by contributor
Andrew Pourtov
Andrew has addressed this invitation to Identity Forum’s eighteen Contributors — but of course everyone is welcome to jump in.
We are different. We have different age, education and experience. We have grown with different cultural values. Our taste was influenced by different designers. We took part in different projects. We have the different approach. Let’s share our experience, and each choose the top-10 identity firms in the world. (I think this will provide more interesting information on each of us, than what is written in our short bio’s.) Here are my choices:
| Firm | Why? |
| 1. Chermayeff & Geismar | logo |
| 2. Landor Associates | brand driver |
| 3. Cato Purnell Partners | dynamic identity |
| 4. Wolff Olins | non-standard |
| 5. Pentagram | typography |
| 6. Chase Design | calligraphy |
| 7. Total Identity | design systems |
| 8. MetaDesign | logic |
| 9. QWER | revolution |
| 10. Siegel+Gale | simplicity |
Make your own choices and share them with us! (Please also explain — in a word or two; what is the firm’s greatest point of strength?)
By Scott Lerman
25 JUL 2009, 23:41 GMT
Andrew: A question before we make our picks. Is this a list of the firms you think are the top/best in the world today, historically, or are you going for a blend of then and now? I’ve worked with two of the firms on your list–both are quite different now then they were then.
By Tony Spaeth
25 JUL 2009, 23:49 GMT
Interesting choices, Andrew. I’m with you on six out of ten. If we’re talking about well balanced (planning and design) identity firms, in fairness a top ten list must include the larger specialist firms:
Lippincott where it all began
Interbrand
The Brand Union
FutureBrand
By Jerry Kuyper
26 JUL 2009, 1:00 GMT
I’m going to jump in with my own definition/rationale before Andrew has time to answer Scott’s question.
Have fun with this, we aren’t getting graded, are we?
T O P T E N F I R M S O F A L L T I M E
Three firms that were pioneers but no longer exist:
Paul Rand (firms can be small) - playful genius
Saul Bass/Herb Yager and Associates - creative chutzpah
Unimark - minimalist approach
___
Two firms that were pioneers and still thrive today:
Lippincott - defined the business
Landor - global reach
___
Anspach Grossman Portugal - design excellence
Pentagram - breadth of creativity
Chermayeff & Geismar - creative brilliance
Siegel & Gale - corporate voice
Steiner & Co. (Henry Steiner) - cross cultural
As Andrew suggested, my list is personally biased. I have worked for four of my top ten and know individuals who work or have worked at each of the firms.
By Andrew Pourtov
26 JUL 2009, 12:31 GMT
2 Scott
I cannot estimate level of these companies at present time. We see already executed projects, and they always show the past.
2 Tony
All good ci-firms will not be included in top-10. This rating, certainly, is subjective, but top-10 it is more prestigious, than top-20 or top-50. You named the excellent companies, but I have made my choice. Lippincott I would include in top-10 Environmental Branding firm, together with Fitch, Saguez&Partners, Checkland Kindleyside’s and Atelier Markgraph etc.
2 all
Please, name top-10 corporate identity firms which work today. Certainly, I too love projects of Otl Aicher and Paul Rand, but they today any more with us…
By Andrew Pourtov
26 JUL 2009, 12:49 GMT
2 Jerry
Your opinion is very important for me. I communicated with all these companies as the editor-in-chief of Identity magazine. We wrote some articles about all companies named me and published their projects. I know some people from these companies personally because they took part in our conferences HiBrand 2007 and HiBrand 2008. But, of course, I did not work in Landor and Siegel+Gale, therefore your opinion for me is more important my own. Steiner and Co. is a new name for me . May be I will write about this company in Identity magazine. Thank you for your opinion, Jerry!
By Andrew Sabatier
26 JUL 2009, 15:09 GMT
It makes sense that a brand identity consultancy should become known for a singular orientation or a ground-breaking contribution to the industry. I’ve tried think of a single idea or description for notable UK-based international brand identity consultancies. The exercise is overly simplified but is worth considering in terms of how consultancies position themselves, consciously or otherwise.
