When asked the question, what are the consequences to an organization that is not strategic about communicating its brand?  The answer in the particular situation of the Komen Foundation, is catastrophic.  When the Komen Foundation decided to separate from Planned Parenthood, all of the stakeholders were not considered in its decision.  Nor was an attempt made to reach to all of its stakeholders to communicate the decision.  Their website notes their mission is “Save lives by meeting the most critical needs in our communities and investing in breakthrough research to prevent and cure breast cancer.”  While Planned Parenthood is only one of several organizations the Komen Foundation invests in, it is an organization that  has a far reach into communities that the Komen foundation could not have reached on its own.  In not having a communications strategy of its own, the Komen foundation, allowed not only its stakeholders, but also the stakeholders of Planned Parenthood to define their brand.  The Komen foundation missed an opportunity to explain how it would continue to reach the communities that Planned Parenthood reached, when severing the relationship.  The affected stakeholders were left to assume that the Komen Foundation was selective in which communities it would serve.  How in affect is this “meeting the most critical needs in our communities?”  And when one meditates on the term “our communities”, the actions by the Komen Foundation allows one to assume the Komen Foundation has limiting the reach of its mission, resulting in a detrimental impact on the overall brand of the foundation.  Its stakeholders reacted negatively to this expression of its brand.