Jeremy Taylor is the Co-Founder and Director of Connect2 and the Business Director of TrinityP3 UK. He discusses the role of businesses and brands in defining and acting with ethical purpose beyond simply delivering increasing shareholder value. Be it delivering environmental sustainability, acting with good social responsibility or making ethical business decisions to minimise harm to others, it is all about good business conduct.
You can listen to the podcast here:
Follow Managing Marketing on Soundcloud, TuneIn, Stitcher, Spotify and Apple Podcast.
Transcription:
Darren:
Welcome to Managing Marketing and today we’re at the National Theatre on the South Bank on the River Thames here in London and I’m sitting down and having a chat with the new business director for TrinityP3 U.K, but also the co-founder of Connect2, Jeremy Taylor. Welcome, Jeremy.
Jeremy:
My pleasure to be here, Darren.
Darren:
And welcome to the TrinityP3 family.
Jeremy:
Even greater pleasure.
Darren:
I wouldn’t mind having a chat to you around the work of Connect2, specifically how that fits in with the overall marketing strategy that your clients are faced with. First of all explain a little bit about connect to what?
Jeremy:
Connect2 is about connecting to communities and communities defined in very broad terms. It might be about where you live, what your interests are, it might be about the football team you support, the hobbies you have, where your families came from, your origins are; all sorts of communities where people have a passion and some sort of purpose that tends to drive community relations.
Darren:
It’s one of those really interesting words isn’t it? Communities are one of those things that you absolutely desire—there’s a sense of belonging to a community. But people really struggle sometimes with defining it.
I was interested listening through to the ways you could categorise communities because it isn’t just your physical community, your geographic community is it? That’s one type of community but you were talking across a full range of different sort of interests, geographies, life stages, all sorts of things, yeah?
Jeremy:
And people belong to multiple communities and often people define themselves by the community as well. When you ask someone what they do they will talk about where they work, their profession. They’ll talk about being a parent, where their kids go to school, where they live. All of those things can be defined by community. All of those are ways community has impact. So, it’s a very broad area.
Darren:
So, how do you make community accessible for instance to say marketers and organisations? If it becomes this word that can be defined in many ways it could be difficult to then find ways of being able to interact or leverage with those communities?
Jeremy:
It certainly can. To do the engagement piece for a marketing organisation you need to be a little careful about which communities you go and talk to. The key thing for me is that the community needs to have a purpose in mind. It has to be about achieving something.
It can be really straightforward. It can be as simple as raising money. In fact, it’s almost always about raising money but the money is towards a cause or a purpose. It’s taking the community group from point A to point B.
Darren:
A common interest.
Jeremy:
A common interest which inspires people belonging to it. And you’ll always find, it’s universal that within the community there are key people, the connectors we call them, who make it all happen.
They’re the ones who wind people up and get them to come along and do things and contribute their time, money and effort. If you can find those people you can get into the heart of what’s going on.
Darren:
It’s interesting because a lot of marketing activities are quite selfishly focused. That is ‘I’m appealing to your self-interest’ either through direct communication or advertising or some promotion giving you immediate value or benefit in the instant whereas when you’re talking about communities it’s a much higher level.
On Maslow’s hierarchy of needs you must be appealing to a much higher level. It’s not about self-interest immediately is it?
Jeremy:
It is a different way of approaching. All brands are good at defining what is right for the individual. That’s how they define themselves. We’re better at doing this particular thing that for you it’s better, cheaper or more relevant.
When you do elevate it to another level you’re building another stage of understanding with the customer. You’re engaging at a different level. And actually you need to be able to vary your proposition to reflect that relationship.
So you might have to adapt the way you’re talking to an individual to talking to a community to match the purpose of that community, to match the reason why it exists.
Darren:
Is that part of that? When people talk about targeting individuals they seem to allude to the fact that they can really hone down to what’s of interest to an individual. Whereas a community will often be a collective so you’re looking for the commonality amongst them—is that part of the challenge?
Jeremy:
Yes, it is. You can define communities. You can use community membership to target (we don’t like using the word ‘target’ because it sounds too impositional) but you can define.
Darren:
Well at least identify.
Jeremy:
Identify, yes.
Darren:
And then you’ve still got to go through an engagement process don’t you? Because you can’t target them and just hit them with something they don’t want because they’ll reject you.
Jeremy:
It’s very much a two-way engagement process to do it properly. The gains are very large. You can talk to 1,000’s of people in one go.
