Re-branding without heart attack

Over the course of my career I have had to accompany companies in their rebranding several times, and in many cases I can say not without feeling the pain of change.

I have often wondered whether this resistance was exclusively related to ephemeral reasons of taste (the famous ‘like it/dislike it’) or whether it was something more. I therefore decided to put together the pieces of successful rebranding and other totally disastrous ones to get a better understanding of what is triggered when someone walks through the door of the ‘boss’ and says: ‘we will change the logo’.

Understanding process allows us to face it with more awareness and more mastery.

The first question is the fundamental one: branding or re-branding?

It is important to know this: starting from scratch, i.e. in devising a brand, as opposed to rethinking or re-branding one's current brand, puts companies in a different position. We will not deal here with the first case, but focus on the one that on the surface seems the simplest, but which often turns out to be a killer, both for those who propose it and for those who ‘suffer’ it.

Re-branding is not at the same time a ‘change of colour’, or a more catchy slogan. Although these two activities, still under the umbrella of ‘coding’ our brand, are specific and cannot be considered rebranding on their own. We will come back to that.

Re-branding is an activity that aims to relaunch one's brand in its essence. It does not only touch on ‘how the new logo will look’ but also re-brands the company in a different light, a new look and perception of itself.

Don't be impatient to change the look if you have no clue about what the impact would be throughout the organisation.

Some example to keep the track on

There is no shortage of examples. In our age of digital transformation, social media and technological evolution, even companies are moving to ‘not miss’ the opportunity to reposition themselves or ‘re-brand’ themselves.

I have chosen two different but rather well-known examples to show the difference between a re-branding and a re-freshing (or restyling, if you will) of the brand: Peugeot and Apple.

I say at the outset that we will not go into the analysis of information we do not have, we will take two factors for granted: redesign and positioning.

Peugeot recently faced to all intents and purposes a re-branding: new positioning in its market segment and the need for a strong turnaround that would not upset the company's founding values (so much so that it was a return to the past, tracing the carmaker's 50s-60s branding) but would give a clear signal that something profound was afoot.

I quote their official statement:

This new emblem paves the way for a brand ecosystem that is not just limited to its visual identity. It brings with it a deeper change. A change of attitude, a new state of mind, a new lifestyle. The PEUGEOT brand is timeless. It reinvents itself again and again. The PEUGEOT brand opens a new page in its history. A new era.

The new design positions the company based on these four key attributes: prestige, trust, longevity and lineage. All fittingly with renewed lettering and a design in keeping with the times.

Re-branding = New positioning + ‘new’ design.

This is another matter for Apple, which, although it has profoundly changed its mantra in responding to market demand with the return of Steve Jobs, has not felt the need to change its positioning. This was also helped by the fact that the founder had returned ‘home’ with the will to keep the values and positioning he wanted to uphold represented.

Apple therefore did not carry out a re-branding, but a re-freshing of its own brand. This gave a great advantage over the competition: at a time when everything seemed to waver and collapse, in his immense genius Steve Jobs showed compactness in the founding values, giving the brand a longevity and nurturing an equity that to this day is unparalleled: chapeaux!

The re-freshing of the brand has allowed Apple to show itself to be in step with the times, to be able to interact with its target audience by creating an ever-renewed relationship with relatively little effort.

The brand, moreover, has adapted to the age of digitalisation thanks to its great capacity for synthesis and recall: no small feat, having been born in 1977.

Re-freshing = Same positioning + New Style

Understanding complexity to avoid a crash

When we talk about branding we must first understand its complexity: branding is not merely the design of a brand, but everything it represents to people. Affective and emotional involvement in branding is the first factor of success or, in the worst cases, failure.

That little legend we tell ourselves where one day a creative wakes up and creates the "brand of the century", however true or not it may be, is an extreme trivialization of a process that has long timescales and extremely intricate roots.

The reality of the facts is that one day a person who matters walks into your office and asks you to rethink your corporate image. But what he forgets to say is that he would like you to do it exactly as he has it in mind; he does not tell you this not because he does not want to, but because branding is a feeling rather than an idea.

Understanding complexity allows us to act by avoiding common mistakes and accompanying rebranding through processes that increase awareness of who you are and what your real, authentic personality is.

The first thing I always suggest is to consider a re-branding project as an inclusive process. By this I do not mean that you should put the brand to a vote: these operations however suggestive are mere marketing activities and risk flattening the personality of the brand and making it seemingly democratic but in fact totally impersonal.

When you are entrusted with this task think first of all about the people to be involved, and what kind of support to ask them for. It is not a matter of showing them drafts and deciding which one they prefer, but of working together on their perception of the company and finding, for example, what the founding values are, hoping not to find only complaints.

Take the time to obviously include top management: if they have asked you to act, it is to meet their expectations. Know how to say no if what they expect to achieve is not achievable and provide alternative plans before you set about designing the new logo. Sometimes you risk putting your face on anticipated failures and dramas without realizing it in time.

Management, HR, Design, Marketing, Communications, Finance, Digital, Operations, Logistics etc: if the project starts every sector will be touched in some way before even the public. Create awareness and participation.

Mitigating the Pain

To mitigate the pain associated with rebranding, ask to your organization to support you in several steps:

Research and Planning: Conduct comprehensive market research and plan meticulously to ensure the new brand aligns with market needs and company goals.

Stakeholder Involvement: Involve key stakeholders, including employees and customers, in the rebranding process to gain their buy-in and support.

Clear Communication: Communicate the reasons for the rebranding clearly to all stakeholders, highlighting the benefits and addressing concerns proactively.

Incremental Rollout: Consider an incremental rollout to test and refine the new brand in stages, minimizing the risk of a full-scale failure.

Consistent Messaging: Ensure consistent messaging across all channels to reinforce the new brand identity and prevent confusion.

Support Systems: Provide support and training to employees to help them understand and advocate for the new brand.

Let your colleagues accompany you in this project, making them participate, showing the commonalities that make in your work your brand more in line with the new strategy.

And of course, design and have fun! No sad designer has ever produced successful brands ;)

If you found this article interesting or you have some question let's get in touch:

Medium: https://medium.com/@gianluigi.fragomeni