7 25 JULY 2009 | 19:56 GMT
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:
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?)
6 24 JULY 2009 | 14:00 GMT
It seems that every page I turn in the business press, I see “brand.” Recent headlines from the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal and MSNBC include “Berkshire Is Still A Brand Name,” Motorola’s Goals Are Modest Given Their Strong Brand Name Recognition,” “U.S. Auto Brands Attract World Of Bidders” and “Republican Party Rebranding Itself.”
Why has the subject of corporate and product branding become so hot? What has caused this particular subject to capture the strong attention of senior management of successful companies, companies that enjoy strong corporate and brand images in the investment world and in their market places? Continue reading this entry >>
5 07 JULY 2009 | 15:17 GMT
They say beauty is in the eye of the beholder. And more often than not, clients choose logos based on subjective criteria and gut feeling. As a design consultant, I respect gut feeling because it comes from experience and common sense. But at the same time, I advise against letting pure subjectivity overwhelm the identity design decision process. After all, it’s not a tie or a dress, but one of the most important brand communication assets.
However, an identity redesign is not a very common event in an organization’s lifetime, so it is very unlikely that most clients know how to deal with it. How can you expect your client to objectively evaluate design proposals, if you don’t offer guidance? They need a framework, especially since each agency can have more or less different approaches. The following framework establishes a set of criteria that is helpful for both the designer (in creating optimal solutions) and the client (in making decisions). Whenever I have used it, this method significantly reduced subjectivity and allowed for an effective decision.
Here are some of the most common criteria that I use: Continue reading this entry >>
4 01 JULY 2009 | 1:19 GMT
We all do it. We focus our attention on logos, those shiny iconic rock stars of identity. The badges that brand famous and infamous entities. The pictures worth a thousand words. The proof in our portfolios that “we were there.”
Most identity forums revolve around discussions on logos. But what about the substance behind these refined forms? What is the truth that really defines the meanings we project onto these icons? What of the corporate cultures that drive the behaviors that shape corporate reputations (yes, including behaviors that had the power to pervert Paul Rand’s penultimate trademark into a “crooked E”)? Where is the discussion of the ideas that truly define businesses and their brands? Continue reading this entry >>
3 24 JUNE 2009 | 14:08 GMT
I was shocked the first time I heard someone say, “Put the bug in the corner.” The bug!
As professionals, we prefer logo, logotype, mark, symbol, wordmark, icon, visual identity or signature. With this many choices it is no wonder others have settled on the irreverent bug. Incidentally, a long-time friend in Mumbai told me of some of the general names for logo in India include pintu (pint sized), chintu (tiny), dabboo (fat) and kaka (small one). (But depending on the specific region, language and even community in India, kaka also can mean poo-poo, as elsewhere. I guess context is everything, when calling a logo kaka in India.)
But whether we designed it, manage it, or just live with it, having a name for the logo appears to fulfill some human need. Some companies provide a formal name, such as The Monogram (GE). Here are a few logos and their officially sanctioned names:
More often, there are names that percolate up from either within or outside the company. These nicknames tend to be more colorful and memorable, but often are edgy, even derogatory. Individuals develop strong allegiances to these names as well. My discussion of this posting with friends stirred up a spirited debate about who, in corporate America, owns the moniker Meatball.
Continue reading this entry >>
