Archives: Design

So I see AIGA (our design industry association) has just launched a new Web site http://www.aiga.org

They state the new features include:

Enhanced profile pages (exclusive to members)
Ability to share links and write short blog posts (exclusive to members)
Conversations, a place to bring up topics for discussion and ask questions
Tools & Resources, a section that collects all of AIGA’s advice—articles, case studies, publication and more—in one convenient spot
Why Design, an area devoted to design’s capacity to benefit society
Chapter spotlights and featured student portfolios
A more visual experience overall

Just wondering what others think of the new version.

This was the old thinking if you changed your logo: make a big splash. The reasoning is sound. Use the redesign as a marketing opportunity—a chance to introduce audiences to the sexy new mark and control the story. "Big splash" and "control" were the benefits of this approach.

Now, social media has taken "big splash" to a whole new scale while making "control" a lot harder to achieve. In the last month or so, we've launched two new identities, one for Marylhurst University and the other for Woodland Park Zoo (with help from Betty White). Both have big groups of engaged audiences who are active on social media. While the challenge was the same—introduce audiences to the new identities—the organizations used different approaches to their respective unveilings. Marylhurst University debuted the new mark at well-attended on-campus events and on Facebook as part of a comprehensive brand launch. Woodland Park Zoo unveiled the new mark—without a specific announcement—at Thrive, the Zoo's fund-raising event, and has so far left Facebook out of it. Two very different approaches. And there are pros and cons to each. Here's a high-level overview of these different approaches.

Approach: "Hard" Launch, inclusive of social media.

Pros:
— Transparency. Lets audiences understand exactly what's happening and why.
— Momentum. Builds excitement and signals change.
— Definitive. Creates a pivot point between the past and the future.

Cons:
— Criticism. The reaction to new identities is—almost always—universally negative. See the comments on the Starbucks page for that company's new logo. (Howard Schultz is widely regarded as a marketing genius, but that didn't stop the first commenter from calling him a "bonehead." That's exactly the the kind of illogical, emotional response new identities engender.) This does not mean they aren't great identities. What it means is that we're hardwired to dislike something new that replaces something we're already familiar with. (But fast forward just a few weeks, and most all the dislike is gone.)

Approach: "Soft" Launch, without social media.

Pros:
— No Criticism (or, at least, less criticism). By not overtly calling attention to the new design, the mark is introduced in context, without inviting any debate about whether it's liked or disliked. At its core, social media asks us to "like" or "dislike" something—either by saying so explicitly, or commenting on something shared. If the coming-out party for a new identity doesn't include social media, the platform for this "like" or "dislike" conversation is greatly reduced. But that comes at a cost . . .

Cons:
— No Conversation. While weathering an initial storm of criticism (see: The Gap) can be hard on any organization, most case studies show that this criticism is temporary and, given a chance, new identities eventually win people over. Don't believe me? See any redesigned logo for a professional sports team. Did the new logo initially freak fans out? Almost always. Did people stop coming to the ballpark or, even more tellingly, stop buying merchandise with the logo on it? Not a chance. Besides, criticism is a form of engagement, and engagement is what everyone wants for their brand. In Marylhurst's case, some early negative feedback by students even led to bigger discussions about governance, which in turn inspired the revamping of student government. Change inspires change. And that is healthy.

Both approaches are effective, and it's likely one is more-suited to your organization. It's just important to know the benefits—and costs—of each.

I led another workshop at School of Visual concepts on Wednesday, this time exclusively attended by 17 Starbucks marketers who came in from all around the country to attend (including: New York, Miami, Denver, San Diego, Indianapolis, Chicago), as well as a few from the Seattle HQ.

We were mainly talking about creative briefs, but there were some interesting discussions about how to set up great creative. And one of the themes that resonated throughout the day was about articulating key "tensions" that the creative work is then asked to reconcile. This is certainly true for the brand identity work we recently completed for Woodland Park Zoo, in which we had to create a mark that reconciles the tension between "conservation leader" (read: science-y) and "engaging experience" (read: fun). For us, the concept that reconciles that tension is wonder. And wonder is at the heart of the new identity. That sense of awe you get when you're allowed up-close access to a wild animal.

