Logos – it’s cool to be square

For designers of corporate identities the growth of digital media has had a pervasive, if sometimes insidious, influence.

I remember the early days of the web when we had poor screen resolution and were just getting to grips with anti-aliasing. ‘Jaggies’ – saw-edges on diagonal lines were a common problem and designers avoided the use of italic type and angled logos. In fact some major brands subtly altered their corporate signatures to ensure good screen reproduction.

Then we saw web graphics impacting upon print design. Logos started taking on button form with radiused corners, 3-dimensional shines, glows and drop shadows.

The latest phenomenon seems to be an increasing use of logos which will fit into a generally square format. Behind this is the influence of social media. Identifiers on Facebook, Twitter et al, were initially photographic head-shots – ideal for a personal, social medium. Now that commercial organisations are increasingly using social channels, they need brand signatures to fit.

For a long time, western corporate signatures were generally horizontal – perhaps a symbol and a brand name. This was ideal for print media. The signature fitted comfortably at the foot of an ad or the top of a letter, along a shop fascia or a vehicle side. However, recently we’ve been required to create adapted signatures for a number of brands (including our own) which fit to a 1:1 shape, for use on Facebook pages etc.

It seems like we are coming full circle. The earliest trademarks are reputedly those of blacksmiths making swords for the Roman legions. These were applied by punches. In the days when few tradesmen were literate, punches, seals, stamps and other marks would be used and would generally fit in a square or circular area. It was only with the growth of literacy that more horizontal ‘signatures’ became common though often used together with a symbol.

The first registered trademark in the UK is the Bass Brewery mark – a red, equilateral triangle – which would fit in a 1:1 area.

In the east, pictograms already fit tidily into rectangles. Elegant examples are the artists ‘chops’ used on japanese prints rather than western style signatures.

New technology once again coaxes us back into old approaches, and once again it is becoming cool to be square.

The seven pillars of export branding

At its core, all branding is the same – however, when a brand moves into the international arena, there are some critical dimensions that must be considered.

1. Language

This may seem obvious, but does your brand name translate into your target languages? Even proper names may have an unintended meaning. Don’t just think of the spelling – when pronounced, even seemingly harmless words may have unintended meanings.

Do you use descriptive words in your brand such as, ‘Norfolk Car Parts’ or ‘Budget Printing’? Will these words be meaningful in your selected markets.

You may not need to change a brand name, but it may help to emphasise just part of your title.

Also consider any statements or strap-lines that form part of your corporate signature; these may need adapting in translation.

2. Culture

While language may be easy to check, culture is rather more subtle, and potentially a bigger trap. There is no quick fix. You need to do your research and immerse yourself as far as possible in the culture of your market.  Look at the media, both online and offline; look at your competitors.

Best of all, expose your brand to nationals of your target markets. Discuss your ambitions. Use your partners in-market; agents, distributors etc. Talk to embassy staff.

You’ll soon appreciate how culture impacts upon many of the other dimensions of your branding activity.

3. Brand Story

Is your brand narrative relevant to your target market? Things that may seem unimportant at home may be leveraged to advantage internationally. While your location may have little relevance to home customers, it may be a strong plus abroad. Consider the cultural context: for example, history of a family business may be very important in certain markets.

4. Competitive positioning

The perception of your brand position relative to your competitors from market to market. Be aware and be sensitive, you can often use this to your advantage. Don’t assume that your positioning will be the same as it is at home.

5. Core Values

Your core values are what makes your brand what it is. They should be strong and consistent wherever you do business. You must be clear about them and communicate them to all you work with – your staff, your partners in market, your customers and supply chain. Don’t tinker with them, but just be aware that certain values may be more important in some markets more than others.

6. IPR

Intellectual property rights – consider them all; brand names, trademarks, patents, designs, copyright etc.

Legal protection may be difficult or costly across export markets, but you must give them consideration. It is important to give your brand all the protection you can apply or afford. It is equally important to make sure you don’t infringe the IPR of others.

Remember, a strong brand can often be the best protection you can get – be first to market, establish a strong presence and leave potential copyists playing catch-up.

7. Visual communications.

Though language is important, visual and non-verbal communications have an equally powerful part to play. When you see the ‘golden arches’ of Macdonalds, or the Apple symbol, you don’t need the name. Strong visual symbolism can be a means of transcending language difficulties.

