Companies are re-defining roles, and quite literally re-naming them. The re-naming of job titles has arguably been driven by the ever-increasing demands and changes in the marketing landscape, particularly since digital arrived and complicated everything.
Naming is powerful. Language has the power to affect how your feel about your work and the values you attribute to it. Employers in favour of more using creative-sounding role names argue that re-defining more creative job titles makes sure their employees are no longer limited to the delivery of just a job name. Certainly in a creative industry, everyone is creative to some degree, so should this be reflected in our job titles?
From a personal perspective I would argue that an account manager is one of the most important roles in the agency. Much more than just being a ‘suit’. In Mad Men days, the world of marketing and advertising was much simpler, and this was reflected in the name. Now account management covers a wealth of marketing disciplines and the skills required to go with this. So to reflect this, should the name ‘account manager’ be redefined to represent this multi-skilled creative role?
But are we over complicating it? As new job roles have been created in the ever changing new marketing landscape, it makes you wonder, where do other roles start and some roles end? If you are thinking of re-naming (from job titles to brand), consider the value of it. Sometimes re-invention from scratch isn’t the right answer and it may be an issue with your values that needs to be addressed.
At Good our name is simple and perfectly sums up our ethos. Our values are clear. We produce good work and are good to each other. Would I be even more good if my job role was Good Manager? Do we then need to re-define every element of our organisational naming to tie back to our brand or am I over thinking it? Our values are strong and everyone understands this. That’s the power of brand.
Did I mention that one of our core principles was to keep it simple?