The difference

There’s a difference between strength and aggression, a wise man recently said to me.

Have you ever been in a situation that required you to consider the shades of difference between the two?

In real time, personality and behaviour are more effective than message and position. In other words, we are understood and known by what we do, how we act – not what we say or how we position ourselves. This is as true for organizations and brands as it is for individuals.

It’s often tempting to be aggressive. Particularly when our buttons are pushed. When we’re angry. When things aren’t going our way.

And look at our world. The news is full of shrill headlines, real time button-pushers – executive compensation, bailouts, job eliminations, climate change, religious tensions – things certainly don’t seem to be going the way I’d hoped.

An aggressive response would be so emotionally satisfying. Proclaiming the wrongness of it all, boldly redefining how things should be, lashing out, laying blame, starting a movement, even. Let’s do it all over beers, down at the pub! Then take it to the streets! It was certainly effective in Munich in 1923. Disastrously so.

I’m aware that my point is a bit dramatic. But then, so are the headlines, and the conversations I find myself in these days.

This is why the line between strength and aggression is interesting to consider.

What would it mean to instead behave with strength? What does the strong person, the strong company, the strong leader do? Look up the word for some inspiration.

Some definitions for the word “strength” that I find useful:

The power to resist attack; impregnability.
The power to resist strain or stress; durability.
The ability to maintain a moral or intellectual position firmly.
Capacity or potential for effective action.

When I survey the brandscape, the business ecosystem, and the high street, this isn’t quite what I’m seeing. Instead, I’m witnessing retrenchment. Brands are self-weakening. Or in hiding, waiting for an upturn.

It’s so disappointing.

In real time, there’s an opportunity for the strong brand, the strong company, the strong leader to stand out. Those that acknowledge the global mood but remain steadfast and unruffled. By not giving in. Staying the course. Reassuring constituents. Being proactive as well as responsive. Smiling instead of grimacing.

Brands that model the solution rather than contribute the demise will thrive in this environment. It’s going to be interesting to see who rises to the challenge.