Darren:
Also I imagine it can be more powerful because it comes, if you do it properly, with the endorsement of the community. That all the members of the community, by buying into the engagement, are actually self-endorsing.
Jeremy:
If your proposition is towards the benefit of the community which you can link purchase to benefit, which can be done then your engagement is at a different level. And the big benefit of that, which we find, is that you get word of mouth.
You get endorsed by the voices that carry loudest and longest in the community and you’ll almost get instructions to buy along with recommendations so it can be very powerful.
Darren:
Is this something that is starting to gain traction because you have to say in marketing there are certainly a lot more conversations around things like brand purpose and starting to find a higher level of meaning than just the selfish delivery of benefit.
Is this starting to grow as a category or is it something that has always been there?
Jeremy:
I would say it’s always been there to an extent and a lot of the lessons come from local business because they depend on being a part of the local community.
Darren:
So sponsoring the local sports club, local junior sports, things like that?
Jeremy:
There’s no doubt it works. It sounds a bit like hard work to do that on a national scale but it’s very achievable and absolutely the corporate purpose conversation is where it starts to score because it’s not just a great way to talk about corporate purpose but of demonstrating it.
You can be there live in the community doing things which will demonstrate what you’re talking about.
Darren:
I’ll pick you up on a phrase you used. You said corporate purpose whereas I referred to brand purpose and I wouldn’t mind just getting some clarity with you around that because the marketing industry, for instance, the World Federation of Advertisers, have been talking about brand purpose for 3, 4 or 5 years.
But you mentioned corporate purpose. What do you see as a distinction between the two?
Jeremy:
That’s a good question. I think there is still an emerging discussion going on there. But I would say that a lot of companies were founded with something beyond the need simply to make money. And there is a corporate purpose which is sometimes defined.
Darren:
A raison d’être; a reason for existing.
Jeremy:
And I would argue that strong companies with a long history demonstrate it; it’s there. It’s in their blood. They don’t always talk about it and what they don’t do often is link it to their marketing activity. So it sits with sort of a corporate communications label on it but it sits at a very high table in the organisation. In the C-Suite they’re aware of it.
Darren:
Or the board.
Jeremy:
The board is with the shareholders and they need to report on it.
Darren:
I think that corporate purpose and brand purpose, if they’re aligned, it is incredibly powerful because it’s taking what you’re describing, the corporate purpose and finding a way of interpreting or reintegrating it into the brand discussion or brand conversation.
I worry a lot where there is a corporate purpose and then you have a totally different brand purpose that can often be misaligned or they can even be totally at odds with each other.
Jeremy:
They can conflict most definitely. It is a danger and I think a challenge a lot of big corporations face is making those things align. I wonder if it is because the marketing function is not sitting at a high enough table in the organisation and it’s not involved in those conversations.
Darren:
I think a lot of it is driven by the fact that the marketers often have an external focus; they’re looking at customers. And a really good example of that would be some of the petrochemical or chemical industry companies where you do market research and people say, ‘we’re concerned about the environment and the impact that chemicals are having on the environment’ so suddenly the brand purpose is ‘we’ll be gentler on the environment’.
So, we’re going to do all sorts of things like sponsor environmental things and then at the corporate level they have to make some really tough decisions that may not be in the best interest of the environment. But it’s a business decision that gets made because there is no alignment between the external focus and the marketing and the internal focus of the corporation.
And suddenly there is a headline and stories that talk about this company that says they’re all about being soft on the environment has just destroyed X.
Jeremy:
Suddenly trust is out the window. An interesting observation on that whole discussion is that marketing is focused on individuals; trying to get down to a one to one understanding of the individual. A corporate purpose is appealing to society. Huge difference between the two.
A community is maybe a way of bridging the gap between those two diverse subjects.
Darren:
An interesting observation that you just made there because a century or even half a century ago the interests of the individual and the interests of society were often aligned and the interests of corporations were often aligned to society.
But I guess in the latter half of the 20th century and 21st century we’ve had the rise of individualism and every person for themselves and it’s all about the me, me, me generation, which we’re both part of. This is why I guess it’s become so much harder from a corporate level to be able to align societal responsibilities and marketing individual focus. Do you think that’s a fair observation?
Jeremy:
I think there is some truth in that. I also think it’s sitting under the heading of too hard to do. It’s not been tackled successfully and people don’t really know how to do it and somehow it matters less that marketing messages are not aligned with corporate purpose.
