For a little over a year now, I’ve been visiting with the Sisters of the Holy Spirit – a Catholic community of wonderful women – in the North Hills area of Pittsburgh. They feed me, my family and even some of my friends while we talk to them about Social Media, their identity and most importantly, their dedication to their ministries of caregiving, education and community service.

Their goals are modest, but their sense of urgency is of the highest order recently. The numbers of women in their aging community have been steadily declining, while they are looking for new and effective ways to reach the younger aspiring women to join them.

With the help of a my wife and a talented group of friends, I’ve been helping the Sisters get to work building a framework of materials as the year’s community outreach efforts get under way.

Photography by Joe Kennedy, with creative direction by Randie Snow.

Image courtesy of ThoughtForm

I attended a great lecture by ThoughForm’s John Sotirakis recently as part of local printer Trust Franklin Press’ lecture series.

John, who is the creative director and branding guru from ThoughtForm’s (formerly Agnew Moyer Smith) team, took time out to describe a bit of a “behind the scenes” look into their process of developing a branding program. The gist of his talk was that, while a branding and identity program should appear to be simple and clear on its surface, much upfront work, planning and research is done in working with the client at the front of the process. Hence the “iceberg principle” – 90% of the branding effort is unseen. Having worked on John’s team during my career, his presentation reminded me of why he is one of the foremost thinkers (and a kind of a local hero) on the subject of branding. He, like me, is a self-proclaimed “branding geek” … another reason I love hearing him talk!

In his example of the American Planning Association identity (APA), the evaluation and planning tactics he used working with APA’s national governing organization and their associated local chapter sub units reminded me of some of the larger branding projects I have worked on, so this talk was especially interesting.

Here are some of the take-aways from my notes:

Branding can be organized into a four phase process:

1. Discovery (Understanding & Strategy)
2. Brand Structure (Articulation of the brand “picture”)
3. Brand Expression (Execution of branded elements / Design)
4. Guidelines (Standards, Templates and Guidelines for use)

Since it’s Discovery that constitutes much of the upfront analysis and planning work of a branding program, John spent the majority of the talk discussing this first phase.

1- Discovery:

Communications Audit

One of the most important parts of the Discovery phase is taking a look at all of the existing material within an organization. This can include external as well as internal communications collateral, templates, brochureware, etc.

John advocates a thorough process of evaluating each piece’s effectiveness across a spectrum of criteria. In other words, for a given brochure – how well does it express the desired personality of the brand? How well does it maintain the consistency of the brand’s parent pieces? How well does it the meet expectations?

Personality Profile

John also spoke about examining the brand from a personality profile standpoint. Much in the way traditional DISC or personality profiles are used to evaluate, a brand can be evaluated across a wide spectrum of traits. Ranging from one extreme to the other, John recommends looking across an organization and ask, “Friendly” or “Reserved,” “Outspoken” or “Subdued,” or even “beer” or “champagne.” By plotting where across a continuum these traits fall, it can give valuable insight into the target for a brands personality. John also suggests that this type of exploration should be done openly and publicly.

If Your Brand Was A Magazine

John also described an additional exercise as asking the branding team stakeholders a simple question:

“If your brand was a magazine, which one would it be?”

This is a clever and fun way to get to the heart of the perceived “personality” of a given brand in the eyes of those in charge. Again, John urges those who engage in this process to do so publicly.

Word Association

In the same way the brand’s stakeholders can help uncover the personality of an organization by describing it as a magazine, it can also be useful to articulate it with “gut reaction” word associations. “When I say ‘Process,’ you say ‘xxxx’ “

Position Statements

John also described a process that seemed familiar to us here in SEI Marketing, and that’s position statements. By breaking the branding team up into groups, A, B C and D, and asking each to write statements that describe the position (desired outcome) of the brand, useful information can be gathered. John outlined a template for these statements, following a “_______ + ______ + ______ = _______” approach.

Audience Survey

By using a series of qualitative questions and statements, John also outlined a process of measuring the audience perception across a “Agree” to “Disagree” continuum. This might include things like color theory, familiarity and statements that test a variety of hypotheses.

