Corporate Reputation Review Volume 5 Numbers 2 and 3
Why Internal Branding Matters: The Case
of Saab
Alan Bergstrom and Dannielle Blumenthal
Institute for Brand Leadership
Scott Crothers
Independent Strategic Brand Consultant
ABSTRACT
In this paper, the concept of internal branding
is reviewed and its importance to the overall
brand engagement is outlined, as is its rela-
tionship with the field of reputation manage-
ment. The Brand Consultancy’s internal
branding methodology is introduced in theoreti-
cal terms, and then applied to a successful
engagement with Saab Automobiles. Chal-
lenges, lessons, and broader implications are
discussed.
INTRODUCTION
Branding, as a field, is currently enjoying
its 15 minutes of fame. As purveyors of a
mainstream business tool, brand consultants
no longer need to justify their existence.
They can take the time to investigate their
work more thoroughly, and emerge with
more refined theories of brand, as well as
methodologies for investigating, imple-
menting, and measuring it.
Yet in a way, the very success of
branding has begun to obscure its true
nature in postmodern, postindustrial
society. What began as a descriptive exer-
cise, and a means of communicating qual-
ity, has morphed into the attempt to
personify products and services in terms
of some higher meaning. Already by
1955, in a landmark article, ‘The Product
and the Brand,’ (Harvard Business Review,
March–April), Gardner and Levy called
for an understanding of:
The more fundamental issues a manufac-
turer and his (sic) advertising people
should face. . . a greater awareness of the
social and psychological nature of ‘products’
— whether brands, media, companies,
institutional figures, services, industries,
or ideas [emphasis added].
Yet, there persists a lack of clarity about
the term ‘brand,’ one that is reflected
even in this short excerpt, which places
‘brand’ in the category ‘product’ and dis-
tinguishes it from companies, services,
ideas, and so on when in fact all of these
things can be branded. This linguistic ten-
sion persists today as the word ‘brand’ is
used loosely and interchangeably for
everything from product (‘we have a line
of brands’) to message (‘is this on-brand?’)
to logo (‘this is our brand identity’),
advertising (‘branding our line of cloth-
ing’) and more.
Thus, for clarity’s sake, before discussing
what an internal brand is we will begin
with a definition of brand and a distinction
between brand and reputation.
Corporate Reputation Review,
Brand Vol. 5, Nos. 2/3, 2002, pp. 133–142
# Henry Stewart Publications,
To us, a brand is the sum total of all per- 1363–3589
Page 133
Why Internal Branding Matters: The Case of Saab
ceived functional and emotional aspects of
a product or service. Therefore, we argue
that everything, and everyone, is ‘branded’
(whether they like it or not) because all
actions communicate a meaning of some
kind.
Branding — the verb — is about adding
a higher level of emotional meaning to a
product or service, thereby increasing its
value to customers and other stakeholders.
A brand’s value is positively related to the
extent of these stakeholders’ emotional
attachment to it. And while it is true that a
brand’s rational, or ‘functional,’ attributes
are also a source of value, over the long
term, these tend not to provide as sustain-
able a competitive advantage as those
which derive from a strong layer of emo-
tional affinity, or identification, between
brand and constituent. (It is purposeful that
words like ‘constituent’ and ‘stakeholder’
to describe a brand’s relevant audiences are
used, as they emphasize the importance of
building relationships between all indivi-
duals whose lives are touched in a relevant
way by the brand.)
Ideally, the brand should flow through
each and every area of the business, begin-
ning with the actual product or service and
extending outward to permeate and
inform every aspect of the organization.
The brand is not only for packaging and
ads, but also for the walls, the bonus
system, the invoices, the intranet, and so
on.
Moreover, although there is much dis-
cussion of the ‘difference’ between kinds of
brands — B2C vs. B2B brand, product vs.
service brand, corporate vs. employer
brand, we are not convinced that there is
any distinction between them. Techniques
may differ, but all great brands have one
purpose: to create a unique and strong
emotional bond between themselves and
their audiences, one that creates greater
loyalty than would otherwise have been
enjoyed.
