Whatever your views, his transformation of a party that had spent 18 years in the political wilderness into one capable of winning a landslide victory, is a considerable achievement.

Bringing about such a victory required a considerable shift in public perception of the Labour party.

For those working in branding and communications, re-positioning (or just positioning) organisations is a frequent challenge, which is why the story of New Labour’s conception intrigued me.

Reading Blair’s biography, three lessons rang true from my experience.

1. Define the brand in a meaningful way

The need for some form of statement about vision, mission or values (the brand idea for want of a better description) is a fairly obvious first step, and so it was with New Labour.

However, often these statements become watered down as the various factions involved argue the toss.  In an effort to keep everyone happy, a form of words that says everything and nothing is produced.

Blair understood that the process was as important as the final words.  He faced considerable opposition, particularly in relation to Clause IV, which was the section of their old constitution which set out (Old) Labour’s belief in the common ownership of the means of production.  He faced the detractors head on.  He sought debate and disagreement.  He drove towards a consensus; an idea upon which everyone agreed and understood.

2. Show how the brand idea informs behaviour

“We have changed.  The new Clause IV is the most visible symbol of that change but it is not the only one.” (Tony Blair)

Internal mission statements are meaningless unless they have a visible, tangible impact on people’s experience of the organisation.

Once a mission had been agreed, Blair explains in his book how policy decisions were continually informed by the beliefs expressed in this statement.  They repeatedly demonstrated to people, internally and externally, how these core beliefs informed Labour’s behaviour.  New Labour was transformed from an idea into something tangible.

3. Champion the brand idea from the top

 “I was hyper-anxious, determined not for a single instant to stop the modernising drive.  If I seemed obsessive, it was because I was.  Reconnection was great and policy change was essential, but above all people needed to know that when I was tested, I would stay true to that modernising appeal.  Our opponents would say; it’s all clever spin and PR.  Day in and day out, with the party’s reactionary elements as my foil, I would prove them wrong with a raft of modernising moves.” (Tony Blair)

Brand positioning projects often originate from the marketing department.  This can make it hard to get those at the top of the organisation to live and breathe the brand idea.  But making sure those at the top do champion it is essential.

The nature of Squad is that we are teams of people, who work closely together, often with tight deadlines, but we’re based in many different places – offices, homes, coffee shops and I dread to think where else.

How can it work if we’re not all sharing an office?

Despite all our communications technology, we still seem to struggle with the idea that people can work, collaborate and be managed when they don’t share an office.

Undoubtedly more and more people are working from home, but the rationale is often avoiding the traffic or looking after the kids.  In other words: personal benefits, not organisational ones.

Jason Fried’s TED Talk intrigued me because he approached this question not as a problem we must cope with in the pursuit of work-life balance; but as a way to improve our productivity.  (His talk is worth watching if you have 15 minutes to spare.)

Two of his points stood out for me: distractions and meetings.

Distractions can be extremely beneficial – Pixar even went so far as designing their offices with all the communal facilities (restaurant, toilets and mailboxes) in the centre of the building to foster more chance conversations and encounters.

The problem is when distractions are involuntary; just as you’ve got your head into something, someone pops up wanting to talk about this or have a meeting about that.

If you don’t share an office, involuntary distractions can’t happen.  As long as you have the strength to ignore the alerts from Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn and everything else, then you control when you want to be distracted and when you don’t.

At times face-to-face meetings are essential and impossible to replicate virtually.  Indeed, not being able to convene meetings is one of the arguments put forward in favour of the office.  However, when you share an office there is a tendency to have far too many meetings – meetings about meetings, as the saying goes.

I’ve seen various solutions to this.  One client used to have a timer that provided minute-by-minute updates on the cost of a meeting based on the participants’ hourly rates.  Others have tried making everyone stand up.

Not being in the same office is also a solution because it makes meetings harder to convene.  This forces you to question whether getting together in person is really necessary.  When meetings do happen they are more focused and more productive.

Admittedly, there are challenges to managing teams that don’t all work in the same place, but perhaps this is a good thing.  Perhaps it forces us to think harder about the way we work together.

I think it’s time to lose the nervousness about not working in offices.

Let us embrace the possibility that being freed from our offices can actually improve our productivity.

P.s. In order to write this piece I took a short walk in the sun and then wrote it while sitting outside the sandwich shop eating lunch.