I think that’s dangerous and I foresee a pendulum swing now against the me, me, me generation. I think it’s changing.
Darren:
We hear lots of reports supposedly about the segment the millennial’s or generation Y and Z are much more interested about what’s best for the environment and for society.
Jeremy:
And right here in London too. In recent weeks we’ve been seeing huge demonstrations around the streets—people desperately concerned about the environment and demanding that business and government do something about it.
Darren:
Going back a step. Earlier on you were talking about how corporations that have been around for a long time often have, at a very high level, a purpose, a reason for being that is almost intrinsic to who they are.
There’s a thing called the founder’s advantage—have you heard of the founder’s advantage? It’s this idea that the founder is this person who has often defined the purpose because they actually founded the organisation.
Walt Disney founded Disney and had this whole focus on the magic of childhood and magic throughout life. And often that’s an advantage because it’s incredibly focused, personalised because the founder exists as a person.
I guess the most modern example would be someone like Richard Branson here in the U.K or possibly even Jeff Bezos at Amazon—the founder who exists as a human being who is talking and articulating their beliefs, their values and that becomes part of the cultural corporate values.
Jeremy:
Richard Branson, for instance, is very much both the corporation and the brand. Interesting. So, he expresses both those things very effectively.
Darren:
So then when the founder either leaves or passes on from the corporation (as we’ve seen with Apple and Steve Jobs) it’s then up to the people left behind. Do they stay with those values and how do you articulate them when the persona of the founder is no longer tangibly walking around the building to build it into the overall corporate belief?
How do you keep the founder’s advantage alive?
Jeremy:
Isn’t it interesting that some of the most successful long-running companies around the world are family-owned ones?
Darren:
Like the Mars family. It’s probably the best example around the world.
Jeremy:
And many others where families are involved, the family makes sure that those cultural founding principles are maintained.
Darren:
But also they are private companies so are not being held to fulfil the needs of external shareholders that are demanding, ‘sacrifice your values to deliver short term profit’.
Jeremy:
Yeah, many big companies have expressed corporate responsibility and report on it to shareholders.
Darren:
It is true, increasingly we are seeing large corporations even publicly listed that are embracing ethical, social responsibility, environmental sustainability, not just because of risk mitigation; we don’t want to get into trouble so we should be good about these things, but because it does make good business sense doesn’t it?
Jeremy:
It does make good business sense and I think we will increasingly find groups of consumers will be looking for evidence of responsible behaviour. They demand it and it will become a differentiation in your buying decision.
Darren:
Now that is quite different isn’t it from what we see as brand purpose where a brand suddenly bolts on a) we are going to do this because it’s a nice thing to do. What’s the difference?
Jeremy:
What I’ve seen now over many years is that brands that attempt to address these issues by a one size fits all solution that involves a programme that applies to schools or a programme that applies to the environment somewhere.
Darren:
I can’t remember the brand, there was a shoe brand and for every pair of shoes that were bought, they would provide a pair of shoes to people that couldn’t afford them.
Jeremy:
That’s Toms which is actually your founder’s principle because that is still run by the guys who founded it, and I think that’s a great idea.
Darren:
But that is what I’m saying, it’s not a brand purpose; it’s actually the corporate purpose expressed through the brand.
Jeremy:
In our company I don’t think there is a difference. Patagonia is another example.
Darren:
And that’s where it works.
Jeremy:
That’s where it works.
Darren:
So it must be incredibly difficult when you’ve got a branded house and a house of brands. So where the brand and the corporation are one and the same it is very different to where you’ve got a brand that is a holding company and then there’re a whole lot of brands underneath it.
Jeremy:
It’s tough in a big corporation where things are required and businesses are traded and have an all-inclusive purpose expressed across a variety of different businesses as well as brands, I guess it is very tough.
Darren:
There’s a lot of examples; there’s Nestle, there’s Unilever, there’s Proctor and Gamble, they are probably the three most obvious. All three of them have corporate purposes, so Nestle is about good food, I think Unilever is about sustainability.
Jeremy:
Very strongly marked sustainability.
Darren:
And then you’ve got all these brands underneath it, but to almost jack hammer that corporate purpose into those brands would be almost an anathema, wouldn’t it?
Jeremy:
So Unilever has defined some of its brands as being ones which are ethical and which are about sustainable resourcing and fulfil all the corporate.