Page 134
Reputation
Corporate reputation, like brand, suffuses
all areas of the business — at least insofar as
every action taken affects the reputation of
the firm. In the sense that reputation is the
sum total of constituents’ brand percep-
tions, it is synonymous with brand. Simi-
larly, in the sense that both brand and
reputation is fundamentally intangible,
they enjoy a close relationship — eg, it
would be relatively painless to subtract
‘reputational capital’ from the following
definition by Fombrun, and substitute
‘brand equity’:
A company’s reputational capital is the
excess market value of its shares — the
amount by which the company’s market
value exceeds the liquidation value of its
assets (Fombrun, 1996).
However, there are several key distinctions.
First, there is the matter of differentiation.
The ultimate brand is unique, its ‘essence’
irreplaceable — there is only one Disney,
one Coca-Cola, one Virgin, one Starbucks.
A strong reputation, however, derives
from similar characteristics across compa-
nies. As Fombrun acknowledges, it’s all
about:
credibility, reliability, responsibility, and
trustworthiness (Carmeli and Cohen,
2001: 72).
A second important difference is that repu-
tation, unlike brand, exists independently
of demand. One can exhibit credibility,
reliability, responsibility and trustworthi-
ness independently of the emotional needs
of one’s audiences. However, the same is
not true of a brand, whose power exists in
direct proportion to the emotional needs it
satisfies. Disney may consistently portray a
certain brand of ‘magic,’ but people have
to want the magic in order for it to be a
strong brand.

For both of these reasons, a company
can have a winning reputation without
necessarily having a strong brand. It is
laudable to demonstrate integrity, yet it is
something else to create a totally unique,
compelling, and focused emotional promise
— and then deliver satisfaction on that
promise over and over again, always with
the same freshness, vitality, and relevance
as on Day 1. McDonald’s may have guide-
lines for how often to smile at the custo-
mer, and obeying them helps to build a
good reputation. But knowing how to
make the customer smile is the essence of
its brand.
Internal brand
Internal branding (IB) refers to three
things: communicating the brand effec-
tively to the employees; convincing them
of its relevance and worth; and success-
fully linking every job in the organization
to delivery of the brand essence. It is a
subset of ‘operationalizing’ the brand,
which simply refers to the integration of
the brand with all aspects of the business.
At the corporate level, internal branding is
an especially useful tool for unifying dis-
parate companies operating within the
same portfolio. When used correctly, it
helps people working within those compa-
nies to understand their place in ‘the big
picture’ and to be more productive in
contributing to it.
THE BRAND CONSULTANCY’S
INTERNAL BRANDING METHODOLOGY
As IB proliferates, so do the number of
firms offering a unique approach for its
implementation. This section discusses the
authors’ approach, and can briefly be sum-
marized as ‘the 5 Cs’: clarity, commitment,
communications, culture and compensa-
tion. These broad categories have been
developed over time, and it is emphasized
that they do overlap and are often simulta-
neous.
Bergstrom, Blumenthal and Crothers
Origin of the framework
Historically, branding has been a technique
for creating an image or identity through
the use of a visual logo, name, and of
course, advertising. The goal, it seemed,
was to express a message in some compel-
ling way. But by the mid-1990s, it became
clear how limited an approach that was. In
the real world, other places, not just custo-
mers but also other constituent groups, test
the brand as well. This could be in how
the telephones are answered, how the
actual product is packaged, or distributed,
or presented, how it performs or what the
customer service people are like. But the
brand is present everywhere.
It was also learned, from research, that
all of these things contribute to form an
impression of the brand, and that most
often that impression is not formed at the
conscious level. It is not possible for one to
just go out there and ‘give’ someone the
brand, the brand is communicated subcon-
sciously.
The Saab engagement really helped clar-
ification of this — because car shopping is
a good example of a brand being commu-
nicated in ways other than advertising. For
example, perhaps you drive up to the place
and cannot find a place to park. You are
not thinking, ‘This is a bad brand, because
there are no parking spaces.’ But some-
thing happens within your mind that may
be a contributing factor. Then, perhaps
you walk in through the front door, and
immediately three salespeople descend, as if
you have just been thrown into a cage of
hungry tigers. Again, you do not think,
‘This is a horrible brand,’ at least not neces-
sarily, but an opinion is being created in
your mind. And even if you find a car that
you like, if the salesperson is obviously
going through a ‘canned pitch’, and not lis-
tening to what you are saying, what kind
of impression does that leave?