Competitive Benchmarking

As an interesting approach to measuring a given brand’s performance against other similar organizations, John revealed a useful “points distribution” system. By distributing a total number of points (20) across a series of criteria for a brand against other competitor brands, you can begin to see patterns or “thin spots” reveal themselves regarding these factors. This can be particularly useful in assessing the needs of the brand, or the kind of work a given identity system must do to support the goals of the organization. It may also uncover many issues that extend beyond the brand’s identity itself and may lend itself to consideration of factors deeper than the superficial public-facing presence.

Personas

Another familiar exercise described by John was to examine the brand from the perspective of a variety of relevant personas. In other words, how does a potential customer view our brand? A potential collaborator? An industry partner? A stakeholder? These all give a branding team useful insight into the end user.

Market Evaluation

John also discussed the process of market evalation by way of a quadrant plot approach. By using a 2 x 2 matrix, on one axis spanning from “Reactive > to > Proactive” and the other “Discreet > to > Outspoken” you can plot the perception of the brand by the stakeholders. This can also work to get to the heart of what makes up a brand’s stance on what it is willing and is not willing to say and do.

Define Success

John wrapped up his discussion of the Discovery phase by urging branding teams to finally ask another simple question of the branding team’s stakeholders; “What would success of the branding program look like?”

John also notes the importance of a “Brand Champion” within the client organization. It is most often incredibly difficult to gain and maintain the needed momentum for a successful branding program effort without the help and support of an internal resource. This “champion” makes certain that the branding effort maintains the presenence needed within and organization and keeps the “seat at the table.” Without this person at the center, it can be difficult for the effort to hold the priority it needs to among other issues.

2 – Brand Structure:

Understand and Articulate Brand Structure

From here, as John describes, the branding process moves to 2 – Brand Structure, where the branding program begins to take shape. The team begins to articulate the brand configurations of signatures / wordmarks and in context of any subrands or secondary business units.

3 - Brand Expression:

Design

Through the design process, the brand voice and personality is extended throughout the various pieces of collateral. Here is where we begin to see a “family” of material form, with common elements and theme tying the pieces together. This is where consistency in branding has real value and power, keeping the character of the brand firmly intact.

4 - Guidelines:

Documentation of Guidelines

As John points out, perhaps one of the most important final steps in any program is to document and articulate guidance for those who will be using or creating any the branded material. Not only is the “how-to” material critical, but it’s also important to relay the branding team’s findings and recommendations. These guidelines may take many forms including electronic, web-based or a traditional “kit.”

A big thank you to John Sotirakis for a fantastic talk, and for sharing a bit of the little known but critical thinking work we designers do.  This is a great reminder that what we do as “design thinkers” can have real business value. It’s the work of those like John that reinforces the shift that communication and information designers have made from “decorators” to “thinkers” and continues to legitimize our roles as strategic partners.

Besides being energized by dynamic and inspiring presentations by Stefan Sagmeister (Seven-Year Itch), Coke’s David Butler (Redesigning Design) and Stefan G. Bucher (Makers and Thinkers) AIGA’s Make | Think in Memphis this past October did a few key things for me.

First, it confirmed a hunch I have been carrying around with me for a while now. Each day I head to work into a somewhat cozy in-house environment. Not without its crazy-making challenges and hair-pulling lunacy, but  pretty secluded nonetheless from the real urgent and complex needs of the worlds neediest organizations. Let’s face it, I do not work nine-to-five on the front lines of the fight against hunger or poverty. Spending a week shoulder-to-shoulder with such a wide spectrum of designers, thinkers and makers—some of whom are indeed working on some of these more pressing problems—has given me perspective. I need to be doing more than I am nine-to-five. I have learned that designers need to step outside of what they are doing and do something else. Stefan Sagmeister urged young designers to “have an interest in something outside of design,” and I wholeheartedly agree, although I would offer that they should also consider their power as practicing designers and where they might be able to improve things for someone.

I was impressed by this need while I participated in the AIGA/Osmosis Express Yourself–Portrait event at the Civil Rights Museum in downtown Memphis. I was paired with a few local kids and guided them through the process of creating their own self portrait. This was the power of making and thinking expressed in the most basic of terms, but to these kids, it was an exercise in looking at what made them happy, what they liked to do, their perception of their family and home lives. For some of them it was awkward and maybe even painful, for some it was the most they’ve been able to express themselves in a long time. Maybe ever.

photos taken by Laura Carthage. Visit carthagephoto on Flickr >

I say designers should focus some effort on making some part of their surroundings better.

