Adjusting Inconsistent Brand Style Guide

The Nucleus of branding is wired in the fact that

1.?????? End consumers are able to distinguish between viers and competitors and position the value of the brand in their mind as they tend to decisively steer their choice which in turn gets translated to sales thereby exchanging the perceived brand value for revenue – the engine of growth.

?

2.?????? Co-rivals get intimidated enough to either shift their branding strategy and/or commit errors that would leverage the branding quotient.

?

Not only this, it constantly fuels the prefrontal cortices of consumers at large persuading them just enough to keep them preferring a brand over the others.

Here’s where a Brand-Style-Guide becomes pivotal to enable and sustain the loop where customers Buy – Use – Dispose of – Buy again; I’ve coined it as ‘BUD’ Buying.

In course of my Sales and Business Development learning, I’ve developed the ‘Doctrine of Parallel Juxtaposition’ which involves comparing two similar concepts (or ideas, strategies, theories, tactics etc.) with one being real (the one you’re trying to reconfigure) and the other being fictional with similar characteristics (the one for experimenting / trial and error) the outcomes of which would enable us to adjust our style guide in question allowing us to reach the desired outcome without crushing the fundamental architecture of our real guide.

This is analogical to railway tracks which run parallel to each other such that they reach their destination together following a common set of bends and curves. If anything is not right in one of the tracks (sometimes in both) we mend and adjust the flaws rather than changing the entire network of rails. The objective is to save time and efforts and simply by shifting our thought patterns and aligning them with the desired outcome we’re able to make a difference [Refer to Coca Cola case study].

Pro-actively, the keyword is – ‘Adjust’; remember, the CEO of General Electric Corp warning and emphasizing – ‘Change or die’; Nobody responded in time and the result is fragmentation of General Electric Company. What he meant was to adjust and embrace change rather than lurking in rigidity. Besides, Isn’t Adjustment what we do for a harmonious conjugal life and brand it as ideal for other couples to envy!!

As kids, while climbing the stairs we often used to skip and dodge the steps for fun or to compete with friends in order to reach the top, first or sometimes just for fun to complement the adrenal glands. Although there lied a risk of overstepping or getting hurt, we subconsciously mastered the art with time and practice.

The same theory is applied while reconfiguring an inconsistent brand style guide. We need not necessarily follow a stringent series of sequential steps when we’re at liberty to enjoy dodging or skipping the sequence.

I strongly recommend to start at no. 2 which would allow us to delve deeper into current set of pros and cons without fearing homogenous bias (unconsciously causing our minds to refrain from questioning our own original creativity) while aptly enabling us to assimilate others’ point of view (may be constructive criticism) and insights.

I back-up my notion on two reasons - Numero uno, in the course of adjusting the inconsistent style guide, we’re largely familiar with our own thought process which has already resulted in the current guide; after all it took time, efforts and other resources to frame the current strategy; we cannot outrightly undermine or write it off. Caution – We try to repair first and only after we’ve exhausted all reasons to abandon the repair work, that we replace.

Furthermore, our already evolved brain will artistically process step 2 and shall try to extract the tastiest drops of wisdom in order to palliate the complexities of step 1 while significantly reducing costs (both in short and long run) and improvising the process by placating the redundancies.

This is achieved by defining and containing the level and impact of inconsistency – this inconsistency is visible to a considerable extent in our Sales figures; we always run a risk of casting unconscious influence on the audit and control process (Step 1) or at least we somehow desire and strive to resist it by playing defensive ultimately leading to no palatable outcomes.

In order to minimize this risk and fossick through the process of harmony through adjustment, asking for feedback and insights first, enables us to carve out a niche which results in actionable audit. This further pares down the risk of head on collision (inessential shifts in branding guide) and subsequent repair / remedial work (roping in additional talent at inflated appraisals, increasing opportunity cost, alluring untapped potential through financial motivation, reshuffling the creative team etc.).

Feedsights (Feedback + Insights) would help facilitate easy yet effective audit thereby complementing optimum shift or change required in parameters like font, style, formatting, color palette, 2d-3d, tagline etc.). Furthering the cause, the rest of the process becomes less complex, more agile, and is more likely to hit the ground running. ?

Epigrammatically, the process becomes more engaging, less tedious, prescient and hence more productive and growth oriented whereby all stake holders feel inclusive and personally satisfying for them both individually and at team level. ?????????

?????????????????????