7

brand identity system and standards

When most people think about a brand’s identity, they usually think about the name, the logo, and maybe the tagline. But the identity consists of so much more than that: It includes typestyles, colors, symbols, attitude and personality, brand voice and visual style, sounds and other mnemonic devices, characters and other spokespeople, product design, package design, and the list could go on and on. The most powerful brands have a consistent brand voice and visual style from product design and packaging to retail environment and external communication.

Companies such as Procter & Gamble have always practiced the traditional model of brand management. These companies manage a large portfolio of stand-alone brands (e.g., Bold, Bounty, Ivory, NyQuil, Pepto-Bismol, Scope, Folgers, Pringles) and market them as separate entities. While brand management is highly effective for those companies, it requires substantial marketing resources. Today, more and more manufacturing companies are discovering the power of using their corporate brand names (e.g., General Electric, IBM, 3M, Ford) to market their products. These companies have discovered that it is highly efficient to leverage the corporate brand name. The name offers quality assurance and familiarity at a minimum, as well as a coherent umbrella promise (example: 3M—Innovative Solutions), if executed properly.

Brand Architecture

Brand architecture, or brand structure, was covered in more detail in Chapter 2. Although situations vary greatly and company brand structures are much more complicated than the ideal, in general an efficient and effective brand structure leverages the corporate brand as the parent brand (e.g., Honda Accord, Canon EOS Rebel, Apple iPhone) and includes subbrands targeted to different consumer need segments. This two-level structure, executed correctly, can maximize consumer communication and efficiency, and clarify the definition of the corporate brand, making it more vital to an increasingly wider group of consumer segments. That said, brand architecture is a highly complex issue, especially for organizations that span multiple product/service categories and are the result of mergers and acquisitions. Some important considerations in developing and revising brand architecture are:

• Make sure that the architecture is based on a careful analysis of key internal and external audiences and not on internal organization structures, egos, and people’s need for control.

• Be very sure to outline the role of the various levels in the brand hierarchy from the outset.

• Think through the extent to which the various brands will link to the parent brand:

1. By name only (endorsed, subbrand)

2. Through common design elements

3. By sharing the same essence

4. By sharing the same positioning and differentiating benefits

I tend to believe that the various brands should almost always relate to the parent brand in the first three ways but not always in the fourth, especially if the brands span a wide variety of product categories or are targeted at completely different customer segments.

Brand Naming

Brand naming is extremely important. Many of you are probably working with brands that already have been named, but in case you are not, here are a few pointers on naming brands:

• People only refer to a person or product using one, or at the most, two names. For instance, I am either Brad or Brad VanAuken. No one calls me Alan Bradley VanAuken (with the exception of my mother, who called me by this name when she was upset with me when I was a boy). It is just too hard to remember, too cumbersome to say, and just unnecessary. Likewise, a car is either a Taurus or a Ford Taurus. People say, “I drive a Honda” or “I drive a Honda Accord.” Few say, “I drive a Honda Accord EX.” People rarely remember more than three levels of names. Saturn was simple. Chrysler New Yorker Fifth Avenue and Oldsmobile Cutlass Ciera were less easy to remember (and can anyone remember what company made the Oldsmobile?). How is a Chrysler New Yorker Fifth Avenue different from a Chrysler New Yorker Salon? How was an Oldsmobile Cutlass Ciera different from an Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme, or how were both of them different from an Oldsmobile Toronado or an Oldsmobile 88 Royale? It got very confusing very quickly.

• Products run into trouble when they have multiple levels of names. For instance, Hallmark coproduced social expression software with Microsoft. Greetings Workshop was produced by Microsoft and Hallmark Connections (in some cases, as a subset of another suite of products from Microsoft, with additional names). What did consumers remember? What did they ask for? Did each consumer use the same name? It might have been easier to call this venture “Hallmark Greetings Workshop (brought to you by Microsoft)” or “Microsoft Greetings Workshop (featuring Hallmark cards).”

• Coined names are preferred if you have sufficient resources to build their meaning. Coined names (such as Xerox, Kodak, etc.) are distinct and can be designed to be easy to read, write, and pronounce. It is unlikely that another brand would be confused with one with a coined name. Because coined names require significant communication over time to build their meaning, they are best reserved for parent brands or other brands that are extremely important to the organization and that will be around for a very long time.

• Many organizations opt for associative descriptive names. Associative descriptive names, which may be partly descriptive, usually allude to a key brand benefit. Examples include Amazon, Sir Speedy, Road Runner, Lean Cuisine, Sprint, BrandForward, DieHard, and Aris Vision Institute. These names work quite well and immediately allude to the brand’s benefit. If you want to get into a product or business quickly with a name that helps reinforce the product’s or business’s primary benefit, while still maintaining some level of uniqueness, this is the preferred naming option.