From Andrew’s list I’ve had direct experience of Landor’s very impressive brand driver platform and Siegel+Gale’s simplicity. To avoid repetition I think the following consultancies are worth noting. Some are up-and-coming and may find a top ten placement sometime.
Johnson Banks – Out-the-box
Lambie Nairn – Broadcast
Moving Brands – Digital non-static
Research Studios – Celebrity
Saffron – New modernism
The Team – Government
Turner Duckworth – Lightness of touch
Venture Three – Ultra-contemporary design
Simplicity is perhaps worth a whole discussion. It seems commonly misperceived and in the limelight mostly due to Apple’s success. Like brands people assume to know simplicity but are often unable to make sense of it.
A.
Apologies for the multiple posts. The formating of the comments has not been properly resolved. Notes on how to treat HTML would be useful.
By David Airey
26 JUL 2009, 16:16 GMT
There’s a London-based firm deserving of an honourable mention:
Moonbrand
Responsible for identities such as The Royal Parks and NHS.
By Dan Dimmock
27 JUL 2009, 12:37 GMT
My Top Ten was based on: perception, admiration and, in a couple of cases, an experience of working with:
Interbrand Value
Pentagram Quality
Wolff Olins Fresh
Lippincott Calculated
The Brand Union Smart
Saffron Clever
Futurebrand Understated
Siegel+Gale Repositioned
Johnson Banks Thoughtful
Landor Busy
However, it’s probably worth taking my 10 year career (to date) into consideration too.
Thanks. DD
By Marco Rezende
27 JUL 2009, 18:49 GMT
Chalenging initiative.
My initial remark is a question:
Is that a US ranking or a global one?
Why should we concentrate only on American firms? Should we not open oureyes and minds to other countries firms?
If so, I would add my own firm, of course.
It is Cauduro - founded 1964, first large scale, total design Identity program: 1971. Value: transforming complexity into simplicity, with a total expression approach. Boldness is the central animus.
My list would include Lippincott as essential: pioneer, value-driven branding, effectiveness of strategy and design.
By Tony Spaeth
27 JUL 2009, 22:59 GMT
Our top ten surely should be global, Marco: Andrew began this post from Moscow. I would agree: with its broad portfolio and distinguished history, Cauduro is certainly a contender.
By Valerie Russell
27 JUL 2009, 23:59 GMT
Love the topic. Wonderful firms.
However the links to the companies websites seem a bit faulty—there are issues with 1, 3, 4 and 7.
Thank you!
By Tony Spaeth
28 JUL 2009, 1:14 GMT
Fixed now and thank you, Valerie
By Gabi Toth
28 JUL 2009, 16:28 GMT
Since this query for a top ten list of branding firms was first addressed to the contributors of Identity Forum, I feel obliged to provide an answer. To be honest, I don’t have an established hierarchy between such firms, neither role models or such. But I’m sure I can recognize, feel, appreciate and respect value, and no matter when or how often this happens from a particular firm or individual, it has so much magic in it that statistics and frequency become irellevant.
By Scott Lerman
28 JUL 2009, 18:57 GMT
I think the day of “top 10″ corporate identity firms as industry movers is past. Don’t get me wrong, large firms will always exist. The mega-networks do good work and provide brand-name security. But great corporate identity is not very dependent on scale of firm.
We all know what clients want: Deeply experienced people that actually work on their assignments; Candid, objective, guides to collaborate with them through a process; Teams that are as accomplished in delivering insightful strategic definition as they are in compelling expression; Recommendations that respect their past while defining their future; and confidence that the team will put their interests first.
As firms get larger and “go public” it gets far more difficult to deliver on these needs.
Mergers, multi-billion dollar spin-offs, and well-financed startup identities are routinely developed with core teams that can be counted on one hand. Small firms can handle large projects–relying on trusted individuals and networks with other small firms for specialized program elements. Even the mega-networks are taking that approach– assembling virtual teams from across their holdings. That’s good news.
