Suzy Pakston had strong ideas from what she had learned in her marketing degree about how to build value into a products brand (branding). She often recounted her professor's words: 'Brands are built from capabilities by adding advantage to the product, by augmenting the product.' All her strategies related to this. This led to an objectivist state in which Suzy's own experiences dictated her view of the world.

But things changed when José was also hired as a brand manager - he had a conciliatory approach to building ideas related to a brand. He valued people's viewpoints and challenged his own on a consistent basis. Their two learning styles clashed dramatically. Suzy became frustrated by José's lack of clarity, while José viewed Suzy's views as one of many. This led to a major showdown in the general manager's office.

The general manager himself was sympathetic to Suzy's views, recounting his own experience as a product manager years earlier. He suggested that 'José get on with the job of management and leave managing people to the human resources department'. This greatly pleased Suzy, who left the meeting with a big grin. José, on the other hand, felt somewhat bemused and reflective, questioning his own methods.

On his way back to the office, he stepped in to see the marketing manager and had a quick chat. He began to explain his narrative of the meeting only to learn that Suzy had done the same 15 minutes earlier. José left a quarter of an hour later having heard the marketing manager's view that the answer lay somewhere in the middle. Jose later began to value the thought that collective others had influenced his ideas related to managing a brand. But there was still the problem of what to do with Suzy...

Questions

1 What approach would you take with Suzy if you were José?
2 Could Suzy learn anything from José? Or José anything from Suzy?