Logos
Earlier this week, I read about possible connotations from the new Office of Government Commerce logo via Law Actually. Turn it 90 degrees, and the OGC’s statement that:
… [it] is not inappropriate to an organisation that’s looking to have a firm grip …
takes on an entirely different meaning.
Of course, I quickly was reminded about the problems with the 2012 logo, previously addressed on this blog. And, more recently, the logo for Progressive Governance Summit had its errors…
What is it about changing of logos that always makes people find “problems” with it (although, to be fair, it didn’t take long in either of the above two examples)? Why are re-brandings so widely condemned?
Very few people liked the Conservative Tree “scribbling”. BBC’s news rebranding in the past week hasn’t been widely supported.
There has to be an element of “We fear change”. We all like what’s familiar to us. And, at least as far as I’m concerned, it gets annoying.
Familiarity breeds contempt, and some people seem to sit in their little box letting life go on in its old routines. I know some people who get disturbed when the postman’s on holiday. But we can’t live like that.
A change is as good a break. It’s refreshing. It’s far too easy for things to get stagnant and outdated. St John Ambulance recently had its rebranding; and we do now have a cleaner fresher look. Uniformity across the board - yes, there’s been teething problems, but by the 2012 Olympics everything will be established.
I’m not saying the new logo is perfect. But, the old one had many problems (identification of vehicles, recognised our name wasn’t “Caring for Life”) - and these things have been addressed in the re-working.
Modification is needed. We shouldn’t fear it.
I’m not saying that some re-brandings are a waste of space. Donington Park circuit changed their logo a few years back from a Stylised sidecar in the shape of the circuit to this monstrosity.
Apparently “The two swishes in the logo are fast and modern”. How it symbolises motorsport though I’ve no idea.
But providing it’s not two slodges of paint that a 4-year-old might draw, I don’t see the problem with any of these logo. Heck, I even like the London 2012 logo - modern and vibrant.
So what if people can find a connotation to them - try hard enough, you can with most things. Stop fearing change though, and ensure that branding moves forward at the same pace a technology and the world we live in.
~ Asp
This entry is filed under A Northern Monkey Speaks, Branding. You can follow any responses to this entry through RSS 2.0. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Ah yes that delightful Olympic logo, nearly forgot - It wasn’t a complete waste of money at all…
Designed by Wolff Ollins at a cost to the tax payer (who else) to the tune of £400,000 pounds.
You don’t see value for money like that every week…
Thing was - I knew that I had come across this designers name before.
So I did a little digging - and guess what?
Which designers were first to sign up, lock stock and barrel, to Julia Middletons infamous Common Purpose cult?
Which designer came up with the logo for the new twenty pound note, which actually features the common purpose logo?
Who designs nearly all of New Labours tacky corporate garb?
Ah yes - that would be Wolff Ollins then!!!
Sell your soul to the devil and then dance to their tune - and you too could find yourselves being rewarded with shed loads of hardworking tax payers monies, for designs such as these….
http://64.233.183.104/search?q=cache:D8JZQAFOFXkJ:www.cbi.org.uk/pdf/wminbusiness0907.pdf+Wolf+Ollins+-+Julia+Middleton+-+Common+practise&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=uk