There is a shift to choosing the right people to lead brand identity programs–rather than the right firm. The quandary? It is far harder to find individuals than firms. Often, designers and brand strategists are restricted from taking credit and portfolio when they leave a firm. It’s easier to send an RFP to the top 10, than to find and vet smaller teams. Clearly, we have to make it easier to find the “top 100″ individuals and teams if the decentralization taking place isn’t to descend into chaos.
What do you think Andrew? Should we start a second list?
By Jerry Kuyper
29 JUL 2009, 3:31 GMT
Scott, you make some very compelling points with which we probably all agree.
As for the new list, I thought we were the list.
By joel portugal
29 JUL 2009, 16:43 GMT
I find it difficult to rank top identity firms. I find it less difficult to select my favorite identity firms. It appears to me that without specific criteria (like period of time being evaluated, global reach, diversity of capabilities, breakthru solutions, client results, etc. et. etc.) the selections are not based on common ground. My 2 favorite design identity firms today are Pentagram and C&G Partners. When it comes to my favorite identity firms and their work concerning culture/value they are on this panel–Ackerman and Maio. Of course I am biased, I have had the privilege of working with them. These choices do happen to reenforce Scott Lerman’s point–size is less significant than the quality/experience residing in the firm today.
By Bob Wolf
30 JUL 2009, 1:41 GMT
To follow up on Scott’s comment that the day of top 10 corporate identity industry movers is past. I believe we need to clarify if we are speaking from a historical perspective, taking into account ALL accomplishments, or current capabilities of the firms we are considering for the list. In many instances, personnel and management changes have removed key contributors, making it difficult to determine if the firm can still produce the same level of work. Our list would certainly be different if we only take into account the work of current employees.
Technology has also played an important role in enabling small/mid-size firms to produce work that is on a par and in many cases, superior to that of large firms. It has also become extremely difficult for the large firms to sustain a high level of quality. With most of them no longer independent and pressured to maintain profit margins, they have had to find less expensive ways to produce their product. This has resulted in less-experienced (less expensive) staff and less time to spend on projects.
Scott is dead on when he says that it is about choosing the right people rather than the right firm. Companies need to know who is going to spend time working on their projects rather than get a history lesson on past accomplishments.
By Andrew Pourtov
30 JUL 2009, 8:36 GMT
Discussion becomes very interesting. I do not think, that quality of work is defined by any one person. MetaDesign now works without Eric Spiekermann, Chermayeff&Geismar Studio without Steff Geissbuhler, C&G Partners without Ivan Chermayeff and Tom Geismar, Landor without Fumi Sasada and Jerry Kuyper, Wolff Olins without Wally Olins, Pentagram without David Hillmann etc. The great companies, such as Landor and Lippincott, works now without Walter Landor, Walter Margulies and Gordon Lippincott. I do not think, that for this reason we should exclude them. In strong agencies except people there are technologies, experience and continuity of generations. Therefore they also remain in the market after leaving of key experts or even founders. McKinsey, Landor, MetaDesign…This list is easy for continuing.
By Scott Lerman
30 JUL 2009, 16:00 GMT
Some of the companies you’ve listed have always worked as alliances of strong individuals. For example, even if pulled apart, Steff, Ivan, and Tom could remain “whole”. Each has always run their own teams and projects. And some of the firms you and others here have cited had “near death” experiences as they transitioned leadership–only to be reinvented within the shell of the brand name.
But you make a good point. Creating an enduring culture of accomplishment is one of the great tests for a organization. Of the firms you listed, Wolff Olins seems to best follow the course of its departed founders. (Although Wally Olins complained to me that his next generation seemed to think they invented the Wolff Olins appoach to design…saying something like, “we’ve done this all before.”)
The mega-network model favors converting individual-driven “below-the-line” firms into more organizationally-driven entities. Makes sense. Public companies crave predictable results, reduced risk from the departure of individuals, and less drama! The result is often a dilution or dissolution of the original firm’s distinctive power. The firms continue, leveraging the original brand, but delivering something quite different. The challenge is to create a branding firm that can “scale-up” without losing its essential character. To combine the best of a more singular vision with the power of broad collaboration. That’s a tall order.
