Creating a credo won't change anything. What companies that fail to implement internal branding lack is not words, but a design for action.
I get a lot of inquiries from people saying, "I want to create a company credo." I'm grateful for the opportunity, but I always feel a little apprehensive. Creating it itself isn't difficult. The difficult part is figuring out who will actually use it after it's created.
Many companies feel reassured when they create beautiful words, frame them, and put them on the conference room wall. But six months later, they realize, "Hey, nobody's been using those words lately." I believe the reason internal branding fails to take hold isn't because the words themselves are poorly crafted.What's lacking is the context in which to use that word, and the design of actions that include management.In this article, I'd like to explain the reasons, including our own mistakes.
The reason a company credo doesn't take hold is because people try to complete it using only appearances and words.
The elements that shape a company's image can be broadly divided into three categories: VI (Visual Identity), which focuses on appearance; MI (Mind Identity), which focuses on language; and BI (Behavioral Identity), which focuses on actions. Only when all three are present is a complete CI (Corporate Identity).
However, most consultations stop at discussions about VI or MI. They want to change the logo, or create a credo. Of course, these are important. But if BI is left out, CI will only look good from the outside. Internal members will quickly notice the discrepancy between the words and the actual behavior.
Here, I'll offer my own definition.Internal branding is about transforming company philosophy and slogans into the judgments and actions of each individual employee.The goal isn't just to communicate, but to bring about change. I believe that a situation where everyone knows the words and a situation where everyone's judgment is influenced by them are two completely different things.
Even looking at the numbers, there's a gap between "being known" and "being effective."
This gap is clearly reflected in the survey. In the "ASAKO Inner Purpose Score Survey" conducted by Asahi Advertising in January 2025 (targeting 5,643 people aged 20-59 across 55 industries in Japan), the percentage of people who said their company's purpose was well-understood was 33.3% overall. This is only a one-point change from the previous 32.3%.
The same survey found that companies with employees who understand, agree with, empathize with, and resonate with their company's purpose scored more than three times higher than those without. This suggests that while more companies are creating their own brand slogans, only a minority use them as a basis for decision-making.
Gallup's "State of the Global Workplace 2026" (published in April 2026) points in the same direction. Global employee engagement in 2025 was 201 TP3T, down from the peak of 231 TP3T in 2022. Moreover, manager engagement fell from 271 TP3T to 221 TP3T in 2025 alone. The middle management, who are supposed to deliver the company's philosophy to the front lines, simply don't have the resources left. It's illogical to blame the lack of progress on the employees' low level of awareness. This is a painful truth for many companies to hear.
We, too, had a period where our decisions were all over the place because we lacked a clear vision.
I may sound like I'm an expert, but Lionheart's journey wasn't always smooth sailing. In the beginning, we lacked a clear philosophy. As the organization grew, members began to judge things based on different criteria, and there was a period when our sense of unity almost began to fade.
For over 20 years since then, we have continued to operate under our core values. What I am now convinced of is,A philosophy is not something you simply proclaim, but something you use every time you make a decision.That's the point. I've experienced failure many times, and I feel this not just intellectually, but from experience. An ideal that isn't put into practice, no matter how beautiful the words, is no different from a wall decoration.
That's why, when I'm consulted about a company credo, I always ask this before discussing the wording: "In what situations and by whom will this wording be used?" If they're stumped for an answer, then it's not yet time to create it.
The key to widespread adoption is to decide in advance "when it will be used."
So, where do we begin? My answer is to decide on the "situation in which it will be used" before considering the words themselves. The situations in which ideals are actually used are not that numerous.
One is recruitment. Everyone can use the same criteria to assess whether a person aligns with the company's values. Another is evaluation, where you can explain, in words, why you gave a particular rating, rather than relying on personal likes and dislikes. And then there's daily conversation. When you can all talk on the same page, team members who were previously heading in different directions gradually begin to align.
Our company's guiding principles, "Respect, Honesty, and Self-Accountability," are based on the same philosophy. We established them as principles that can be practiced through daily effort, even without special talent. When things don't go well, the first thing we ask ourselves is, "Was there anything I could have done?" I believe that's the smallest unit in bringing our principles to life.
What's important here isn't that everyone takes the same action. It's that everyone has a "place to return to when they're lost." That's the role of the philosophy.
Stop distributing things unilaterally and ask people to participate.
Another often overlooked aspect of brand adoption efforts is the methodology. Creating a thick set of brand guidelines and distributing them company-wide via email is not about participation; it's about notification.
An article by Monotype, known for its typefaces and fonts, also states that internal branding should be a participatory effort involving everyone, rather than a one-sided directive. Since everyone, including those handling emails, presentations, and invoices, is part of the brand, it's necessary not only to communicate rules but also to create an environment where brand assets are easily accessible and usable. Even the font used in internal documents embodies brand consistency. The article points out that employees who pay attention to details are more likely to notice inconsistencies in the parts that customers see.
I share a similar viewpoint. Concepts that are difficult to use won't be adopted. It's more effective to create a situation where people want to use the concept than to try to enforce the rules.
Don't betray your words with your actions. The first to be tested is the leader.
Finally, let's talk about the most troublesome point. At the heart of BI are, ultimately, executives and managers. The Monotype article states that the words and actions a brand espouses must be true to its identity. It also points out that no matter how much a company focuses on its logo or typography, it loses its meaning if it doesn't value its employees.
This is a painful truth, and it applies to me personally as well. Since our philosophy is "creating smiles," we are responsible not only for the smiles of our customers, but also for the smiles of our partners and colleagues. If a manager makes a decision that contradicts this philosophy, that single instance can speak more eloquently than 100 morning meetings.
Therefore, creating a company credo is meaningless unless it is accompanied by time for managers to review their own actions. I want them to spend a portion of the time they spend refining their words on "What will I change starting tomorrow?"
Summary: Decide on your actions after you've spoken.
The reason the credo isn't taking hold isn't because of the employees or the way it's phrased. It's because they're trying to complete it with just VI and MI, putting BI on the back burner. The three key steps are: define the context in which it will be used, create a way for participation, and have management take the lead.
Lionheart wants to be a company that doesn't just "state" its philosophy, but works with its employees to ensure it "takes root" within the company. We've stumbled many times ourselves, so we understand where people tend to go wrong. If you're currently struggling to find a place for your newly created credo, please tell us about it.
FAQ
Q. We already have a company credo, but it hasn't permeated the organization. Should we rewrite it?
A. Before rewriting, please check where the word is used—in hiring, evaluation, or everyday conversation. If there's no context, changing the word will yield the same result.
Q. Where should I start with internal branding?
A. It's best to start by deciding on one action for the manager themselves. Demonstrating a decision aligned with the company's philosophy before communicating it to employees will significantly speed up the communication process.
Q. How can I measure the effectiveness?
A. In addition to awareness surveys, I'd like you to look at whether there's been an increase in decisions made based on company philosophy when faced with uncertainty. Since some aspects can't be fully measured by short-term numbers, I recommend regularly monitoring whether the explanatory language used in recruitment and evaluation has become more consistent.
After starting his own business at the age of 26, he has over 20 years of management experience in the design and branding fields. In 2016, he moved with his family to the Philippines and established a local IT outsourcing company, leading its global expansion. Currently, as a "GLOBAL BRANDING AGENCY," he supports the growth of companies while also actively working on organizational reforms within his own company. Based on the real-world struggles and firsthand information he has faced in organizational development and overseas management, he shares practical branding and organizational theories that are thoroughly aligned with the perspective of business leaders.