In short, it is the people, not advertising,
that are at the core of a brand. What is
Page 135
Why Internal Branding Matters: The Case of Saab
commonly called internal branding is actu-
ally branding itself: implicitly or explicitly,
consciously or unconsciously, representa-
tives of the organization are always com-
municating something. It therefore makes
sense to be proactive about the message
being sent. It is not only a matter of win-
ning the hearts of external customers, but
of motivating internal customers (employ-
ees) as well. Whatever ‘job’ they are doing,
people need to know what it is they are
contributing to, and why.
Clarity
Before you can send a message effectively,
you have to know what message it is that
you want to send. Priority number one
therefore, is to arrive at a binding decision
as to what the brand represents and how
that should be communicated in words and
images.
This process can be divided into two
stages:
1 Constituency assessment. This means
comprehensive interviews of groups
engaged with the brand to talk about
what it means to them. This includes
senior management, middle and lower-
level employees, partners, vendors,
clients, industry analysts, regulators; in
fact everyone involved. The viewpoints
of employees, including disaffected and
former employees, are critical in this
stage. (In fact, merely doing the inter-
views is seen as a means of promoting
support among employees for the
culture change that has to occur if the
brand engagement is to be successful.)
For this reason, it is key that personnel
are interviewed in a confidential, anon-
ymous manner, so that they can say
anything, without fear of retribution.
2 Senior leadership must decide on key
brand attributes for translation into
language and visual symbols that
become the cornerstone of the brand’s
Page 136
‘face’ and ‘voice’ (The Brand Consul-
tancy (TBC) calls this ‘Face of the
Brand’ and ‘Voice of the Brand’,
respectively). These attributes must be
relevant, believable, desirable, and
above all livable. If employees do not
live the brand then this entire engage-
ment merely becomes another trendy
exercise, resulting in a report that sits
somewhere in the corporate server.
Moreover, although it will be difficult to
narrow down what qualities the organiza-
tion’s brand will represent, it is essential to
limit them stringently. In a brand initiative
you do not have the luxury of ten com-
mandments — five or less is ideal.
Commitment
A significant challenge, in this effort, is to
build consensus around the brand. Without
consensus, there is no commitment — and
there is no way to force a genuine allegiance
to the brand. If agreement is something that
people agree to just for the sake of minimiz-
ing conflict, then what you have is not a
marriage but a shotgun wedding.
Consensus can be built in a variety of
ways, and how to build it depends on
many factors, including the size, complex-
ity, and culture of the organization. At one
extreme, there may be a CEO who simply
says, ‘this is the brand, like it or lump it,’
and then proceeds to turn the workforce
over until every single individual swears
allegiance to that vision. At the other,
developing clarity around the brand can
involve a lengthy process of coalition-
building, compromise, discussion, and
refinement, until all major constituencies
can at the very least be reconciled to this
new level of meaning in their lives.
There is no one right way, or ideal way
to be clear about what brand is, but a gen-
uine sense of shared understanding — and
commitment — is necessary if further
initiatives are going to be effective.

Moreover, commitment is an ongoing
process, one that can be supported by a
variety of tools, including a brand task
force as well as educational programs that
talk about the relationship between people
and the seemingly abstract brand they are
supposed to serve.
As time passes, and the initial enthusiasm
for the brand initiative fades away, having
a brand-educated workforce and dedicated
brand team will keep the momentum
going. In addition, these should serve to
lessen conflict around future brand-related
decisions, as the question becomes ‘what is
‘on-brand?’’ rather than ‘who is right?’
Initially, it is likely that challenges to the
brand will surface repeatedly. The more
carefully it is woven throughout the orga-
nization, and the more consistently
employees are rewarded for living its prin-
ciples however, the less likely it is that any
of these objections will stick.
Communications
Once the brand has been codified, and
there exists a basic commitment to its
importance throughout the organization,
TBC’s next programmatic step is commu-
nication. The general guidelines for brand
communications reflect a deeply felt need
for employees to approve of and appreciate
the process. The following elements
demonstrate this emphasis:
— Leader example: The people in charge of
the business are also asked to take
charge of the brand. When a leader
speaks, people listen: their voice is the
most important brand communicator
of all.
— High frequency: Telling people over and
over again what the message is, over an
extended period of time, rather than
relying on a one-shot brochure or mass
voicemail or e-mail.