By Andrew Pourtov
30 JUL 2009, 19:58 GMT
Dear Scott, thank you for last comments. Please, explain what second list you suggest to open.
Small commands? Top-100? Concrete people? This theme also is very interesting to me!Probably you do not know, but QWER has only several employees, but they have made EXPO 2000. Chase Design is the small company too. I named those who is pleasant to me most, instead of the largest companies. Otherwise in the list would be Interbrand etc.Certainly, to know all small good agencies it is very useful. I advise some large Russian companies and I help them to choose branding agencies within the limits of available budgets. In particular, recently I have advised to involve in rebranding project one of the largest Russian bank except 4 small and middle russian also 2 small romanian branding companies.
Winners of our competition Identity: Best of the Best regularly there are small agencies from all world: Serbia, Croatia, Romania, the Netherlands, the USA, the Great Britain, Germany, China etc.
By Scott Lerman
30 JUL 2009, 20:37 GMT
Andrew, I’d like to see listings of top individuals that detail their past key projects. This would be a boon to potential clients (and worry some branding firms.) Imagine a major corporation selecting potential brand consultancies by first choosing key people–then seeing where they currently work. Their RFP could then specify which individuals they’d like on the program team. Today, the deck is stacked for companies. They use portfolio that includes the worl from legions of employees (and sometimes founders) that no longer work for the firm.
Maybe that’s a project for this group. Develop a standard set of information and begin to build an iBrandBase.
By Andrew Pourtov
30 JUL 2009, 21:30 GMT
Scott, iBrandBase is a good idea, but very difficult business. i think that It will not be necessary for clients. They cannot employ free-lance team from employees of the several branding companies and cannot manage the branding project.
Russian clients also do not wish to receive best of possible decisions. They are afraid to make the wrong choice only. They will agree to pay money, than time which is necessary for market studying more likely. They sometimes pay the big money to cosultants from London, and those do very weak works…
As examples of unsuccessful projects (this is my personal opinion) I can name project Fitch for Russian Post, Minale for Russian Machines, Wolff Olins for Sistema Telecom (MTS) etc. Strong projects of top branding agencies in Russia: (this is my personal opinion)
1. Wolff Olins for Beeline
2. Landor for S7
3. Identica for Russian Standard
4. Interbrand for Troika
5. Fitch for White Wind
Enterprise IG/Brand Union, FutureBrand, Lippincott and MetaDesign yet have not made projects for the Russian market.
By Marcel de Waard
02 AUG 2009, 12:39 GMT
Andrew: I would add Teldesign to the list, founded 1962 is among the best-known design offices in the Netherlands.
http://www.teldesign.nl/
By Anujit Roy
03 AUG 2009, 2:19 GMT
I like to add ‘Newlyn’ to the above list, Established in 1991 by Miles Newlyn a world renowned typographer and designer.
The one word can explain Newlyn is ‘ Elegant’.
http://www.newlyn.com/
By Andrew Pourtov
03 AUG 2009, 17:43 GMT
Hi Marcel
Thanks for the information about Teldesign. I did not know this company. The Netherlands has given to the world a lot of strong design and identity companies. In top-20 I would include Total Identity, VBAT and Dumbar.
By Marcel de Waard
03 AUG 2009, 22:34 GMT
Hi Andrew
Total Identity, VBAT and Dumbar all very good companies, but did you now that (Gert)Dumbar started his professional career at Teldesign?
By joel portugal
03 AUG 2009, 23:04 GMT
The subject of the world’s top 10 firms seems to have taken an unusual twist. It appears to have become an issue of large/connected firms vs. smaller/independent firms. I think the purpose of Andrew’s article is to offer up the names of today’s top identity firms(companies who are in business today). I don’t think it’s to make a pitch for any particular firm.