Darren:
That are aligned to the corporate objectives.
Jeremy:
Their approach is to say we will express it in a specific way for each of those brands and there is a specific scheme. To my mind some of them were better than others. I’m impressed they do it and have the will power to do it and the ability to realise it.
Do they kind of express an overall responsibility for Unilever, I don’t know, I’m not sure it comes across. I’m not sure Unilever ever has the need or the desire to become a holding brand, anyway.
Darren:
Off the track, but I know there are quite a few people in the advertising industry that criticize where a holding company owns lots of brands, starts sticking their holding company brand at the end of the ad to almost say this is part of us as a way of getting a rub off on the overall company because they say people buy brands, they don’t buy the investment people that owns that brand.
Jeremy:
I kind of agree.
Darren:
Yeah, so you’re in that group.
Jeremy:
The parent company shouldn’t be fighting against the principles of the brand. The investment money always goes into the brand, so that’s what you are communicating.
Darren:
Because I’ve had this discussion with corporate affairs and they say interestingly in the modern era shareholders are also consumers.
Jeremy:
Yes.
Darren:
So, they’re not trying to communicate necessarily to the big institutional investor that’s just looking at the numbers but they’re communicating and reminding the mum and dad shareholders, the everyday shareholders like perhaps you and I, that your favourite brand X is part of a bigger company, which is the one you invest in or could invest in.
And I can understand the strategy. I’m not sure it’s the most effective way of articulating it.
Jeremy:
Yes, I understand it’s a dilemma and I’m not sure I’m going to give you a pat answer to that one
Darren:
And that’s fine. I thought when you mentioned the idea of how do you get brands to align to corporate purpose? They’ve also tried to do the other thing, which is get corporate identity down into brands, haven’t they in a lot of cases? And I’m not sure it’s the most effective way. I understand why they do but I don’t think it’s that effective.
Jeremy:
It appears to be more of an imposition to me rather than a benefit. To me, the brand needs to match the corporate purpose if that’s a possibility, which it should be.
Darren:
So, where do you think the opportunity sits for marketers? We’ve discussed that brand purpose needs to be aligned to corporate purpose but where we’ve got a marketer that’s focused on the consumer on an individual level, how does a marketer participate in being able to either help promote and communicate the corporate purpose, the corporate ideal?
Jeremy:
I would say what the marketing director should be looking at is how the corporation and the brands are behaving. That part of the business needs to be involved in behaviour as well as just communication. It needs to be demonstrating things the company talks about doing and making sure that every aspect of the corporate behaviour aligns to their stated purpose.
It should be clear and I think it’s ill-defined where different departments are doing corporate responsibility programmes and marketing programmes and they’re not aligned.
Darren:
It really is getting that alignment between corporate strategy, corporate relations and marketing, which often doesn’t happen.
Jeremy:
I would be really frustrated to be in that environment where the two are not aligned and are not working together and sometimes even fighting against each other.
Darren:
Often, the most intrusive or visible expression of brands is the advertising or the marketing and yet, as I mentioned before, often the only thing that happens is a little logo for the corporation gets stuck on the end of the advertising without any real thought about how can the advertising go beyond that to be aligned to the overall corporate strategy, corporate identity, the corporate purpose?
Jeremy:
There are activities that corporations get involved in now. A lot of them have commitments to letting their staff have a day a year to work in the community.
Darren:
Volunteering.
Jeremy:
Indeed but it often doesn’t happen because they don’t really have any use for it. There’s no kind of clear way to harness that. Getting involved in a community for instance, if you have a corporate policy that’s aligned lets you make good use of that.
Suddenly, these people are doing work to demonstrate a corporate purpose so you can start to align different policies within a corporation behind a common cause.
Darren:
Also there is the issue of the marketing actually acting in a way that’s aligned to the corporate purpose because marketing itself can be something that contributes to let’s say CO2 pollution.
It could be decisions made with media buying. It could be supporting issues that are actually the opposite of the corporate values around say, bullying or fair play or things like that. What do you think the role is for CMOs to actually make sure that their marketing complies with a corporate set of values?
Jeremy:
Yeah, I wouldn’t think that very high on the list of priorities just now. It’s an area they might get found out on if they’re not thinking about the environmental impact of their communications. It comes right down to the kind of energy, which is being expended on communications, even electronically.