— Multiple channels: Communicating in as
many ways and across as many media
Bergstrom, Blumenthal and Crothers
as possible, preferably implicitly rather
than explicitly (‘let’s talk about the
brand’). Appropriate messages are
ideally reflected in e-mails, reports,
presentations, brochures, reference
manuals, employee guidelines, and so
on.
— Environmental management: Not only
logo and typeface communicate the
brand, but everything from office
furniture to work location sends a
message.
There are also some very formal ways for
communicating the brand internally. These
might include brand ‘launch’ events, brand
reference materials, and even a brand ‘help
desk’. When The Brand Consultancy
worked with Visa, for example, a brand
‘rulebook’ with a built-in whistle was even
issued, so that people could literally ‘call’
off-brand behaviour.
Culture
Howard Schultz, the chairman of Star-
bucks, told Business Week (6 August, 2001):
‘If we want to exceed the trust of our cus-
tomers, then we first have to build trust
with our people. Brand has to start with
the culture and naturally extend to our cus-
tomers.’
However, changing a culture is not easy.
In the authors’ experience, modifying the
sum total of ‘how we do things around
here’ is a momentous challenge. Why
should people change, if they feel every-
thing is fine the way it is?
For true branding to take place —
including internal branding — the organi-
zation must anticipate, acknowledge, and
respond effectively to the inevitable cul-
tural resistance that will spring up. True
brand initiatives are difficult.
How do you get an organization of
50,000, or 500,000 to agree and not to
resist? A variety of possibilities exist. One
way is to punish people for behaving in a
Page 137
Why Internal Branding Matters: The Case of Saab
way that is ‘off-brand’: this could be done
as a threat for non-cooperation. A prefer-
able way is to continually communicate as
to why the brand is meaningful and rele-
vant — or, to communicate the actual
unpleasant consequences of non-coopera-
tion and the positive rewards of coopera-
tion. Rather than forcing people into the
brand system, the authors’ would advocate
giving them the freedom to choose it. In
effect, eg: ‘Our company reflects a higher
order of values. Those values fit together,
they create a personality that makes our
brand real. We need for you to share in
those values and in that personality in
order to help us grow and remain competi-
tive for the long-term. Moreover, if you
refuse to help us out, it is very likely that
we will ultimately go out of business.’
At Saab, The Brand Consultancy actu-
ally put about 16,000 employees through
various forms of brand orientation, brand
understanding and brand involvement,
where they were exposed to what the
brand stands for and asked to come up
with ways that they could support it.
Everyone knew what the bottom line was:
‘if we fail to create a compelling customer
experience, the company goes out of busi-
ness and we all lose our jobs’. That was a
very real motivator. And in turn, the
employees themselves came up with the
answers — answers that they would be
responsible for implementing.
In short, for culture change to happen,
there must be a reason to cooperate; there
must be a role to play; and there must be
consequences for opting in or out.
Compensation
Ironically, employees who tend to be paid
the least — customer service representatives
— are actually the most critical conduits of
brand. As Gallup’s William McEwen notes:
The delivery of the brand promise often
happens by human agency at the point
Page 138
of sale and proceeds through service,
complaint and resale. Yet marketers,
who have the bottom-line responsibility
for brand health, rarely focus on the
Fifth P (people) (Gallup Journal).
As companies become more sophisticated
about the importance of frontline employ-
ees in delivering the brand, they will also
become more sophisticated about compen-
sating them appropriately. Yet it also
works the other way: just as customers
who feel ‘a strong affinity’ for a certain
brand are willing to pay more in order to
have it, so too employees may be willing
to accept somewhat less in terms of benefits
and compensation in exchange for being
aligned with a brand they feel connected
to.
In effect, brand is a medium of exchange
that works both ways: companies that
uphold it can demand higher prices (and
offer less pay); but they can only do that if
employees feel rewarded for upholding the
brand. This fifth element of TBC’s IB pro-
gram emphasizes that the only way to sus-
tain a strong brand is to offer a payback
for those who deliver on it.
CASE STUDY: SAAB
In the early 1990s, Saab was experiencing
declining market share. After many years
of poor financial performance, their adver-
tising share of voice was down, and GM
had recently acquired a 50 per cent stake in
the company. Its new CEO understood
that brand weakness played a significant
part in the company’s problems, and con-
tacted TBC in search of a turnaround.