As someone who has been involved in the field of identity for 45 years and today has no involvement with any particular firm the issue of large/connected firms vs. small/independent firms is not anything new and is not unique to the identity world. There have always been these differences. The disparity might even have been bigger in the 60’s than today. Here are some examples from other fields: Harvard vs. Williams,New York Yankees vs. Tampa Bay Rays, New York Columbia Presbyterian vs.Greenwich Hospital. All are outstanding operations.
Each has its own strengths and weaknesses. It’s up to the client to determine what best suits their needs and up to the individual consulting firm to present their case in the best possible way. There is a demand for all sizes and shapes. This is not new. During my time I have seen some of the original big firms come close to failing and after many years be brought to life. Some in the business might refer to this as brand revitalization. Keep in mind it’s the client/customer that makes the decision based on the consultant’s presentation.
By Wednesday
05 AUG 2009, 4:48 GMT
I have to re attach my socks every time I look at Turner Duckworth’s work.
By ramel Kabbani
09 AUG 2009, 23:04 GMT
How about FutureBrand? why it is not on the list? I thought it is one of the top ten
By Tony
11 AUG 2009, 21:03 GMT
Ammunition Group > Logic and craft
http://www.ammunitiongroup.com/
By Mary Shu
11 AUG 2009, 21:19 GMT
Tony, I think you need to cast your net wider, perhaps outside of the US.
Ken Miki
http://www.ken-miki.net/
BAS
http://www.basbrandidentity.se/
Stockholm Design Lab
http://www.stockholmdesignlab.se
Light Publicity = legendary
http://www.lightpublicity.co.jp
Lance Wyman = Legendary
http://www.lancewyman.com/
By Denis Riney
26 AUG 2009, 17:01 GMT
Alan Chan is a great designer in the Far East - to make this more global,, we might add his firm to the list
By JM
04 SEP 2009, 7:55 GMT
I must say, this list is terrible out of date. I agree most of the companies listed are, or were great, but there are a host of new companies driving brand identy design forward today.
Here is my list:
1. Wolff Olins
2. Kashiwa Sato
3. Stockholm Design Lab or BVD.se
4. Moving brands
5. Saffron
6. Turner Duckworth
7. Spin
8. Roundel
9. Open (NY)
10. bibliotheque
…and so on
By Eric Sly
16 SEP 2009, 1:37 GMT
Wow, I am encouraged. If this is the best of what is out there then I am more confident than ever in my ability to branch out on my own. The whole retro, hippie fad is going to die eventually and real talent will be all that is left standing, which most of these relics seem to do nothing more than cling to distant, past successes. The only thing I got from every single website is that they are proud of themselves, approve their own work, and all seem to claim many of the same clientelle…
By Eric Sly
16 SEP 2009, 1:41 GMT
BTW..
Is it really that hard to talk a handful of lethargic accountants into accepting a design, good or bad?
No.. This list is evident of that.
By Matt
27 SEP 2009, 14:48 GMT
Wow, this thread is a great read.
I find the discussion of Doing Great Things vs Did Great Things interesting. Using Australia as an example: 10 or 15 years ago, to name the top design firms in the country would have easily been a discussion of FHA and Cato. Minale would have deserved a strong mention.
Now FHA has disappeared into the lackustre rhetoric of Futurebrand, and Cato seems somehow out of favour, with the spotlight seemingly occupied by Hulsbosch, Moon Design, Frost, Landor (nee LKS). I really don’t think it has anything to do with the comings and goings of individuals, and I think anything that considers individuals as somehow inherently more important than a studio’s networks, culture and processes to be misguided. You have to wonder how much of this ebb and flow is all just circumstantial?
By Roy
14 OCT 2009, 13:26 GMT
I’d add ‘Edenspiekermann’ to the list.
http://www.edenspiekermann.com/en/
By Martin Marusinec
19 OCT 2009, 10:22 GMT
It would be interesting to see more local branding companies as well. I am sending you couple of links to the best branding firms from the Czech Republic.