• Commit to  partering with an organization and give some work away.
• Try talking to non profit in a terrible part of town about their most pressing need, then spend two hours and help them solve it.
• Serve someone dinner.
• Look around you and consider the day-to-day work you do, then take a giant step outside of it and do something for someone for free.
• Commit to contributing a portion of work pro bono each year to a charitable organization.
• Apply for membership to the Designer’s Accord.
• Review the AIGA’s Living Principles for Design, then find a way to apply it to your work.
• Learn about Ethnography and how user-centered design can help you consider what you work on more carefully.

I wish I could say that I did all of these things, and I wish I could dedicate the time do learn everything…maybe someday.

Photo by Stacy Wood

Secondly, I realized (maybe late due to my nine-to-five bubble) that the entire paradigm of design as a discipline has shifted from one of “decorating” to one of user-centric approaches, dedicated to proving the value of design thinking as a valuable commodity. Needless to say, this was refreshing. I was glad to see designers dispense with all the talking about themselves, and start talking about why we need to apply solid design thinking to address social change and to solve real business problems for the right reasons. Most importantly, it was nice to hear that this was for reasons other than “because it makes us happy,” or “because it was a great addition to my portfolio of work.”

The entire tone of the conference was one of social responsibility, ethical principle and focused on making designers a powerful force for change. Maybe it was the venue, being the home to the Civil Rights Museum and steeped in culture as described by Stax Record’s own Al Bell.

Maybe it was the BBQ. Maybe it was the blues, but for sure it was just the reminder I needed.

Thanks AIGA. See you next year!

In the interest of time, I’ll be brief, but let’s start by saying that Tufte is an encyclopedic mind and a fantastic presenter. If you every had any doubt that a single person could cover the history and analysis of information graphics spanning from the time of Galileo (1613) to today, structure it for presentation in six hours in a meaningful way, attend his course. Secondly, like James Brown is the Godfather of Soul, E. T. is the Grad Daddy of information graphics. For info geeks like myself, he’s a hero.

From my notes:

9.28.09 | 8:45 AM | Crystal City Marriott

E. R. Tufte walks over and leans against a nearby credenza outside the ballroom as we open our books and start our “read-ahead assignments” while we wait to enter. He cracks a smile and jokes, “Nice books.” He then lets us know that we can take our time, but the room was open if we wanted to go ahead in.

I entered and sat in the second row, just beyond the right-most of the two projectors. I am one of 4 people in the room.

He walks straight up, reaches into my box of books, and grabs one out, beginning to unwrap it himself.

He turns to page three of The Visual Display of Quantitative Information and signs his name, while he asks two rapid-fire questions at once, “What do you do? Where do you work?”

He grabs the next book, Envisioning Information, turns to page three and signs again as he responds and let’s me know he’ll be visiting CMU in November for a pair of free lectures

Here are my take-aways in list form:

1. Always Remember: Do whatever it takes to explain something.
   - Don’t ask, “How can I use data visualization / charting to understand X?”
   - Ask, “How can I understand X” (the method of explanation will make itself clear)
2. In diagramming: linkages (links) = verbs. Annotate and label them clearly and simply.
3. Avoid (and be on the lookout for) “Chart Junk” (Tufteism)
4. “You never need boxes around things. Ever.”
5. You need to include signs of credibility (data) – the reason to believe what is being presented.
6. “Keep an open mind, not an empty head” (Tufteism)
7. People are very good at finding relevant information in a complex visual field. (newspaper sports pages)
   “Something is always relevant to someone”
8. Assume your audience is smart…or smarter than you (they managed to find themselves in a position of authority somehow – how dumb can they be?)
   If they aren’t, make them so.
9. “There is no such thing as information overload, only bad design” (Tufteism)
10. On Supergraphics: Supergraphics are important for many reasons, one of which is that there are many stories or “hooks” in them for the viewer.
11. On figure ground vibration between design elements: 1+1=3 (first line + second line + the interaction between the two)
12. On “fudging figures and data”: Local “Optimizing” = Global “Pessimizing” (Tufteism)
13. On Interfaces: make them 93% content and 7% administrative (and make it minimal)
14. Use Trebuchet for tables on the PC (if you have to) (Tufte is a Mac guy)
15. Sort tables by Performance, not alpha.
16. Don’t get it original, get it right.” (Tufteism)
17. Develop a good routine for presenting performance data.
18. Find a supergraphic you can use.
19. The intellectual model for non-fiction reporting should reporting. Look at science and nature for inspiration.
20. Add data to help with credibility…and DON’T LIE.
21. For “serious stuff” it’s better to spread stuff across space, rather than stack it in time. (Spacial Adjacency)
22. If you want to understand something more, increase the resolution. (Tufteism)
23. On PowerPoint (don’t get him started!): PowerPoint slides represent a breaking point (interruption) within a flow of important information.
24. Information resolution is key.
25. Work to maximize viewer cognition time and minimize viewer “figuring out” time. (“Eliminate impediments of content”)
26. A way to escape “flatland” (the confines of 2D paper space) is to show real object / 3D item whenever possible (Galileo’s Istoria e Dimostrazioni intorno alle macchie solari included an actual pop-up figure)
27. As a consumer, be on the lookout for information “cherrypicking,” blocks to original sources, glibness, smugness, lack of backup information, comparisons, causal an multi-dimensional information. Look for documentation.
28. E.T.’s law: 97% of content in a given field is junk. Our job is to find the other 3%. (Tufteism)
29. On Small Multiples (diagrams using small representations or figures to explain): Small multiples are useful on many levels for comparisons, multivariate data and reliability.
30. The idea of “Know your audience” can often lead to underestimating them. Instead think, “Know your content. Respect your audience.” (Tufteism)
31. Remember Conway’s Law relative to design: BAD organizational structure dictates structure of design.