As a first step, the company sought clarity
about the brand. An assessment was con-
ducted, to determine Saab’s strengths and
weaknesses. It was found that the brand was
not well understood inside the organization
(nor indeed, outside). Yet at the same time,
market research suggested that there was
still opportunity to be had. Saab had an affi-

Figure 1: The original company logo
Figure 2: The ignition switch placement on the
car console: a Saab product hallmark feature
Figure 3: An overhead image of the ‘crumple
zone’ safety design
nity with some very attractive segments in
terms of demographics and psychographics,
namely: well-educated, affluent, indepen-
dent-minded, unpretentious, higher-
Bergstrom, Blumenthal and Crothers
income, male, middle-aged professionals,
with active lifestyles.
TBC also learned that the Saab brand
was perceived through a filter of functional
and emotional attributes. From a functional
point of view, these included unique
design, superior comfort and spaciousness,
designed-in safety and security, smart engi-
neering, and technical simplicity. The emo-
tional attributes included reinforcing
owner’s feelings of individuality and perso-
nal focus, driving pleasure, security and
safety, and ‘having made an intelligent
choice.’
Of course, many of these seem to exist
in other car brands. For example, when
most people think of ‘safety and security’
they probably think of Volvo, and many
people attribute ‘driving pleasure’ more to
BMW than to Saab. It was the strength of
the combination of these attributes how-
ever, that made Saab unique. TBC’s task
was to capture that combination and com-
municate it both internally and externally.
Therefore, a new positioning for the
Saab brand was created that made clear its
market and customer segment focus, its
unique positioning and the rationale for it,
all in specific terms — and all under the
brand essence ‘unconventional.’ This
became the platform for the internal
branding to begin, focused on several key
functions. It also provided direction for
new external communications and market-
ing programs that were directed to target
customers and prospects.
This positioning included four key
‘brand pillars.’ These were:
— individual and personal
— sporty performance
— safety and security
— intelligent technology.
Obtaining commitment to the revitalized
brand from within was not a difficult task,
primarily because it was well recognized
Page 139
Why Internal Branding Matters: The Case of Saab
that jobs depended on the success of the
brand project. Thus, it was relatively easy
to move forward and communicate the
brand throughout the company.
In this, the initial steps were operational.
First, the product development process
was redesigned. All of the key brand cues
that were unique to Saab and part of its heri-
tage were identified and incorporated into
the design process. At each step of product
development — from concept to prototyp-
ing to final design — brand ‘checkpoints’
ensured that all Saab products distinctly and
accurately reflect the Saab brand and attri-
butes in both design and performance. A
few specific brand ‘hallmark’ features were
identified to serve as ‘carriers’ or ‘cues’ for
the brand’s unconventionality as communi-
cated through the four pillars. These
included such things as a large use of glass, to
create a ‘greenhouse’ effect, to convey safety
and security; a handshake door handle
design to convey individuality and personal
focus; a cockpit-shaped driver’s compart-
ment/dashboard; and a distinctive ‘wing’
design front grill to convey the intelligent
technology tied to Saab’s aircraft heritage.
Figure 4: The Saab turbo-charged engine
Page 140
Next, dealer showrooms were rede-
signed to new standards. The ‘brand zone’
was at the center of the design, reflecting
the brand’s connection to all parts of the
purchase and ownership experience. Brand
cues were built into the layout and design
of the dealer showrooms, financing areas,
and parts and service areas to reflect ‘indi-
vidual and personal’, ‘safe and secure’, all
the while in an ‘unconventional’ fashion.
As an example, the reception desk at the
showroom entrance was shaped not around
the receptionist but around the customer.
The focus is on the customer in a very
‘individual and personal’ way, and the
shape provides a feeling of ‘safe and secure’
and is undeniably ‘unconventional’.
Further, new financing programs were
developed, designed to be unconventional
and yet individual and personal in how
they deliver the customer experience.
Moreover, customer service programs
were created to reinforce ‘individual and
personal’ attributes. Specifically, the com-
pany incorporated the latest technology to
scan customer ownership and maintenance
history, thereby not requiring the customer
to wait or fill out needless forms at every
visit, reflecting the individual and personal
attributes of the brand.
