Last week the head of marketing at Mondelez, the unpronounceable producer of Oreos and Creme Eggs, quit her job. This is what the company had to say about it: "Our search for a successor will focus on finding a digital-first, disruptive and innovative leader who can build on Dana's legacy and mobilise breakthrough marketing in a rapidly changing global consumer landscape."
In a single, shortish sentence Mondelez has done something special. It has evoked not one, but 10 top business cliches, each of which is begging to be banned.
Starting from the top, “digital-first”. This is at best confusing, and at worst a bad idea. No one seems to know what digital means any more. Is it about technology? Is it about being hip? Even McKinsey is confused and has written a long, convoluted article about it.
Whatever it means, to be rabidly digital-first is surely a mistake. If you are in marketing at Mondelez, you can either flog Ritz biscuits on Facebook or on TV; which is best will depend on the circumstances. The point of having a marketing chief is that they decide.
‘Disruptive’
The word “disruptive” is even more dangerous. Disruption is okay if you are Uber (though even then it is not plain sailing), but not if you are a traditional multinational that has got big by doing things steadily for a long time. In my experience, truly disruptive people have no time for big companies and big companies have no time for them.
The word “innovative” is a watered-down version of disruptive, only it has come to function in a similar way to the word ethical. Companies that make the most fuss about either are invariably the ones that are least keen on acting accordingly.
“Leader” is an even emptier word than innovative. It manages to be both grandiose and mundane: everyone is now said to be a leader. The word has eclipsed a far more useful one – manager. We all know what managers do – they manage others – which I assume is precisely what the Mondelez marketing chief will actually be doing.
“Legacy” should be banned for a different reason: it is deceptive. To talk of legacy sounds complimentary but is usually the opposite. Legacy IT systems are a company’s worst nightmare, while legacy businesses are ones that you should sell or close in a hurry.
Evidently Mondelez has no desire for its new person to build on the legacy of the old, or else it would not have gone on about disruption. You can either build or disrupt. You cannot do both.
So far, the first half of the sentence has been confusing, cliched, internally inconsistent and profoundly boring, but it is still my favourite bit.
The second half degenerates into sheer flatulence. To “mobilise breakthrough marketing in a rapidly changing global consumer landscape”, serves the unintended purpose of telling candidates that if dumb platitudes are not their thing, they had better steer clear.
‘Mobilise’
To “mobilise” means to prepare troops for active service; marketing cannot be mobilised. “Breakthrough” is so stale a cliche it makes me almost feel sorry for the author, and as for “rapidly changing”, for as long as I can remember businesses have been saying that these are rapidly changing times. Such a pronouncement is meant to make one feel breathless and excited, but leaves one weary instead.
“Global” is always either superfluous or inaccurate in this case it is the latter. Consumers’ passionate feelings about their snacks tend to run on national lines. Witness the outrage of the British when, in 2013, Mondelez rounded the corners of Cadbury’s Dairy Milk to improve the “mouth feel”.
Finally, “landscape”. Here is a simple rule: Monet can do landscapes, particularly with water lilies, bridges and poppies. Mondelez cannot.
Instead of trotting out 10 cliches, the company should have said it was hiring, not yet ready to name the replacement – and left it at that.
Never mind disruptive breakthrough legacies. The Mondelez job will only be for you if you have thick skin. Sugar is the new tobacco and the chances are everyone will hate you. If they do not hate you for making them fat, they will hate you because you go on charging the same amount for our favourite snacks, while making the packets ever smaller.
