A few months ago I was reading one of my favorite blogs, Logo Design Love, and in a very short post the author posed the question “Are Iconic Logos Designed, or Bought?”
I figured “designed”, but this question really stuck with me, and I’ll admit that I changed my answer after my initial reaction once I really began to think about it.
See, in design school, we are taught about iconic designers such as Paul Rand, Milton Glaser and especially Ivan Chermayeff & Tom Geismar. Their work (in specific cases) is thought to be iconic, and it really is. IBM, I Love New York and the NBC logos are perfect examples of what it means to be “iconic”. They are easily recognizable and more importantly—identifiable.
These logos, and many more, are so well designed. They are all simple, clever and unique. These are obviously the reasons they are iconic. I thought.
So many times in design school, and my early years of professional design (it will be two years in August), I wanted to design a logo or a wordmark that could stand up against Apple, Nike, McDonald’s and FedEx to name a few, but I wasn’t hitting the mark I wanted to hit, and I never understood why. My designs shared the same qualities as the “iconic” logos, but they never had that instant “pop” or emotional connection that the big brands all had.
That’s the key – big brands. And once I got to this conclusion, that’s when I changed my answer.
A logo doesn’t sell the product. It only identifies it. The (important word to follow) BRAND sells the product. But what is a brand? A brand is nothing more than a promise. It’s that emotional connection a consumer has with a company or product. It is what they come to expect. It is how they differentiate company from company and product from product.
The logo only identifies these connections, it doesn’t create them.
The brands, and subsequently, the logos succeed only because the product has stood the test of time. It is desirable to consumers because they have had, or know somebody who has (look at the designer talking about Social Media), a positive connection with the company or product. More positive connections = more sales = more $$ = bigger advertising spend.
The more I see the logo, the more recognizable it is and finally the more identifiable it becomes with the product or company.
So, with all that said, here’s a question of my own:
Assuming that iconic logos seem to be more the result of a big wallet, can a brand succeed in evoking emotion and making a connection without an identity? Can you fall in love with a faceless person if he or she is saying all the right things? I think we have a little “chicken or egg” conundrum here, and thoughts are welcome…
Cheers!
Kyle
You hit it on the nose from a design perspective Kyle; regarding the chicken and the egg dilemma – I’d say that’s largely dependent on the level of strategy that the branding and development teams put behind building those relationships.
Even this mysterious person has a face, he or she will be impossible to love until you know who they are – that’s relationship marketing combined with the emotional branding as far as I see it.
Of course, now you’ve painted an even bigger picture here: the importance a good logo has on branding efforts. Without that symbol to identify too, a personality isn’t really worth developing for a company’s product or service.
TL;DR? Starbucks. How many people do the ‘brand turn’? They not only love the coffee, but they love the logo – they want to share their relationship with the world.
Thankfully we have a talented graphic team at SGC with people like you on board Kyle! Great post/discussion.
Still interested to hear everyone’s take/perspective!