Here's another one we discussed in the workshop: the celebrated "Swagger Wagon" campaign for Toyota. The tension reconciled here, through humor, is between "embarrassing stigma" and "pure utility."

http://www.youtube.com/user/Sienna

Creative is the silver bullet that can solve what often seems to be unsolvable tensions. And a great creative brief can set that tension up, articulating it in a way that inspires killer ideas.

Last week PBDH’ers attended Woodland Park Zoo’s Thrive event — a major fundraising campaign for the zoo (attended by an estimated 600+ people). Inspiring presentations were given by Dr. Deborah Jensen, President and CEO of the zoo, and Dan Harris, Anchor of Weekend Good Morning America — who shared videos of his visits with zoo conservationists working with animals up close in the wild. A personalized video message from Betty White, as well as a delightful (and very well done) video featuring children enjoying their experiences at Woodland Park Zoo made the event outstanding. And to top things off, in addition to the $600,000 (and growing) donated at Thrive, the zoo received an anonymous gift of $4 million to be used towards building a new tiger and Asian bear exhibit complex!

PBDH recently completed work with the zoo, which was unveiled at Thrive – including a new logo and campaign theme More Wonder More Wild. It is an exciting time for the zoo as a leader in wildlife conservation and education — as well as a fun place to visit and enjoy. PBDH is proud to be a partner with such an incredible organization!

Watch the special message from Betty White:

On Friday, I led a workshop at School of Visual Concepts on writing effective creative briefs. Like previous sessions of this popular workshop, there was an all-star crew of participants, this time from Starbucks, WSECU, Garrigan Lyman, Casey Family Programs, and new advertising agency Hey,.

We covered a lot of ground, including what I regard as the five most critical elements to include in any creative brief.

— The Big Picture
— Business Objectives
— Creative Objectives
— Audience Insight
— Competitive Landscape

These five, plus a single-most important takeaway the creative should evoke, form the foundation for any successful brief.

Many thanks to Starbucks' global creative team for their willingness to share their creative brief process. What often gets me most excited about these workshops is bringing smart people from different organizations together to discuss, collaborate and learn from each other. We don't get enough opportunities like that, so a whole day to focus and think critically about such an essential component of the creative process is always welcomed!

I saw the French film Fears of the Dark when it first came out a couple of years ago. I recently gave it another viewing – and was struck again by it’s visual brilliance. A series of animated shorts woven together through striking black and white imagery, by acclaimed graphic designers and comic book creators. The subject matter is rather dark in nature, in fact quite frightening in some instances. Some of the stories come to life with minimal imagery — simplistic and stark, utilizing negative space for atmosphere and impact. Truly inspiring for any artist and a reminder of how you can have maximum power with minimal content.

Check it out if you want to be inspired — and maybe a tiny bit scared. Watch a clip:

There's already been innumerable articles written for and against the redesigned Starbucks logo. There's no need retreading here all the arguments about whether or not Starbucks was wise to tinker with their established brand identity, or whether or not Starbucks joins the elite brand club of name-free logos pioneered by Nike and Apple.

So I will simply tip my hat to Starbucks and congratulate them on what I see as a well-conceived and boldly executed update to the siren. Gap failed in their redesign because 1) the design was uninspired and 2) they wimped out in the face of being lambasted via social media. Starbucks, on the other hand, excelled on both fronts. The design is tops. And company leadership (Howard Schultz himself!) did a wonderful job of explaining the design change to its audiences. I particularly love that Howard went into the specifics of the change, and the ideas behind it, and spared everyone the corp-speak blither blather that emanates from so many other companies.

Also, I actually do believe Starbucks has positioned itself to join the likes of Nike, Apple, Mercedes and others with logos so recognizable that the name isn't even needed. They aren't there today, but they started today and they're well on their way. Onward, Starbucks! And three cheers from me.