BASF: a chemical reformation

New: The two-box symbol, six colors, and an identity tag

Launched: The flags were raised at HQ March 16, 2004

Story in brief:
In North America, BASF is famous for its unusually long but oddly effective ad slogan... "We don't make a lot of the products you buy. We make a lot of the products you buy better"  ... or essentially "We don't get no respect!" The slogan built awareness, but neither the understanding nor the respect BASF feels it should command (it is the world's largest chemical company), especially in the U.S. marketplace.

Determined to correct this anonymity, CEO Hambrecht committed to the proud, preemptive identity tag "The Chemical Company," explaining to a New York Times reporter "We know the public image of chemicals and chemistry has been deteriorating.  Well, chemicals are essential to life, we know how to work with them, and we have got to fight back." The identity tag, in English, will be used worldwide.

The addition of the abstract symbol, two squares, appears to be of secondary importance (though of more lasting impact).  Its functional purpose is quite simply to add distinctiveness, to indicate "this is not just text, it is our logo." Its communicative purpose is equally simple, to command attention and signal change; "Take a fresh look; we are changing."

Beyond this, don't look for meaning in "two squares." But if you insist, BASF has explanations at hand. If you see a big and little square, to Dr. Hambrecht they signify a lock and key, the customer's need and the BASF solution. But many designers will see equally sized positive and negative squares, counterparts "symbolizing partnership and smart solutions."

The six colors, incidentally, are meant to express "diversity and dynamism," with no other specific meanings.

 Credits:
CEO - Jürgen Hambrecht
Identity counsel & design - Interbrand Zintzmeyer & Lux

First Impressions:
Mixed. I see two marks, positive and negative, one strong and one weaker. In positive form, gray-black on white, the logo forms a strong unit in which BASF predominates, while the squares add differentiation and a kind of dynamic positive/negative visual game.

In color however (the preferred form), the white BASF is less forceful and the squares become pastel forms, more decorative than assertive.  In many media the rectangular color field itself may tend to become part of the identity, which complicates matters. Furthermore each color, to me, has a different emotional resonance, some more appealing than others... not necessarily a way to build a clearer, firmer corporate identity.

I honor Jürgen Hambrecht's  intention to signal change. But the power of the old BASF letterforms derived in great part from their isolation. Perhaps it would have been enough change to simply add "The Chemical Company."

Other comments
From Albuquerque NM, Michael Townsend writes "The thing about the two boxes is that it seems unfinished. [And] it looks like they’re trying to make an optical illusion part of the logo. I guess that’s okay if you think of what chemicals do; that is, taking one thing and making it something else, but I don’t think it makes a strong visual statement."

But Don Bartels (Smith + Bartels, Berkeley CA) sees something else. "Having labored long and hard with the BASF account (at Landor, in the last millennium) I know this extraordinary company. When I saw this at your site, my immediate interpretation was that BASF is the smaller of the two boxes, the necessary ingredient at the core of the larger box which represents its customers' products.  The company may not say it but the 'little box completing the big box' logo says it all... a very fine fit indeed."

Incidentally,
this "color palette" idea looks like a fashion trend. Abbey did it in 2003, and in 2004 GE authorized a veritable confetti of  colors for its monogram (GE review to come).  Since color can have great power, in distinctiveness and memorability and in appeal and emotional association, this inconsistency is a risky practice.  (It sometimes seems to me more a response to insiders' boredom with their brands, a natural result of overexposure, rather than to consumers' needs.)