Tufte on “How to give a good presentation”:

1. Only use PowerPoint as a tool, not a platform for presenting
2. Give a handout (you can still use the screen for movies, charts, images, etc)
3. Use sentences
4. Handout: Side 1 = Supergraphic; Side 2 = State problem, proposal, solution, resolution, etc.

Tufte on “How to prepare for a presentation”:

1. Eliminate Items that damage content
2. Make content better
3. Practice (use videotape if you have to)
4. Show up early
5. End early

The minute he said “end early,” he was done…three minutes early.

After the course, I spoke to him again at his merchandise table as I sorted through a pile of signed press sheets, from which I scored two excellent forms from the Envisioning Information print run.

High in the in the Guanacaste Mountain range of Costa Rica is Women of the Cloud Forest, a Fair Trade project dedicated to offering opportunities to the women of rural Costa Rica and their families. There are about 50 women in the project who hand-embroider bags and jewelry decorated with the variety of beautiful seeds found wild in the rainforest.

The women who participate in the project live across the Monteverde region – from “downtown” Santa Elena to two hours away in Cabezeras. Women of the Cloud Forest operates a small Arts Center where women gather together to take free classes in embroidery and produce rainforest seed jewelry.

– womenofthecloudforest.com

The classes are offered in a communal setting, where the women who range in skill level from beginner to expert, can all learn from each other.

From birds to butterflies, frogs to insects, the women produce color accurate reproductions of North and Central American species. Each design is lovingly “painted” using single strands of embroidery thread.

After the women have finished decorating the bags, they are then sent to their talented seamstress, who puts the finishing touches on them, including the zippers, straps and pockets. Over 200 custom crafted designs by the women are then shipped and sold throughout the US.

The Women of the Cloud Forest project also offers Teacher’s Packets, do-it-yourself kits for teaching small classes of about 30 people to make their own rainforest seed bracelets and jewelry, as well as information about the different types of seeds.

They also provide consignment style fundraising opportunities, perfect for schools, churches, environmental groups and other non-profit organizations who are looking for an easy way to raise funds while also raising awareness about fair trade and conservation issues.

Along with the great opportunities for the women of rural Costa Rica, the Women of the Cloud Forest project also empowers other locals with ways to earn income as a result of the group’s efforts:

Misiel Alvarado is a seed collector. Besides organic vegetable and coffee farming, Misiel is able supplement his income by collecting various types of seeds for the project. The cosecha or the harvest of the seeds starts in March at the end of the dry season. The seeds are then washed and drilled preparing them for jewelry-making.

I was lucky enough to spend some time with co-founders Amy and Michael Sobkowiak, and they are wonderful people with a great drive to help the people of the Monteverde region. They have some amazing stories of how the people they help have thrived.

