Keir Starmer’s ‘productivity theatre’ and the need for a recognisable Labour brand

D espite securing a stonking majority in the July election, prime minister Keir Starmer’s Labour party still appears to lack a distinct identity. It is a brand under construction.

There is still an air of mystery surrounding what Starmer’s Labour represents, apart from “change”, “I’m not Jeremy Corbyn” and “we’re not the Tories”.

Labour is already thinking about how it can win the next election as it is unlikely to be able to do everything it wants to do in one term. It got away with not having a brand in 2024 because the Tories were in such bad shape. It won’t be so lucky next time and needs something stronger. The work starts now.

Labour’s identity is akin to a Lego set of thousands of multi-coloured bricks – but one that lacks an instruction manual. On first sight, it represents an opportunity. The possibilities for what you could build are endless. But without the manual, you end up joining bricks together on the hoof – and end up producing something unrecognisable.

Part of the reason that we’ve ended up here – with a political party elected without a clearly differentiated and identifiable brand – is the national mood during the election. There was a sense that people were voting to end 14 years of Conservative rule rather than in favour of Starmer’s Labour. Turnout was exceptionally low and millions of votes were cast for Reform.

This enabled Starmer to continue with his “Ming vase” strategy. Fearful of scaring or dissuading voters with specifics, Starmer was cautious to the point of obfuscation on fairly basic questions about his plans for government. Now in office, voters are looking for answers. They want to know what “change” means apart from merely a change of governing party. An election campaign usually forces a party to put meat on the bones, but not so in 2024.

This is not to say that Starmer hasn’t done anything since coming to power. In fact, his first weeks in office have been jam-packed. But there is a difference between being busy and setting out a plan. In fact, the greater risk at this stage is that Starmer and his team are sliding into productivity theatre – focusing on projecting the appearance of being busy and exaggerating performance.

Five steps to building a brand

He instead needs to adopt five key principles for building a successful, strong and sustainable brand.

First among these is unification. In the case of a political party, this involves leading a unified team, managing factions and ensuring everyone sings from the same hymn sheet. Disunity leads to conflicting messages, perceptions of weakness and negative associations.

Second is aligning (and communicating) brand values that resonate with people. It should be possible to demonstrate how these values will solve the wants and needs of citizens.

Third, Labour must differentiate itself from its competitors in order to encourage identification and long-term loyalty. At present, Starmer’s Labour party appears to be a mash-up of New Labour, Corbyn’s nationalisation agenda, and a desire to acquire the reputation for economic prudence that was traditionally associated with the Tories.

Fourth is authenticity. Political brands need to ensure they are trustworthy, genuine, stay true to their ideology and deliver their pledges. There are hints that Labour will deliver its manifesto pledges (1.5 million new homes, 6,500 new teachers), however its authenticity could be undermined by the introduction of means-tested winter fuel payments and the prospect of tax rises in October’s budget.

The fifth principle is being approachable. Political brands need to demonstrate they are inclusive and accessible. They must appear in-touch and relatable.

Political brands which adopt all five principles will be rewarded with long-term loyalty from voters.

Starmer must use the summer recess and honeymoon period to ensure his brand follows these principles. The window of opportunity to retain a coalition of support of voters will not stay open for long. Voters have given team Starmer the benefit of the doubt. They are waiting for answers to their problems. Starmer needs to clarify what he believes in before voters stop listening.

A mismatch between actions and beliefs can lead to inconsistent and contradictory political brands, which can lead to voters to become apathetic, sceptical and disengaged with the electoral process and politics.

Sources:

▪ This piece was originally published in The Conversation and re-published in PUBLIC SQUARE UK on 27 August 2024. | The author writes in a personal capacity.

▪ Cover: Flickr/Number 10. (Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.)