The problem
Several experienced leaders, each responsible for a different part of the business.
The risk ran both ways: profiles that all sounded like the same company announcement, or profiles so separate that they built no shared position in the market.
What needed to change
One market position, held by separate people with separate points of view.
Technical depth had to become useful business content without turning into product promotion.
What I did
One narrative, and distinct content territories for each person based on role, knowledge and natural voice. A rotating publishing schedule across the profiles, so the work arrives in a rhythm rather than in bursts.
The evidence
Complex service work was explained through real decisions and their consequences, with no client, contract or commercial detail exposed.
The business now has a repeatable way to build standing through its people rather than through a logo.
What changed
The company no longer depends on one voice to explain itself. Each executive is a way into a different part of it.
The judgment
Giving them a common tone would have been faster and would have looked tidy.
It would also have made all of them sound like the same announcement, which is what a company page already does, and it would have wasted the one advantage they had: several people who know different things.
A company page explains the business. People explain the thinking.
If you are evaluating this for a leadership team, tell me what the market understands about it today.
Write to me