This year marks the 80th anniversary of the United Nations, a milestone shadowed by crisis. The Doomsday Clock stands at 89 seconds to midnight, as increasing geopolitical tensions fuel eroding trust in multilateralism. Criticism of the UN often targets its inability to address global challenges effectively, but the deeper problem lies in how it operates and communicates its mission.

Decades of reform have delivered modest improvements rather than transformation. As Clayton Christensen’s Innovator’s Dilemma shows, organisations that cling to old models struggle to adapt to disruption. The UN faces this dilemma: its structures preserve continuity but resist bold moves. To survive and thrive, the UN must find the courage to disrupt itself before someone else does – or it will become irrelevant.

Saying Goodbye to Everything Everywhere All at Once

The 21st century is marked by interconnected crises. The UN suffers from strategic overextension, with expanding mandates, inefficiencies between organs, and persistent gaps between ambition and resources. This creates “mission sprawl,” where responsibilities outpace capacity.

On top of this, the UN faces chronic underfunding, unpredictable Member State contributions, and ongoing liquidity crises. Facing overwhelming demands, institutions like the UN can “freeze,” preventing decisions. That would explain why the UN continues creating new mandates while struggling to abandon outdated ones.

Corporate turnarounds offer instructive parallels. In the 2010s, Microsoft spread thin until Satya Nadella refocused on “mobile-first, cloud-first,” shedding Nokia hardware and investing in Azure. This strategic realignment was grounded in financial necessity and long-term coherence.

IBM’s 1990s crisis was solved through operational discipline. CEO Lou Gerstner declared, “The last thing IBM needs right now is a vision,” focusing instead on breaking internal bureaucracy and integrating previously competitive IBM divisions. In 1997, near-bankruptcy pushed Apple to cut its product line to four categories. Jobs summed it up: “Focus is about saying no.”

Three mechanisms emerge for UN application: mandate sunset clauses, systematic evaluation of functional overlaps, and embracing “strategic neglect” – deliberate choice not to act on every opportunity to preserve effectiveness in core areas.

However, implementing such changes faces unique multilateral constraints. Unlike corporate CEOs, the Secretary-General cannot force reforms through hierarchy. Most UN decisions require consensus, or at least no veto, among actors: Member States (especially the P5), staff and unions, civil society, and the global public who feel the UN’s impact but lack a voice. The zone of possible agreement on core UN functions remains narrow, constrained by “anchoring effects” – biases that favour familiar institutional templates over better alternatives. Organisational change theory shows large bureaucracies also “fight back” against reform. To succeed, reformers must persuade not only governments but also the UN workforce that changes will strengthen, not gut, the institution’s mission. Yet in the end, Member State buy-in – especially from the most powerful – is decisive.

Communication and Identity: Beyond the Blue Flag

While the UN’s blue flag is globally recognisable, symbolic visibility does not translate into emotional proximity. Pew Research found 58% of respondents across 35 countries hold favourable views of the UN, yet the UN’s own survey revealed roughly 40% knew little to nothing about its work. Over half described the organisation as “remote from their lives,” even as 74% consider it “essential” for tackling global challenges.

This reflects a deeper paradox – people form judgments based on negative, emotionally charged information. For most people, the UN identity is constructed through fragmented, predominantly negative media coverage, including a paralysed Security Council, humanitarian crises, and bureaucratic inefficiency. These episodes dominate not because they reflect the UN’s work, but because they are what people remember.

Enduring brands succeed through identity-based communication. Apple’s “Think Different” campaign sold creativity, not just products. Nike’s “Just Do It” and Ben & Jerry’s “Peace, Love & Ice Cream” created emotional connections beyond what they sold.

Lego’s remarkable turnaround from near-bankruptcy illustrates how organisations rebuild emotional connection by returning to core values while embracing innovation and storytelling. Lego reinvented itself through films, games, and community experiences, connecting with new generations and evoking nostalgia.

Microsoft’s cultural transformation under Nadella shifted from a rigid “know-it-all” ethos to a humbler “learn-it-all” stance, openly acknowledging past missteps while committing to continuous learning and adaptation. This transparency increased credibility by signalling self-awareness and readiness to improve.

Recommendations:

1. Refocus Through Strategic Discipline

• Introduce sunset clauses and regular impact reviews
• Practice strategic neglect: deliberately disengage from areas lacking comparative advantage
• Build foresight tools for long-term risk anticipation

2. Rebrand Through Identity-Based Communication

• Tell value-driven stories, not just processes
• Create cohesive messaging across UN entities
• Position the UN as a platform for solidarity and shared values

3. Reinvent the Blue Flag

• Redefine the brand as “promise of protection”
• Invest in youth engagement and digital storytelling
• Collaborate with cultural voices to spark imagination

4. Recommit to Transparency and Trust

• Embrace radical transparency about limitations
• Shift to learning-oriented reform narratives
• Foster authenticity over perfectionism

Conclusion

Reform must look beyond technocratic fixes and draw inspiration from outside. Corporate case studies demonstrate that institutions in crisis can rebuild purpose and trust by embracing clarity, emotional resonance, and strategic discipline. These lessons are not blueprints, but metaphors: calls to reimagine how the UN prioritises, how it communicates, and how it connects.

The UN does not need to be everywhere, do everything, or speak to everyone in the same way. It needs to become more focused in its action, more human in its narrative, and more courageous in its reform. Legitimacy will not be rebuilt through efficiency alone, but through the ability to inspire – moving beyond the blue flag as a symbol toward the blue flag as promise. Not only that it works, but that it matters.

---

By Kristina Liutikaite-Lamanauskas, alumna of the Diplomacy, Negotiation and Policy programme.