• Generic descriptive names are least desirable. They are not distinctive in consumers’ minds and they can’t be protected legally. Interestingly, among the online companies with generic names, such as Auctions.com, Business.com, Buy.com, Computer.com, eToys.com, Food.com, Furniture.com, Garden.com, Mall.com, Mortgage.com, Pets.com, or Stamps.com, many have gone out of business. (Others have subsequently purchased many of these URLs and are trying their luck at them. So much for all those once exorbitantly expensive URLs!)

Generic descriptors are frequently used for subbrands, when you want most of the credit to go to the parent brand. For instance, at Element K (now Skillsoft), branding structure featured generic descriptor subbrands because (a) Element K was a new brand that we needed to build quickly, (b) resources were too limited to build multiple brands, and, most important, (c) we were touting a blended solution across all of our products and businesses.

In summary, coined names are used for products and services that are distinctive, that provide sustainable competitive advantages, and that will receive substantial marketing support over time. Associative descriptive names are used for important products or services, but primarily those that need to have their meaning built quickly or that will not receive the sustained level of marketing support required of coined names. Generic or descriptive names are reserved for subbrands that are not mission critical.

Strong names allude to the benefit, such as Amazon, Smart Car, Duracell, or Best Buy. Ideally, any name you choose should be short, easy to spell, and easy to pronounce. Say the name out loud and see how easily it rolls off the tongue and how pleasing it is to the ear. Pay attention to cadence, rhythm, and balance. Alliteration and repetition of sounds can add to the strength of the name. Consider Best Buy, Kodak, and Coca-Cola. I prefer a two-syllable word starting with a strong consonant and possessing rich vowel sounds.

Here are two points to consider when naming your brand:

• Names formed from acronyms or initials are up to 40 percent less memorable than any type of pronounceable word, real or coined.¹

• Perhaps the worst names of all are those built from generic word parts such as “com” and “sys” and “compu” (WorldCom, UniSys). These names seem to be confused with every other brand name created from similar word parts and they are very difficult to recall.

Naming Decision Trees

Organizations with more than one brand should develop decision trees to aid people in naming new products and services. The decision tree (see Figure 7–1) should outline when an existing brand should be used and when a new brand is necessary. (One of the more exhaustive branding/naming decision trees that I have seen is in Nicholas Ind’s book, Living the Brand.) It should also identify the type of brand to be created (e.g., subbrand, endorsed brand) and the naming convention for that brand (e.g., coined, associative/descriptive), which should be based on the following factors:

• Importance of the new product or service to the market and to the organization

• Projected life span of the new product or service

• Unique differentiating benefits delivered by the new product or service

• Intent and capacity to communicate the new brand in a significant way over time

In general, new brands should be created only when a new product or service delivers on a different brand promise from one of the organization’s existing brands. To do otherwise is costly and confusing to consumers.

Brand Logos

It is at least as important for a logo to be recognizable as it is for it to be readable. Often, people are only able to get a quick glance at the logo, and then only at a distance. In those instances, recognition, not readability, is all that counts. That is why it is so important to integrate recognizable icons, shapes, type fonts, and colors into a logo’s design.

Some logos were created during the era of big department stores and were designed as signatures to fit on the side of buildings. As a result, these logos tend to be more square in orientation than they are horizontal. Many of these logos now seem outdated (if they haven’t been updated). Hallmark’s logo belongs to this class (see Figure 7–2); however, Hallmark has since moved the crown closer to the Hallmark signature to increase the logo’s horizontal orientation. Others were designed as corporate logos to reinforce leadership and stability (AT&T, IBM). Many of these logos now seem cold and sterile. Some logos are more fun, communicating more of a personality (Apple, MTV, eBay). Google breaks all of the rules by frequently changing its logo to commemorate a particular holiday or season.

Today, logos must be designed assuming they will be used in multimedia environments (TV, Internet, etc.). That means colors, animation, and sound sequences should be considered. Examples include NBC, Intel, Yahoo (animation), Harley-Davidson (engine sound), and Maxwell House. Many social media brands (such as Facebook, Google +, LinkedIn, Pinterest, Tumblr, and Twitter) have square versions of their visual identity that are used as online buttons.

The Importance of Color

Color is an important consideration in your brand identity system. Colors have a significant impact on people’s emotional state. They also have been shown to impact people’s ability to concentrate and learn. They have a wide variety of specific mental associations. In fact, the effects are physiological, psychological, and sociological. For instance:²

• Nonprimary colors are more calming than primary colors.

• Blue is the most calming of the primary colors, followed closely by a lighter red.

• Test takers and weight lifters perform better in blue rooms.

• Blue text increases reading retention.

• Yellow evokes cheerfulness. Houses with yellow trim or flower gardens sell faster.