Consider the elements of your corporate identity, symbols, colours, typography. Maintain rigid visual standards.

It’s important to look at the cultural context of your visual elements. What semantic connotations do your colours have? In many cultures colours are far more important, and signify different states.

B2B brand benefits are relative.

Brand values and more importantly, brand values, are not always the same throughout the marketing chain.

Some years ago I was pitching for a project for a major retail brand, when I realised how crucial our own brand reputation was. We had clearly demonstrated we could deliver the ideal solution; our product knowledge, understanding and research was spot on; timescales were realistic and prices very competitive. However, we lost the business to a competitor with a stronger brand who we were sure had far less product knowledge, fewer in-house specialists and would certainly be much more expensive.

What we had failed to grasp was that the brand benefits of a supplier are specific to the customer you are dealing with. We were negotiating with a middle range line manager. Of course he shared the corporate ambitions, but also had a personal agenda that meant he needed to be sure he would look good in front of his boss and not suffer too badly if the supplier did not perform.

He chose a ‘bigger’ brand. There used to be a saying many years ago, that: ‘Nobody got sacked for specifying IBM’. There was a safety factor behind the brand.

The lesson for all businesses is to understand the priorities throughout the marketing chain. What may be key benefits for the end-user may not be top of the list for the distributor or retailer. Of course all the benefits are components of the brand offer. If a brand is to sustain that offer in-depth it must satisfy all stakeholders. However, it is important to understand and communicate the relative benefits to each of the individual parties.

You have a chain of customers each with their own focus, and customers only listen to one radio station – WIIFM – ‘What’s in it for me’.

Can the Barclays’ brand change cultural values by changing structures?

Barclays’ new CEO Antony Jenkins, is undertaking an admirable strategic overhaul of the way the brand does business and hopefully in its longterm public perception.

He talks about changing culture and practices – practices are fairly straightforward, pragmatic things to change. Little wonder that systems-based organisations begin there. You can plan, implement, monitor and measure. To what extent changes to practices affect culture is far more difficult to assess. Tackling corporate and brand cultures head-on is far more difficult.

Cultural changes do not necessarily follow changes in practice – where practices are pragmatic, cultures are emotional.

A few years ago I worked on a project for a major high street bank (not a brand job), and the management proudly explained the measures they had put in place to become a ‘real customer-focused organisation.’ However, when talking to staff it did not need in-depth discourse analysis to show that the new systems had not had a major impact upon culture. New customers were described in bulk as ‘feed stock’, and when asked to explain their jobs, many people would begin with: ‘Suppose Mrs Miggins needs a… ‘

I wish Anthony Jenkins well. Full marks for recognising the seriousness of the issue. I shall watch with interest however the way the organisation deals with the emotional dimensions of cultural values and the measures put in place to assess them.

Brand quirks are good for you.

A brand quirk is a feature or attribute that does nothing to enhance the performance of the product or service, but provides a unique point of differentiation.

In areas where the delivery may be considered a commodity, differentiation is at a premium. This is where the value or a ‘quirk’ may be really telling  - it ups the ‘Quirk Quotient’.

Some of the most notable examples appear in the confectionery or countline sectors. There are very few real differentiators between chocolate bars, few notable differences you can make. The most we can manipulate are marginal variations around a few popular themes.

Consider the shape of the ‘Toblerone’ bar. It has no effect on the taste of the product, provides no enhancement in itself – but it is a quirk or huge value in brand identity and differentiation.

The round Smarties tube is another quirk. It provides no tangible benefit. In fact, I heard a well-reasoned argument from a packaging specialist that a rectangular tube makes far more sense, providing better space occupancy in transit. I understand it was even tried once, but for the public, the round tube is part of the Smartie offer.

The hole in a Polo mint or a Lifesaver has no flavour enhancing property – it is a quirk – but of inestimable brand value.

Quirks are as important as brand assets as are brand names, logos, colour schemes and all the other identity collateral.

Though we understand their value, quirks are among the most difficult things to create successfully. They are often serendipitous, springing from creative irrelevancies and often coming from unlikely quarters within the organisation.

Consciously creating a valuable quirk is as difficult as creating a video that is ‘guaranteed’ to go viral.

If you have a brand that is clearly differentiated in terms of the benefits it delivers, you should concentrate on communicating them. If not, a quirk may help. There is no handbook to creating a killer quirk, but I suspect that the necessary conditions include an organisation that loves and believes in its product or service, that creates a truly innovative environment and has people with a sense of fun and playfulness.