Touch: http://www.touchbranding.com (visual identity)
Fiala Šebek: http://www.fiala-sebek.cz (packaging)
Ogilvy CID: http://www.ogilvycid.cz (corporate identity)
Studio Najbrt: http://www.najbrt.cz/en/ (branding & design)
Side 2: http://www.side2.cz/ (branding & design)
By Alina Wheeler
05 DEC 2009, 2:56 GMT
With all due respect to my colleagues whom I greatly respect, I think that a list like this serves no purpose and helps no one firm do more intelligent and responsible work. Wouldn’t our collective intelligence be better used to define the characteristics of the best firms?
By Branding Firms
05 DEC 2009, 12:19 GMT
Great post and commentary… although it’s difficult to really ascertain a particular order, I have to agree with Tony’s 6 + 4 list.
By Andrew Pourtov
05 DEC 2009, 16:29 GMT
Dear Mrs Wheeler
We have varying knowledge and experience in branding/identity/design and differently we perceive market leaders, we have different experience of dialogue with them, both different analytical and creative abilities.
This list is necessary to define best of the best from the point of view of each of us. “The collective reason” will inevitably average a choice and will make it more boring. For certain, instead of the best simply largest companies will be named. Large not always the best.
Finally, nobody prevents you to make your own topic and the rating.
All the best
Andrew Pourtov
Editor-in-chief of Identity magazine, Producer of HiBrand 2007 Non-Standard Brand Strategies, HiBrand 2008 Corporate Branding and HiBrand 2010 Product Branding
By Henry Kaye
26 DEC 2009, 16:43 GMT
Perhaps the title should be changed to Western or English-Speaking Identity Firms. I cannot help but think of Baseball’s World Series when I read the topic and see the list(s).
By Ting
18 MAR 2010, 0:01 GMT
Are there any good mid tier firms that don’t cost an arm and a leg?
By Tony Spaeth
20 MAR 2010, 18:48 GMT
Yes Ting, there certainly are good mid-tier firms. For a start, see the list of “Other full service identity firms” on the Useful Links page at Identityworks.
By Alina Wheeler
20 MAR 2010, 19:23 GMT
I don’t believe that top ten lists are helpful to either practitioners or clients. I believe that it is more important that we as a profession can agree on what defines excellence, and agree on the core competencies that we aspire to.
Twelve Traits of the Best Brand Identity Firms
There’s a panoply of highly capable firms that specialize in brand identity. Which ones should companies trust to revitalize their brand? Whether the firms are global brand consultancies, multidisciplinary design offices, design boutiques, or specialists in areas such as packaging or interactivity, these core competencies hold true.
1. Strategic imagination: an ability to understand and align business goals with creative strategy and expression.
2. Process focus: a disciplined process that fosters collaboration, builds trust, and ensures responsible decision-making and results.
3. Design excellence: reducing a complex, meaningful idea to its visual essence requires skill, patience, and unending discipline, whether the endpoint is a symbol, a look and feel, or an integrated brand identity system.
4. Irrefutable logic: creating a new system or brand architecture requires an ability to communicate a compelling case for change to any decision-maker, from the CEO to the director of marketing to a division head.
5. Alchemy: an ability to synthesize vast amounts of information and reduce it to a big idea, cut through the clutter and see the “gold” in a marketing audit.
6. Empathy and insight: an ability to be collaborative and understand the perspectives of all stakeholders, to suspend judgment and transcend politics.
7. Flexibility and humor: an ability to keep an eye on the big picture despite constraints and challenges. A sense of humor in the face of inevitable changes.
8. Mindfulness and curiosity: an awareness of what is going on in the wider world; insight into best practices and the branding landscape.
9. Tenacity: boundless energy; the perseverance of a marathon runner that is required to develop and refine key messages, sustainable symbols, new names, taglines, and branding guidelines.
10. Organization: phase by phase, email by email, presentation by presentation, file by file, tracking and documentation.
11. Focus: laser-like dedication to the customer and their experience.
12. Passion: passion fuels excellence and inspires brand engagement.
By Nazar Khan
09 APR 2010, 13:59 GMT
A consensus is possible only on revenue basis. But then it will miss many of those serving weak currency clients.