• Reds and oranges encourage diners to eat quickly and leave. Red also makes food more appealing and influences people to eat more. (It is no coincidence that fast-food restaurants often use these colors.)

• Pink enhances appetites and has been shown to calm prison inmates.

• Blue and black suppress appetites.

• Children prefer primary colors. (Notice that children’s toys and books often use these colors.)

• Forest green and burgundy appeal to the wealthiest 3 percent of Americans, and often raise the perceived price of an item.

• Violet is often associated with spirituality, royalty, and quality.

• Orange is often used to make an expensive item seem less expensive.

• Red clothing can convey power.

• Red trim is used in bars and casinos because it can cause people to lose track of time.

• Most people (76 percent) associate “speed” with the color red.³

• White is typically associated with being cool, clean, and fresh.

• Red is often associated with Christmas, and orange with Halloween and Thanksgiving.

• Red and black are often associated with being sexy and seductive and are favored by porn sites. Red and black also have a high association with fear and terror.

• Black clothes make people look thinner (as most people know).

• Black is associated with elegance, sophistication, and mystery.

• Black is the favorite color of Goths.

• “Fun” is most associated with orange, yellow, purple, and red.

• “Trust” is most associated with blue and white.

• “High quality,” “high technology,” and “reliability/dependability” are most associated with black and blue.

• Men’s favorite color is blue (57 percent), then green (14 percent); women’s favorite colors are blue (35 percent) and purple (23 percent).⁴

Colors also have a functional impact on readability, eyestrain, the ability to attract attention, and the ability to be seen at night. These factors are important in choosing colors for signing, website pages, print ads, and other marketing media.

• The most visible color is yellow.

• The most legible of all color combinations are black on yellow and green on white, followed by red on white. (It is no surprise that most traffic signs use these color combinations.)

• Black on white is easiest to read, on paper and computer screens.

• “Hard” colors (red, orange, and yellow) are more visible and tend to make objects look larger and closer. They are easier to focus on. They create excitement and cause people to overestimate available time.

• “Soft” colors (violet, blue, and green) are less visible and tend to make objects look smaller and farther away. They aren’t as easy to focus on. They have a calming effect, increase concentration, and cause people to underestimate remaining time.

Usually, it is advantageous for a brand to consistently “own” certain colors that provide an additional recognition cue. The George Eastman House International Museum of Photography and Film in Rochester, New York, has taken a different but equally effective approach. Eastman House wanted to communicate that it is a fun and vibrant organization that offers much more than artistic black-and-white photography. So, the “e” icon in its logo appears in a rainbow of colors. Each business card features the logo in a different color. The name itself only appears in black and white.

Obviously, colors are an important part of any brand identity system. Testing the effect of a new brand identity system’s colors is well advised. It is important to consider that color associations will vary by individual and especially by cultural context and a person’s previous experiences with the colors. All the impacts of colors are equally true of music, scents, and sounds. For instance, studies have identified that music affects supermarket sales, mental concentration, achievement on standardized tests, factory productivity, clerical performance, and staff turnover, among other things.

Tools to Maintain Brand Identity Consistency

To ensure that external audiences are hearing consistent messages about the brand, companies often “script” their sales and their service organizations. At Element K, to reinforce its brand positioning, the marketing department worked with company management and the ad agency that developed its “E-Learning with the Human Touch” campaign to craft a detailed script (with a PowerPoint slide presentation and other aids). There were then sales and service organizations required to memorize those scripts.

In addition to scripts, organizations use the following tools to ensure brand identity consistency across the enterprise (and by business partners):

• Published Brand Identity System and Standards. These standards used to be printed hard copy manuals and CDs, but more recently they’re featured on intranet sites, which offer the advantage of instant, low-cost universal updates and digital access. They usually include brand architecture, brand style guides, naming conventions, and a naming decision tree.

• Brand Photo Libraries.

• Brand Message Guidelines. These procedures are often divided into dos and don’ts sections, such as: Do say “Make a Xerox branded photocopy,” but don’t say “Make a Xerox.”

• Brand Management Intranets. Internal sites usually include the following items:

- Brand essence, promise, and personality statements

- Brand pricing guidelines

- Brand distribution guidelines

- Brand research summaries

- Brand management contact information

- Examples of recent brand ads

Brand management intranet sites sometimes include the following items:

• Video clip of corporate officers talking about the importance of living the brand

• Video clip of customers talking about the brand

• Recognition of people and activities throughout the organization that have delivered the brand promise

• Brand history, myths, and legends

• Quizzes and other fun exercises designed to teach employees about the brand and its promise

• Digital Brand Asset Management Systems. More and more organizations are using digital asset management to maintain consistency and control throughout their enterprise. These systems are typically fully hosted on the Internet by third parties (cloud services model). They provide the ultimate control over decentralized sales and marketing organizations (or retail networks) that develop localized advertising, promotions, and other marketing programs. Two firms that specialize in digital brand asset management include Imation (www.imation.com) and Saepio (www.saepio.com).

