Stop pitching from the stage. Solve a real problem.

After D-Congress, Jacob Wibom Westerberg proposes something I would like to see at more events: the Brand Clinic. A company describes its problem, the experts ask questions, then give advice in front of an audience. The adviser has to show how she thinks when the answer is not sitting in her sales deck. That is the part of episode 98 I develop here; much of the conversation itself concerns my journey home and world events.

Tell us where it hurts before anyone shows a product.

In Jacob’s proposal, the brand starts by describing its situation. His hypothetical company has grown, stalled and tried to move forward with more marketing. Profitability has fallen. There is something to investigate before the next vendor gets to show its product.

What actually happened? What was the company trying to change? Which parts of the business seem to work, and which do not? Those questions need room before we decide what to buy or rebuild.

I think that order matters offstage too. An adviser can know her solution extremely well and still understand too little about your particular business. If the product always comes before the problem, it becomes hard to judge whether the recommendation fits at all.

Open the episode · 1:06:38

Good questions are part of the expertise.

Jacob suggests letting the panel ask questions and perhaps review data in advance. They need that to understand the business before offering advice. We discuss a short format, which would also make that ability very visible.

It is easy to sound confident when you choose which part of the story to tell. A specific question in return makes it more demanding. What is your advice based on? What information are you missing? What would make you suggest something else?

I want to follow the reasoning. That lets me understand how the person weighs the company’s situation against the solution. The audience gets something to work with too: we hear which questions had to be answered for the advice to become more than a general instruction.

Open the episode · 1:07:19

More marketing is not a complete answer to a stalled business.

The hypothetical company has already tried pushing harder on marketing. The result was lower profitability. Going onstage and delivering the same advice with more confidence is not good enough. We need to understand what was missing from the attempt.

Framing the problem that way gives the discussion useful precision. We are talking about the change the company needs and what it costs. A recommendation should help us think about both. More activity alone tells us little about how the business will improve.

A real company gives the advice something to push against: a budget, a team and attempts that have already failed. I want to hear what the adviser proposes with those conditions on the table.

Open the episode · 1:06:58

“Localise” tells very little to a company that still cannot sell.

Jacob uses international expansion as an example of a subject that attracts very general answers. Someone asks how to succeed; someone else says localisation. In the audience sits a company that still cannot make sales work. It needs the reasoning to go further.

Which situation are we trying to improve? What do we know so far? What is the specific next step, and why that one? A broad principle can be a starting point, but it needs translating into something that helps the person who asked.

We do not need to pretend that forty-five minutes onstage can fix an entire business. Jacob also says the time limit would be demanding. Even a limited conversation becomes more useful when the questions concern an identifiable problem and the participants have to explain their thinking.

Open the episode · 1:08:02

A good vendor should be able to join the discussion.

We stress that the purpose is not to catch vendors out. I also say there are plenty of vendors with good solutions. That is precisely why I want to hear them discuss what suits a particular brand, for example when it needs to choose a platform.

That discussion can make room for strengths and questions. How does the solution help this company? What does the business need to do to make it work? Following that is far more useful than giving the whole slot to a prepared pitch.

Jacob describes the clinic as an addition to a D-Congress he generally likes. I agree it would bring something to the event: we would see experts ask questions, choose a direction and explain their choices.

Open the episode · 1:08:57

Take the same expectations into your next advisory meeting.

In this episode, the Brand Clinic is a proposal. We have no delivered format or results to evaluate. But the idea says something about what I want from sharing knowledge: a better understanding of the problem and a clearer next step.

That is a reasonable expectation when choosing a business partner too. Listen to the questions, how the person uses the evidence and how specific the recommendation becomes. That gives you more to assess than a persuasive introduction.

I would take three questions into the next advisory meeting: what do you think we should do, why that, and what do you need to know to stand behind the advice?

Open the episode · 1:07:28

This article is based on the conversation and adapted for reading.