough. I am going to change my name. I am sick and tired of people who have known me for a long time expecting that my previous words and deeds should somehow imply who I am and what I stand for. My old name is just so yesterday. Let's me, what fitting new identity pleases me? Barack seems to have some fresh promise. Bono would be another possibility. Father Teresa isn't taken yet. Harpo, or Oprah spelled backward, could bring on a certain level of celebrity gravitas.

No seriously, it's just that running from your reputation has taken on a whole new level of fiction. Branding was supposed to be about teaching the marketplace who you were and what you stood for. Today, it seems more often the game is to confuse the marketplace by denying who you were and overstating what you have become.

A failure to communicate

I find it valuable to look at history to understand how these best practices originated. It seemed to get off to a decent start in biblical times. Most often when a guy got renamed then, it seemed to mean something--although not unlike today there was often some onerous behavior for a new name to overcome in the local market. Renaming gained momentum with 20th century crooks, who began to find their recorded criminal backgrounds inconvenient. So, in order to avoid reminding folks of their desperado past, they would dream up a new identity and start over. The problem too often was that over time they engaged in the same behavior, so it was necessary to rebrand from time to time. Of course, back then they didn't use that term--rather they used terms like imposter, assumed name, alias and so forth. But of course that was before marketing evolved. The old view of communication was to illuminate. The new 2.0 version is to obfuscate.

Surely there is a better way to cure an inconvenient past. At this writing we are winding up the elections. I notice that several of the candidates who sent me material did not reveal their political party even though I have determined they each do in fact represent one. This attempt to rebrand is not just limited to celebrities, business and politics. We are even seeing it in the world of organized religion. Eddie Gibbs, professor of church growth at Fuller Theological Seminary summarizes: "I think what we are seeing is the detribalizaton of Protestantism ... So, I think that the dropping of the denominational label is to become more generic, less of a threat, less of a reminder of negative stereotypes if you've walked away from church."

Are you really changing the behavior?

Now don't get me wrong. I am all for the capability to change and evolve. It is a source of hope for all of us individually and organizationally that we might be able to more nearly become what we aspire to be. The taking on of a new name can be a signal to all--internally and externally--of the intention to become something new. All too often, much effort is put into the effort to change the image and so little is put into the heavy lifting of changing the behavior. The problem is that "spin" has spun out of control. The authors of "Applebee's America" are right on target: "The most important gut values today are community and authenticity ... [people are] tired of spin and sloganeering from political, business and religious institutions that constantly fail them." Marketing runs the risk of becoming a distrusted community due to inauthentic appeals detached from reality.

I suggest that any organization changing its old name to a new name should answer three questions regarding strategic repurposing:

1. What key behaviors are targeted to change--internal and external?

2. What key resources will be allocated differently--financial, human, leadership?

3. What cultural and incentive mechanisms will be provided to enable the change?

Renaming and rebranding, absent attention to substance, gives change a bad name. We are to a point where selling of change has so outstripped execution of change that true efforts at individual or organization redemption are greeted with cynicism. Thoughtful attention to renaming and rebranding without a look at repurposing will fail. None of us want a world so full of deceitfully renamed fried chicken, cigarettes and trial lawyers that everyone is a cynic about transformation.

Robert Hall is author of "The Street Corner Strategy for Winning Local Markets." E-mail: [e-mail]