Brand identity opinions of an account guy
Or, gentle observations from someone on the fringe of the creative process.
When I first saw this article, the traditional ad/branding side of my brain thought, “Sacrilege!” How could a brand the size of Lenovo be comfortable enough with an identity that could be easily modified by so many people?
But as I thought more about it, the digital side of my brain thought “Good on them for having the balls to think differently.” Many of us still think of brand identity guides as extremely rigid guidelines intended to maintain the strict integrity of the brand, no matter the application, medium, size, usage, etc. Those guidelines worked extremely well when the only applications you needed to think about were print and broadcast even if print applications could include everything from collateral, business identity packages, vehicles, uniforms, print ads, packaging, POP, etc. Those guides were no small undertaking, but the control was there. Syquest and Zip drives, CDs, DVDs and even floppies could be judiciously distributed to key people to maintain that control.
Then the internets happened, bringing a whole genre of new identity needs and making it extremely difficult to keep your native brand files intact. Now anyone who wants your logo files can get them extremely quickly with the right search terms and then use them however they see fit.
Current identity guides are a hot complex mess with all the branding opportunities available. Much of Struck’s identity work has included digital-only style guides to address these evolving needs for our clients. Websites, apps, social media skins, avatars, email sigs, IAB banner ads, … all test the very limits of your brand identity and its legibility and readability.
When Struck rebranded ourselves a few years ago, we specifically created multiple versions of our own logo that were intended to work horizontally and vertically. Our color scheme was rolled out to have the flexibility to pair with prospective clients we were communicating with, in order to provide a sense of the partnership they could get working with us.
We recognized that it’s almost impossible to predict every usage of our brand identity. The only thing we can plan for is unpredictability and be flexible for any new needs that may arise.
A logo redesign for a company of Lenovo’s size will always get mixed reactions. UnderConsideration, a well-respected blog about corporate identity, gives it fairly mixed reviews. They downplay the idea of the box as a well-worn technique. And while they do say the new logo is an improvement, they feel as if Lenovo could have taken it even farther. By contrast, the Ad Age article linked at the beginning of this post is far more complimentary of the new mark (although it reads as the Lenovo press release might). High profile brand identity work will always be polarizing, there is no surprise there.
However, it is refreshing to see clients willing to stand up for change and flexibility. I do look forward to seeing how Lenovo is able to enforce the brand as their partners and agencies continue to adapt the logo as they see fit. But even the money quote at the end from the client indicates they’re going to have much more openness about change moving forward:
“One of the challenges with today is you don’t have as much control. … We’ll have a lot of flexibility. I think as marketing people we’re getting used to all of that.”
The notion of designing a digital-first logo first may not be as applicable to all brands. But you can make a strong argument that more and more brands should be thinking along these lines. We just all need to realize that maintaining strict adherence to your brand standards while also asking your advocates to create content on your behalf is confusing and borderline hypocritical. Hopefully Lenovo’s culture can continue to adapt as their identity organically evolves.