In addition, Saab’s Internet site was rede-
signed to reflect the ‘unconventional’, with
unique approaches to purchasing and com-
municating with existing and potential cus-
tomers. (Saab was the first automobile
manufacturer to enable customers to pur-
chase an automobile via the Internet.)
Once the brand had been clarified, a
commitment to it had been made (at least
at the senior level), and it had begun to be
communicated to the customer in opera-
tional terms, it was time to turn towards
culture. Extensive employee communica-
tions and training were conducted to
implement the brand internally. The pro-
gram was extensive, helping employees not
only understand the brand position, but

Figure 5: The Saab 9–5 product
also how it applied to their functions and
jobs, which led them to further commit-
ment and action.
All 16,000 employees throughout the
Saab organization were exposed to the new
Saab brand and trained in a way that was tai-
lored to their functional area. After it was
completed, the assembly line worker could
describe the brand in the same terms as a
senior executive, and most importantly they
could describe how it mattered in their job.
Again, as mentioned previously, in prac-
tice there are not five temporal steps that
take place in order, but rather they rein-
force each other and are ongoing. Com-
munications was an integral part of the
culture change at Saab, together with the
commitment shown by management to it.
Ultimately, many approaches, media and
support materials were used, including:
— an internal brand ‘brochure’ that
explained the brand
— the ‘Saab Way’ training program
— an interactive modular display of the
Saab products and brand, that served as
a dynamic training tool
— a ‘Pillars of the Brand’ videotape.
Ultimately, the employees came to under-
Bergstrom, Blumenthal and Crothers
stand that the company was only going to
be as competitive as its brand was. And
they also understood that no-one could
give them all the answers — it was up to
them to voluntarily engage with it and
create initiatives for keeping the brand
strong. If this is how the brand has to be
experienced every time a customer touches
the brand — what do you in production?
What do you do in sales and marketing?
What do you do in customer service?
What programs, what initiatives can you
come up with to ensure that when custo-
mers encounter the brand in your area
they’re going to feel that reinforcement.
And the employees came up with those
programs — not management.
Which brings us to the issue of compen-
sation. The beauty of engaging the
employees so dynamically in the brand, of
empowering them to create the programs
that would lead to its success, is that they
were also able to create their own rewards.
In effect, each individual became a brand
leader, setting their own targets for compen-
sation rewards and incentives.
After the engagement was over, the
effects of the brand repositioning and inter-
nal branding program at Saab were mea-
surable. During the first year of
implementation, Saab recorded its first
profitable year following several years of
losses. The sales declines reversed and Saab
experienced a growth of nearly 40 per
cent, all at a time the market for similar
cars was relatively flat. The success led GM
to renegotiate it options to acquire its JV
partner’s 50 per cent interest in Saab.
CONCLUSION
Although most people think of branding in
external terms — ’image,’ ‘identity,’ adver-
tising, logo, and so forth — there is
increasing realization that the inside and
the outside of the brand must match. A
brand’s audiences test it in many ways, as
mentioned previously, whether it is in the
Page 141
Why Internal Branding Matters: The Case of Saab
way the telephones are answered, how the
actual product is packaged, how it actually
performs, or even how it is distributed. All
of these things contribute to form an
impression — one that may not even really
be conscious. What companies have really
overlooked, until now, is the importance
of people in relaying the brand message,
regardless of their level in the hierarchy or
job description. It is people who answer
the telephone; people who package the
product (or design or oversee its packa-
ging); people who decide what parts to
use, and which go where; people who are
involved in distributing it; and so on.
Internal branding explicitly links the every-
Page 142
day lives of people on the job to the
brand’s long-term, ‘big picture’ success.
REFERENCES
Carmeli A. and Cohen, A. (2001) ‘Organizational
reputation as a source of sustainable competitive
advantage and above-normal performance: An
empirical test among local authorities in Israel,’
Public Administration and Management, 6(4), 122–
165.
Fombrun, Charles J. (1996) ‘Reputation: Realizing
value from the corporate image’, in: Coggin, A.
(ed), ‘Reputational Capital: Promote, Protect, and
Preserve’, Harvard Business School Press, Boston
(http://www.quo-vadis.co.za/copy/reputationalca-
pital.htm).
McEwen, W. (2001) ‘The power of the Fifth P,’
Gallup Journal, Issue 1 (www.gallupjournal.com).