Darren:
I’ve never noticed any marketers really putting that as a high consideration but it seems like a big missed opportunity because it gives you then as a CMO or a marketing director a conversation to have with corporate affairs about how can we be better aligned, and better deliver the corporate values through our marketing.
Jeremy:
And why would you not get your heads together early on in the game? What happens when the plastics argument is finished and deliveries of the petrol carbon footprint is as good as it can be? Are you going to go somewhere else?
Darren:
Well there was a terrific example; Qantas (an Australian airline) has recently had their first flight with zero landfill from the flight. They worked with their staff, their operations team to come up with a way of completely recycling and reducing the landfill waste from the flight to zero.
Jeremy:
I’m impressed.
Darren:
I was really impressed and I was impressed because every part of the business, in the way they communicated it seemed to be involved. There were operations, flight crews, cabin crews, even marketing, in articulating the story, corporate affairs was onboard. It was an amazing case study or one-off example of the power of what can happen when everyone is aligned to the values of the organisation.
Jeremy:
An interesting observation, that the entire organisation had to be involved to make it happen. It can’t be compartmentalised into one department to make sure that these things happen because it affects every part of the company and everything the company does.
Darren:
You have to have everyone onboard otherwise all it would take is one part of the business not to be aligned to the purpose of why you’re doing this to potentially raise cynicism. Because we have become a cynical bunch haven’t we, as consumers? I don’t mean as advertising or marketing people; I mean as consumers.
Jeremy:
We are cynical and there are more and more ways to express that cynicism. And company behaviour is much more transparent than it’s ever been before because it’s online, it’s instant, it’s accessible.
Darren:
We’ve got social media so we can all jump onboard and criticise the hell out of people.
Jeremy:
And basically, it’s much easier to be critical and praise online. Reputations can be trashed more quickly than ever.
Darren:
Do you think this is a trend or do you think this could be a one-off? Do you think this is something that organisations are starting to seriously look at?
Jeremy:
No, it’s more than one-off. It’s a definite shift and I think there are some very interesting organisations and individuals who are pushing the agenda of making sure that organisations engage properly with society in radical ways.
There’s a really interesting book written by John Brown, ex-CEO of BP, which talks exactly about that; how to engage radically with society. And it must be the CEO’s expressed responsibility to do that. And he has to make sure the company’s behaviour is aligned with the message.
So, find different ways of getting your message across and making sure that everything the company does is aligning.
Darren:
It’s interesting you mention the CEO because there’s that famous quote that ‘marketing is too important to be left to the marketers’. That the chief brand officer is the CEO in every corporation.
Jeremy:
I really subscribe to that. If he’s detached from it and all he’s worried about is share value then the company is too short-term to be properly focused.
Darren:
So we’re starting to see more of those CEOs starting to become the brand leader of the organisation and then the role of marketing is then to just communicate, articulate, and interpret that brand value into the communications channels.
Jeremy:
And protect the premium and the trading value. And back to your earlier conversation; where is that done? It’s done by the Richard Branson’s, where the brand and corporation are aligned perfectly.
Darren:
But what a great opportunity for marketers to be able to go up to the CEO and say, ‘let’s have a conversation about what your vision, your corporate values are, what your corporate positioning or purpose is and now let’s look at how we can align to actually amplify and deliver that as part of our marketing investment’.
Jeremy:
And also trying to make sure that that corporate expression is part of the sales impact of marketing—why not?
Darren:
Where it’s relevant.
Jeremy:
Where it’s relevant and it can be.
Darren:
Because consumers are looking for brands that do good responsible business. They increasingly want their corporations to be making contributions beyond just delivering shareholder value.
Jeremy:
Yeah, they do and it’s quite hard to express that on a brand to one individual basis. It’s a lot easier to do that, it’s more effective to do that…
Darren:
On a community or a society basis.
Jeremy:
Yeah, and the great thing about the community is that it has the common value you can use if you can match the corporate.
Darren:
You’ve had some personal experience of this where you live?
Jeremy:
I have. I sit both sides of that fence. I know it from being in a community myself. I know the increasing challenges that local communities in particular face as we’re getting back into an age of self-help there’s less central and local government budget available.
We’re being encouraged to look after ourselves and you have to go elsewhere to find the funds. You have to go to business to do it.
Darren:
It’s good isn’t it? And what I like about the fact you’ve got personal experience plus this is work that you’ve been doing with Connect2 is that there is an integrity and an authenticity about the approach because it’s not like selling a media you never read or a strategy.