Online brands – opportunity or threat for pack design?

With more sales moving online do we have to rethink the role of pack design – will it become a less important part of the marketing mix?

‘Phenomenal’ growth – that’s IGD’s prediction for online grocery shopping (The Grocer). Online sales growth is outstripping growth through stores, according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS)’s Retail Sales figures for July 2012. All exciting stuff, but what does it mean for pack design strategies?

I spent a good deal of my working life involved in retail pack design; everything from biscuits to lawnmowers. Its importance was taken as a given. It was the silent salesman, communicating features benefits and the brand values. Emotionally there is no more powerful moment than at the point of purchase. Trends in online and click-and-collect could potentially change the role of packaging design.

At the moment most products have a dual life; part on the shelf and part online. Our relationship with online brands is based to a large extent upon our in-store experience. But as time progresses products and customers may evolve who have no relationship other than online – in fact it’s easy to think of any number of online-only brands, though perhaps few in the FMCG sector.

A case could be argued for pack design to be being obsolescent. However, it’s interesting to look at how e-books that never have a bookshelf life have adopted virtual covers online: the same goes for some albums – a skeuomorphic comfort factor. So perhaps there is one important semiotic role for the pack as an icon for brand or product.

Many of the other functions of pack design present quandaries – conveying product information, size, contents, applications, instructions etc. These are not necessary for the online ‘pack’ as they can be conveyed in product information and specification details on the web page, separate from the pack. However, these may need to accompany the delivered product.

Other functions of the pack design such as communicating features and benefits, demonstrating the contents or creating emotional appeal will still be required. However, these are not necessarily roles for the pack. Rich online media, video, audio, games, communities etc., may present far more exciting ways communicating this information as part of the whole ‘pack’ experience.

Rather than presenting a threat to pack design it may open the door to a new age of retail/e-tail connection.

Packaging designers need no longer be constrained by the pack dimensions or print limitations. A single compelling icon when clicked can open a door to an almost boundless experience. The necessary data and statutory information can be separated from the emotional appeal of the brand.

The pack for the delivered product will have a different function. The purchase decision has been made. The new pack has to inform and reassure the buyer they have made the right choice and help stimulate repeat purchase.

The future looks exciting for pack design – though maybe not as we know it.

Five key characteristics of great brand leaders.

What is the defining characteristic of great brands – large or small? It is brand leadership. They have strong, committed and unwavering direction.

Great brand leaders come in all shapes and sizes from Henry Ford to Richard Branson or Steve Jobs. But they all share some key qualities.

(1) Vision

A clear view ahead and ambition for the brand is vital. Vision is not to be confused with strategic objectives: it is a more amorphous thing and often difficult to articulate, but we all recognise when people have vision.

Vision is not about what a brand will do, but of the brand itself. I’m sure in the early days of Virgin, that Branson had no idea he would be selling financial products or space travel. And Steve Jobs did not see himself in the mobile phone business. Vision is not necessarily about the product or service – these will change over time under market or technology pressures. It is about the brand and its values that should be steady and enduring.

(2) Communication

There is little point having vision if you are unable to share it. Great brand leaders are good at communicating their vision – but not necessarily verbally. Often they communicate by example, by their actions, by the way they go about their business. Branson is not the greatest verbal communicator, but his vision is clear in his operation, manner and approach to business.

(3) Empathy

Great brand leaders have a good deal of empathy for their audience. This is different from understanding – the stuff you get from research. It is an emotional quality. It is relating to the aims and aspirations of your brand stakeholders. It takes exceptional people to still be able to empathise with consumers or junior employees as they themselves climb the greasy pole of success.

(4) Consistency of values

One of the reasons we choose brands is for consistency – when I select brand ‘A’, I know what to expect. So long as my expectations are met, I am happy and loyal. It’s not just about product performance or service, it’s about the way the brand goes about its business.

Consistency is a function of leadership. It is not to say a leader can’t surprise or even shock – but they operate within a clear framework of values.

(5) Brand guardians

Organisations grow. To ensure that the vision is clear, the consistent values are understood and empathy is fostered, the leader needs to recruit brand guardians – trusted lieutenants who will carry his or her values through the organisation.