To learn more about the Women of the Cloud Forest, their projects and their skillfully-crafted products at:

www.womenofthecloudforest.com >

On Tuesday, June 30, 2009, President Obama called our attention in a press conference to the importance of the work of non-profit organizations. The item from his remarks that spoke the loudest to me was the following:

So if anyone out there is waiting for government to solve all their problems, they’re going to be disappointed.  Because ultimately, the best solutions don’t come from the top-down, not from Washington; they come from the bottom-up in each and everyone one of our communities.

This sounds like a clear call to me. Regardless of your party affiliation, view on the war, policy, etc, one thing is hard to debate – we need non profits to thrive. Throughout our varied communities, there exists in these organizations a strong spirit of tenacity and the drive to face severe adversity to make our surroundings better, safer and equal.

If not now, when?

In a previous post, I highlighted an interview by AIGA Philadelphia, who spoke with Pentagram’s Michael Bierut about our power as designers. There is no denying his point, that in a culture now dominated by corporations and organizations who yield so much influence over the products we use, our lifestyles and the ways in which we receive our information, design has been “democratized.” We are surrounded by Apples, Targets, Wal Marts, Best Buys and so many other companies who literally market lifestyle as opposed to product. Our responsibility as designers to care for the products, messages and communication vehicles we help our clients use has never been more important than it is today.

So what can we do? (let’s be led by example)

Design can indeed be a powerful tool for change if put in the right hands. I took a few minutes to round up some examples from those who take this work seriously.

Landesberg Design

Landesberg Design was founded in 1982 and is based here in Pittsburgh with a branch office in NYC. Established and overseen by Rick Landesberg, his firm has become an institution locally, with a long history of work for a range of clients – from fortune 500 to cultural institutions to foundations. Notably, his work for non-profit organizations such as the Sprout Fund, Carnegie Hero Fund Commission, Local Initiatives Support Corporation (LISC) and Hôpital Albert Schweitzer Haiti stands out for their impact both locally and globally.

Making the Connections, The Sprout Fund

Carnegie Hero Fund Commission: A Century of Heroes

LISC 2007 Annual Report

Hôpital Albert Schweitzer Haiti 50th Anniversary Book

Catapult Design

Catapult is a multi-disciplinary non-profit design consultancy dedicated to providing engineering, implementation support and product solutions that change lives in areas of the world that lack infrastructure to provide for people’s basic needs. They work to provide clean water where there is none, they help a health clinic in Rwanda power itself with solar power, you get the picture.

In Guatemala, like many places around the globe, thousands of rural families do not have regular access to electricity in their homes. Instead of relying on electricity delivered by reliable local infrastructure to meet their needs, they are forced to provide their own power, piecemeal, or go without.

More than 1 billion people around the world rely on kerosene lamps to light their homes and businesses when the sun goes down. Not only is kerosene expensive, but its flames are dangerous and the smoke poses serious health risks.

Seven health clinics in Rwanda’s Ruli District serve the needs of 120,000 community members. These clinics provide both in-patient and out-patient care for people who cannot make the 2-3 hour walk to the main hospital. Two of the seven clinics are connected to the grid; three have some electricity via solar panels; two have no electricity.

Public Design Center (PDC)

The PDC is a graphic design resource center. At the core of their mission is empowering those in the most economically disadvantaged locations to communicate more effectively. Through workshop-style one hour clinics and drop-in consulting engagements, they help people make the most of their resources.

Few things are as vivid in my memory as that day. I was huddled around a production area island exacto-cutting out comps for a meeting at PPG Industries, here in Pittsburgh. I remember being very confused. And the phone ringing…a lot. Our client called to cancel the meeting, announcing that her building – One PPG Place – was being evacuated. What were you doing?

I’ll let the pictures do the talking.

As I think about where I am and look back, I consider a few key things:

• If money was no object and nobody else needed help I would spend all my time with my family doing things we love.
• If there were no bills I would quit my job and work on designing things that helped people.
• Reality can be frustrating, and I would much rather do things because I cared about doing them, rather than needing to do them to get paid.
• …more

As I really look closely at things, there is a thread tying many of these things together, and it’s this – I hope one day I find myself in a position to leave behind some work that has changed things in some way. Rather than just making things with limited uses, or temporary purposes, made of paper or things that end up in the trash (hopefully recycling bins), I hope I can leave behind some lasting impact for someone, or some cause.