• Naming a Brand Identity Manager or Specialist. This is also an extremely helpful management practice. This person reviews and approves all new executions of the brand and its subbrands and all new interpretations of its identity. This person should be well respected throughout the organization, possess strong interpersonal skills, and should be assertive and persuasive.

• Creating a Cross-Divisional Brand Identity Council. Such a council, composed of key design (and editorial) managers from departments and divisions throughout the organization, is also very helpful. The council raises awareness of brand identity issues, builds a consensus around their resolution, becomes a “brain trust” for the brand’s identity, and provides peer pressure for interpreting the brand accurately and consistently.

Use the checklist in Figure 7–3 to assess the efficacy of your brand management practices in the area covered by this chapter. The more questions to which you can answer “yes,” the better you are doing. The checklist also provides a brief summary of the material covered in the chapter.

	YES / NO
Is your brand’s name proprietary? Does it differentiate the brand instead of just describing its products and services?	—	—
Is your brand’s name suggestive of a key differentiating benefit, but not too narrow so as to decrease the brand’s ability to claim new benefits in the future?	—	—
Do consumers like your brand’s name? Is it memorable?	—	—
Do you have comprehensive brand identity system and standards that address all uses of your brand’s identity elements?	—	—
Are the system and standards actively in use?	—	—
Are they available in digital form?	—	—
Are all business units and subbrands subject to those standards, with none outside the jurisdiction of the standards?	—	—
At a minimum, does the system include standards for the visual identifier, color, typography, backgrounds, contrast, staging area, relative size, positioning, key applications, and unacceptable uses?	—	—
Is your logotype horizontally shaped? That orientation delivers the greatest visual impact and is a functional necessity when the logotype is used in retail environments.	—	—
Will your system work globally? The meanings of specific words, colors, and symbols in different countries are especially important to understand.	—	—
Does your system include distinctive shapes, colors, typestyles, and voices?	—	—
Does your brand own a color that is different from that of your major competitor?	—	—
Does your system include a slogan or jingle?	—	—
Does it include sounds and other mnemonic devices?	—	—
Is your system effective in multimedia environments?	—	—
Does it address cobranding, comarketing, brand licensing, and strategic alliance and sponsorship situations?	—	—
Have you designed the brand portfolio, including a subbrand structure?	—	—
Is your brand hierarchy simple enough for consumers to easily understand (preferably no more than two levels)?	—	—
When your brand hierarchy has two or more levels, do you know which name (corporate, parent, endorsed, or subbrand?) the consumer uses to refer to each product or service offered by your organization?	—	—
Do you have criteria to help you decide when you can use an existing brand, when a completely new brand is needed, and when a subbrand is the right choice?	—	—
Do you find that all of your subbrands are distinctive? Are you certain that no two subbrands in your portfolio meet the same consumer needs and deliver the same benefits?	—	—
Are your subbrand names distinct from one another so that they are not confused for one another?	—	—
Do you use existing brands whenever possible to meet new consumer needs or to enter new product categories, offering instant assurance and maximizing communication efficiency (provided that doing so doesn’t dilute the meaning of the original brand)?	—	—
Are you increasingly leveraging your corporate brand as a parent brand?	—	—
Are there simple and consistent ways in which subbrands relate to corporate or parent brands?	—	—
Are there simple rules for when a brand is endorsed by a corporate or parent brand and when it is not?	—	—
Does everyone agree on what names, symbols, colors, visual styles, voices, etc., are used across all applications, subbrands, and product lines on behalf of the parent brand and its identity? In each point of contact with the consumer (advertising, retail environment, product packaging, etc.), have you decided how much emphasis will be placed on the parent brand vs. the sub-brand? Have you decided which elements will be associated with the parent brand and which with the subbrand?	—	—
Is the system functional for all intended uses?	—	—
Does your system address internal applications (memos, employee newsletters and other internal publications, computer screensavers, etc.)?	—	—
Does the system reinforce intended brand associations?	—	—
Have you built at least nine random, nonfunctional design elements into your brand’s trade dress to make it easier for you to legally protect your brand?	—	—
Do you confer with intellectual property lawyers when designing new products and brands to ensure that what you’ve created has maximum protection under the law?	—	—
Do you have an ongoing process set up to proactively protect your brand’s identity against dilution or confusion, including regular reviews of possible competitive infringements?	—	—
Do you have a corporate brand identity council (or another process) to manage the brand identity on an ongoing basis?	—	—
Do you conduct periodic communications audits to monitor adherence to corporate brand identity standards?	—	—
Is your brand identity system as simple as possible?	—	—
Ultimately, is it immediately clear which brand is the source for all points of contact you have with the consumer?	—	—