Jeremy:
Absolutely, skin in the game is important.
Darren:
I imagine that working with communities, if you get it wrong you get feedback very quickly.
Jeremy:
Yeah, very quickly because you are encouraging the communities to talk online and you’re providing the fuel for it and if it’s the wrong kind of conversation you’ll hear about it very quickly. And the impact will be correspondingly rapid and great.
Darren:
Another example of why this has become so important is the UN 3 years ago made a commitment to 17 or 19 different initiatives around things like eliminating poverty, providing clean water, climate change—a full raft of these initiatives.
It’s interesting in Europe (we won’t mention Brexit) how much government and society have picked those up compared to other parts of the world.
Jeremy:
I think big corporations and businesses have a very important role to play because big businesses are not single nation entities, they are international and they operate internationally.
If you’re talking at a United Nations scale you can’t be thinking about one country at a time, it has to be tackled beyond that. Big corporations have a huge responsibility and role to play in that.
Darren:
I don’t know if you’re aware of the history but there is a terrific documentary called ‘The Corporation’. Originally, you could only form a corporation—the idea of an entity rather than personal responsibility was introduced on the basis that it would be for the good of society.
It was almost an extension of the Guilds and friendly societies; that you could create a corporation that had a purpose. But the purpose, and this goes to John Smith, the economist—business is more than just making money, it’s to enhance society and benefit all people in it. Somewhere along the line we lost touch with the purpose of corporation.
It’s interesting that in a social media-engaged age the voice of the consumer is now starting to readdress that.
Jeremy:
I think that’s a big driver of the change. I think that the change from that original corporate good behaviour maybe was in the 1980s.
Darren:
With the greed is good.
Jeremy:
Greed is good.
Darren:
Good old Michael Douglas in Wall Street.
Jeremy:
Shareholder value is all, profits are all. I think a lot of companies lost track.
Darren:
Neo-liberalism. All that was was a reflection of the new liberalism, which was all about the one with the most money won.
Jeremy:
And that’s all that matters. And I don’t think that is proving to be sustainable because people are not impressed enough by it to want to buy those products or services. And they don’t want to see their spending money going to line the pockets of already rich individuals and rich houses.
So, I think the pressures are going to be increased and it is about transparency and responsible behaviour.
Darren:
And holding people accountable.
Jeremy:
And holding people accountable.
Darren:
We hear words like authenticity, transparency, integrity. It’s interesting when you start to apply those things to a corporation because we all have a sense of what they mean on an individual basis, and, I think, on a community basis.
But for some reason at a corporate level—I’m aware of someone who once said, ‘in my job I have to make decisions that I don’t find palatable but that’s my job’. And somehow to be able to disassociate your personal responsibilities and values from the job you do is a very sad state of play isn’t it?
Jeremy:
Very sad. I’m thinking as you’re talking that all those elements add up to a big word in English: ‘trust’.
Darren:
We all talk about the loss of trust.
Jeremy:
We all talk about it but if you break that down what does that mean? It is all about those values you were just talking about there.
Darren:
Integrity, transparency and accountability.
Jeremy:
And responsible behaviour is within those headings but if you get that wrong and if trust goes it can go very fast. Huge problems in that for corporate, government and the community.
Darren:
Corporate, government, all of the institutions are suffering from a loss of trust.
Jeremy:
Standing from this point of view I’m sure they are.
Darren:
We live in the post-truth world so they say. I don’t think so because people are reacting to that. People are demanding those values from all of the interactions that they have.
Jeremy:
I think they are. The ‘I trust it because it’s always been there’ philosophy has now gone and therefore all those bodies and organisations and government bodies and large corporations that used to rely on some kind of trust because it was always there because they are who they are, the law—it’s going.
You can watch it going down one by one over the last 4 or 5 years. And they have to work hard at maintaining trust and rebuilding trust, their reputation and demonstrating it over and again in everything they do.
Darren:
Jeremy, thank you for making some time and sitting down and having a chat. We’ve run out of time.
Jeremy:
Thank you, it’s been a great pleasure. Let’s do it again
Darren:
And welcome to TrinityP3 again. And one last question before we go. Which brand do you trust?
Ideal for marketers, advertisers, media and commercial communications professionals, Managing Marketing is a podcast hosted by Darren Woolley and special guests. Find all the episodes here