On the plus side, I can look positively on an item from the recent past that I had almost forgotten about entirely. A few months back I had been selected to be on a list with some of my heroes, all who are dedicated to design for change and labeled as “role models” by an organization named, Creative for a Cause. An honor indeed – some of these folks are seriously heavy-hitters.

• Manufacturing a cellphone uses approximately 1390 MJ of energy and produces 60 kg of CO2 emissions
• A gallon of gasoline has 131 MJ of energy and emits 8.8 kg of CO2
• Manufacturing a cellphone uses as much energy as 10.5 gallons of gasoline and emits as much as 6.8 gallons of gasoline
• Using a cellphone for a year on average uses 4,221 MJ of energy (equivalent to 32 gallons of gasoline) and emits 112 kg of CO2 (equivalent to 12.8 gallons of gasoline)
• replacing a cellphone every 2 years rather than one would save 30 kg of CO2 emissions (about 3.3 gallons worth) and 700 MJ

Source: Fat Knowledge Blog & UMTS report (ESU-services Ltd.)

Bucking the Trend and Dialing it Back

Generally speaking, I tend to go against the grain. I reject trends, I change jobs when I shouldn’t (ask my wife), I ride the bus everywhere and I have the economy cable package (although DVR takes care of the time shifting).

Admittedly, though, until recently I was a BlackBerry user (also known as the “CrackBerry” around my house) with a serious affliction. For the most part it began as a work-related nice-to-have – something all the managers carried – and was a sort of necessity.

It wasn’t until the prospect of ditching the BlackBerry came up that I realized the impact it had on my everyday life. From a purely practical standpoint, I was scanning email 24/7 and perpetually strapped to it. From an psychological perspective, I was always “waiting” for something to come in, and basically like Pavlov’s dog, jonesing to see that “new message” icon in the upper left or for it to ring. Not for any special reason, either – simply because the functionality was there – I was a slave to it in a way. (I’m not alone either)

So the idea of ditching it was undoubtedly for two major reasons: 1) Cut back expenses and 2) Cut back stress (and maybe get some of my life back too) Hey, why not just check email a few times a day – later when I’m standing still – those messages will be there in 15 minutes anyway, right? (tick, tick, convulsion, tick)…and I’ll cut expenses, too.

A Phone I Can Feel Good About

A sort of unintended side effect of kicking the “CrackBerry” to the curb was also realized when I found the Moto W233 Renew phone, by Motorola. It’s literally the first carbon neutral cell phone on the market. It’s made from recycled materials (recycled water bottles to be precise), and what little carbon footprint results from the manufacturing the handset is offset by Motorola with their alliance with Carbonfund.org, getting their official CarbonFree® product certification.

The packaging uses 22% less material, and all the printed matter is on 100% post-consumer recycled paper. A postage-paid envelope is even provided in the box to return your old phone for recycling at no cost.

So I got a bit of my life back, saved some green and made the dent I’m making on the planet a little smaller. Now, if I can just shake the DTs from the email withdrawal…

* CarbonFree® is a registered trademark of Carbonfund.org in United States and Canada

To say that as designers we have a responsibility to the people we work with, and that we have power as agents of change is indeed an understatement.

In the following interview, given by AIGA Phily, Pentagram partner Michael Bierut discusses this in the context of the global economic climate, the proliferation of forces like “Target” and their ability to democratize design in today’s culture. He is also asked to comment on IBM’s Watson’s idea that “Good design is good business.”

If you had any doubts about the collective influence of the design discipline, take a listen to one of today’s foremost thinkers on the subject.

Over the last week, I have had no fewer than four conversations with coworkers and other designers about how their “Brand” is misused, abused, damaged and confused within their respective organizations. These have been separate and unique conversations about somewhat different topics, although the constant among them has been one central issue…the organization (mis)understanding of what exactly a “Brand” is and not internalizing it appropriately. Why is there not a better understanding of what exactly a brand should mean to people?

Brand ≠ Logo

March 5 on NPR’s Marketplace, the big story for Xerox was their new logo. Whatever.

Ron Frankel, who they claimed was a “branding expert based in Los Angeles” stated:

“companies have been spending billions to rework old logos so that they can multitask for the Web, in video, on cell phones. For instance, AT&T sought a new emblem when it acquired Cingular. UPS has faced heavy competition from FedEx and recently went brown with it’s new insignia and KFC is trying to build customer backing by giving a face lift to “The Colonel,” but Frankel says it’s not enough that people know you.”

