Everyone marketer has a view on this- how much your company’s logo can help bolster your brand. Our view at Prayag has always been that, especially for a B2B context, the logo is a necessary ingredient in creating a brand, but much depends on how it is publicised.
I came across an article in the Fortune magazine which had an interesting analysis on some logo makeovers, and whether they had actually helped or hindered in the brand building exercise.
Of the make overs that have worked big time, Apple and IBM top the list, while Kraft’s efforts have not quite worked. Xerox and Pepsi’s changed logos have also been questioned.
Which brings us to an important insight- in visual rebranding exercises, the negative impact if the exercise does not create the intended market perception far outweighs the positive impact when it does.
Do check out the full article http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2009/fortune/0908/gallery.new_logos_redesigns.fortune/index.html
it is worth a read!
Popularity: 15% [?]
I agree that its an important element of branding that works towards brand building, recall etc, but sometimes when one reads the lenghty explanations on the minutae of the logo – why this colour, why its this long/short etc – I wonder if its a bit of overkill. Justifies the creating agency’s fat bill though, I suppose….
Yes, that really is the point, and this article underscores that.