We see this with great football managers – once the match is in progress, there is little they can do to affect the outcome of the game. But usually they have one or two key players who understand and share their views and wishes. These players ensure things are kept on track and don’t drift.

As brands grow to global stature and complexity, these guardians are vital and should exist at all levels and in all disciplines within the organisation. Once recognised they need to be fostered and nurtured.

Legal victories may be bad for brands

When your brand wins a legal battle it may be good for the company but can damage brand values and engagement.

Apple have been smugly congratulating themselves after their court victory over Samsung. We can all understand – when your success is built around product innovation, protecting your intellectual property must be at the front of your corporate mind. But perversely, the public may not share in the jubilation.

Legal confrontations are not particularly edifying. Especially if you are a powerful, brand leader, there is always a reaction to feel sympathy for the underdog. I’m sure many of us remember the reputation Microsoft earned by their eagerness to rush to litigation.

Nobody likes to see dirty washing done in public. Facebook’s internal conflicts did little to endear the management to its public. All of these actions reflect upon the brand values and can be internally damaging.

The discourse within organizations that are involved in litigious processes is indicative of lawyers’ confrontational culture. The metaphors are about battles, about fighting, winning, victories and defeats. The dialogues are adopted throughout the organization. Staff understand who the ‘enemy’ is. The brand ambassadors begin to use the discourse of street-fighters. The ‘battles’ become part of the brand narrative and define its values.

Of course we must protect our IPR and be prepared to stand up for our brand. But it is also important from a brand leadership standpoint that we don’t allow the corrosive and hostile attitude to damage our values.

Make the most of the five ‘E’s of branding.

Brand experience is all about the interaction between the brand and its public. While we all remember the four ‘P’s of the marketing mix (though I’ve seen up to 11 at the last count!) – the crucial dimensions of brand interaction are the five ‘E’s.

Engagement

- interactions need engagement. The more people engage the greater the opportunity for interaction. Smart brands maximise engagement. Product, literature, advertising, communications, customer service and online connections – all present chances to interact.

Excellence

- the goal of any brand should be excellence in its chosen arena. Excellent product, customer service, processes – each touch-point should be the best we can make it.

Ethics

- we see more brand disasters arise from unethical dealings. This is all about poor brand values and bad leadership. A sound brand should deal openly and honestly with its customers, suppliers, employees and the world in general. People are far more likely to forgive incompetence or poor service than they are unethical business practices.

Emotional attachment

- much of our attachment to brands is emotional (though we try to convince ourselves it is pragmatic). It is intangible, but we should recognise it as a core brand strength, deeply embedded in brand values. Apple, for example, has a loyal following who simply love the brand – it is difficult to analyse, but the company does seem to understand it and builds on the values it embodies.

Experience

- as with ‘engagement’, the points of interaction are points of experience. Whether it is visiting a store or a website, opening a brochure or a package or using a product – there is a user experience. Our entire understanding of the world is based primarily upon our sensory and emotional experience of it. Brands such as Starbucks understand this – it is not just about the product (which lest’s face it is just a cup of coffee), but the whole experience of the store, the environment. It is about all the senses, visual, auditory, olfactory  and tactile.

Branding should not be a verb.

Branding, in marketing, is something that ‘is’ not something you do. In short, we are better thinking of it as a noun rather than a verb.

A soon as we start selling a product or service with a name, a brand exists. It emerges from the interaction of the product or service with the world at large. A business can create a new brand simply by bringing something to market.

We can then develop that brand, improve it, promote it and communicate its benefits, protect it, grow and diversify it – but branding itself as an activity, has no meaning, unless you are a cattle farmer.

I spotted an article the other day proposing that branding was an unethical activity. I was about to rush into print to respond, when I realised that I couldn’t because the argument was based upon an incorrect premise – that there was an activity called ‘branding’.

Dangerous shorthands

The unhelpful and uninformed use of the term has grown out of lazy journalism. Just as ‘marketing’ is misused to mean anything from advertising to PR, branding is a shorthand for all forms of brand development, identity creation and brand communication. It is also a handy term when a pejorative inference is needed to criticise those bad, mad men and women.

I work in brand development – but I would never describe myself as a ‘brander’ – because I don’t ‘brand’.

Perhaps it’s time for all of us who work on brands to champion a bit of clarity, and in the words of one of my favourite quotes: ‘Never verb a noun’.