So, the problem here for me is that his point seems a bit short-sighted. Seeing as how companies these days need to do this kind of “brand maintenance” when big things happen–like mergers, or complete changes in business paradigms–or the moving of many of their services and customer touch points to the web, his point here makes me ask, “And this should happen differently, how?”

Don’t get me wrong, I am a Paul Rand fan (till the grave, and nearly cried when UPS rebranded. I am also a Pittsburgh resident and responded with a moment of silence when the Blattner Brunner agency replaced his Westinghouse “W” with their spinning monstrosity outside of the Westinghouse Building on Stanwix St.) But even the most steadfast and timeless (as Paul Rand was a master of) identities need work sometimes as times change around them.

So why is that? Let the big man tell you himself:

Here is what a logo is and does:

• A logo is a flag, a signature, an escutcheon, a street sign.
• A logo does not sell (directly), it identifies.
  
• A logo is rarely a description of business.
• A logo derives its meaning from the quality of the thing it symbolizes, not the other way around.
• A logo is less important than the product it signifies; what it represents is more importance than what it looks like. The subject matter of a logo can almost be anything.?

-Paul Rand

What we do not hear in this statement is that the brand IS the logo, or even that the logo IS the brand. The way this Ron Frankel and Xerox’s VP of branding were talking, it was among the most significant moves they have made in decades, and the act of changing their logo constituted a “rebranding” effort.

Poor Frankel, he tried, as he went on to say:

“They need to know why they should care. That’s what you tell your designer. Give me a visual representation that will start or try to communicate why our brand is the only solution.”

Ahem-Mr. Frankel, this is perhaps the second bit of direction given to first year design students, right after they are told, “pretend you have a client and need a logo.”

So again I ask, this is the crux of the news?

So why then do we find an entire segment on a nationally-syndicated radio show waxing on about the Xerox logo changes as the marker for a whole new face of the company? Now that there is a new logo, do the employees walk around the offices with a new-found sense of pride? Do they race back to their cube to pull out their Xerox-branded Ducati action figures with a renewed enthusiasm now that the logo is updated? Now that they have custom branded jump-drives and water bottles, do they believe Xerox now a phoenix rising from the ashes of its former self? No. They’re the same company that now has to explain to everyone why they have a new identity.

I waited for the real story – I waited for the discussion with the CEO or CMO to come on to discuss how the company and its employees had to really discuss how they would internalize this new identity, how they would embrace it from the top down.

The best I got was:

The design has to create a link between the old and the new that doesn’t alienate the customer.

Again-this is what they started this segment calling “rebranding.”

You’ve got to make the right choices that are respected by the core customer and of course desired by the masses.

Well, seems they might be neglecting a fairly significant factor here. How about asking the Xerox VP about how this new identity reflects the unified voice of the company in everything the organization is, does and says? How about asking if the new identity is from the inside out, from the top down, adopted and believed in by everyone who answers a Xerox phone, delivers a printer or who lands a distributor deal for toner.

The brand ≠ logo. The brand is every single thing that could possibly reflect back on that company. It’s customer service representative’s tone of voice, the building foyer–and the quality of their products.

Brand + 1 (as Novaurora’s Jason Putorti says):

“There’s no such thing as a “neutral” brand experience. This little word is kicked around a lot and its meaning is often confused. Your company’s “brand” is how other people feel about your company. (Yes I said feel!) Put another way, it’s what your customers say about you, not what you say to them. You might even call it your company’s personality. For example, what do you think about Amazon.com? That’s their brand. If Amazon has done a good job, what you think will match up with what they want you to think, also known as their “brand values.” Every interaction between your company and your customer affects your brand in a positive or negative way. Well-executed visual communication can go a long way to providing the right takeaways.”

First published at Foundread.com, 27 November 2007

What he said. ^

Ok, that’s enough ranting. Although I do agree with Frankel that the new logo looks like a “baseball that got drunk,” I simply think that the interview failed to define accurately what “brand” means and what identity maintenance like Xerox just underwent really encompasses. In my opinion, the public might be better informed had they asked more thoughtful questions that got to the heart of why Xerox is now telling an entirely new story to us, and why they thought they needed to.

If I had to guess, I would speculate that if you called the Xerox corporate office and asked the person who answered the phone, they could answer these questions–and I would bet their answer would have nothing to do with being “desired by the masses.”