There is nothing more constant than change. People change, companies change, and so do political parties. It’s either gradual or sudden, driven by both internal and external factors. Change leads to success or becomes a reason for detachment. Change for political parties can either be a total rebranding or a deeper, more fundamental change that is the core of the party. The difference is drastic, so it’s important to spell out both of these approaches and the reasoning behind them in this article.
The art of rebranding a political party
Rebranding is a process of changing the identity of a company, product, service by changing its name, logo, or visual identity. The same is true for political parties. Rebranding involves changing the party’s image to reshape how it is perceived by its supporters and voters. Sometimes, rebranding is needed to better reflect the changes taking place within the organisation. For instance, a political start-up transitions to a more established political party, necessitating a logo or visual identity change.
Sometimes, rebranding is aimed at refreshing and revitalising public perception of the party to remain modern and in line with current visual aesthetics of the voters. Other times, rebranding is a remedy for a political crisis or an electoral loss where a political party needs to shed negative associations or connotations with its previous public image. Interestingly, there is a case in European politics where we’ve seen both reasons for a rebranding.
The German FDP party has been a long established and successful party, present in several governments, enjoying power and support. But in 2014, it found itself in an almost impossible situation – the party did not pass the threshold needed to be elected to the Bundestag. This sent shockwaves around the country, but certainly party members were even more shocked. What followed the next year was a process of internal reflection that led to change of leadership, priorities, and an organic party rebranding the next year.
The party did not change its name, but changed the logo, corporate colours, while adjusting its messaging to embrace modern liberalism and address contemporary issues to regain relevance and increase its electoral support. On the one hand, the rebranding effort was aimed at supporters to showcase the core supporters that the party is alive, contemporary and active and to potentially attract new supporters who previously could not connect with the party. On the other hand, the rebranding was a logical final step in the process of internal change – from leadership change to alterations of policy priorities. Otherwise superficially changing one’s logo without internal work can not lead to long-term success. And the rebranding worked – a few years later, the party was back to the Parliament and the government’s coalition.
Transforming the party’s core
If rebranding calls for significant internal changes, then changing the core of a political party involves tectonic shifts across all organisational pillars – values, policies, internal culture. Unlike rebranding, such profound change can not happen often or rarely does, and is normally a response to broader political trends, changes in society in general or some revolution-like events inside the party.
Such changes are so complex that nowadays, party membership more often opt for leaving the existing party and founding a splinter party to better reflect the change of ideology or values. There aren’t many examples of successful core change of a party. But there is a great example that shaped politics for at least a century. Have you guessed the party? You are right. The Democratic Party of the United States of America back in the mid-20th century.
Historically, the Democratic Party was aligned with the Southern states and upheld segregation and racial discrimination due to the legacy of slavery and Southern resistance to civil rights reforms. However, in the mid-20th century, especially during the Civil Rights Movement, the party underwent a profound shift in its core values toward racial equality. Influential figures like President Lyndon B. Johnson led efforts to pass landmark civil rights legislation, fundamentally transforming the party’s platform. This shift attracted many African Americans, who transitioned their support from the Republican Party to the Democratic Party, as well as many others supporting equal rights.
This change of the party’s core values came as a response to turbulent events and new movements within the society. Without such a vast historic backdrop, it is hard to imagine a truthful change of values and ideology – the cornerstones of any political party.
Communicate your changes to be effective
Whetheryour party is rebranding or changing its core, leaders, staff and active members have to communicate and explain the change to their members, supporters and voters. What does this change mean, why was it necessary, what does it imply – without proactive communication and participation, sudden change can lead to detachment of supporters. Only by understanding the party’s identity, the change and reasoning behind it, can people identify themselves with it and thus support and join the change.
Two possible change scenarios for political parties are extremely different and have different impact levels on party identity. However, even a simple change of logo without a proper participation, preparation, and communication can spark alienation of existing members. Of course, it is impossible to make a profound change that will be comfortable for everyone, but unless the aim is to completely change a party’s membership base, it is necessary to invest proper resources into communicating the change to unify and strengthen the organisation. Any voluntary change within a political party should rally its existing members around the flag, even if this flag has new colours or symbols on it.