Branding

Visual Continuity: Is It Always A Good Strategy?

~ K. Quesenberry ~ 1 Comment

Awhile ago I wrote a blog post about the importance of visual continuity. In “Visual Continuity in Print & Digital” I said “When designing creative executions, visual continuity is key – especially in today’s media cluttered world.” I still believe that is true, but sometimes change is good for a company as well.

In the post I talked about the Pepsi Refresh Project. Another example is Target. They have been very successful and they have kept the same red logo and target symbol on white backdrops for a long time. This is an equation for success and a great example of visual continuity. But this made me think of a question. Can a brand be successful without visual continuity?

The one brand that immediately came to mind is Burton Snowboards. The only consistency about Burton’s visual design has been its inconsistency. Since 1977 the company has had a lot of different logos. How many? They basically have totally redesigned their logos – yes multiple logos – every year. See the picture for a retrospective. In the early 1990s Burton Snowboard rarely used the same logo twice in their print ads.

Is this a smart move? A SAP case study on Burton describes the company’s success coming from how they are able to remain as nimble as their riders. The business is unique because they have professional athletes who drive the product development process and have a tremendous amount of input into the look, feel, and functionality of the product lines. They also take rider feedback to heart — whether the comments come from a pro rider, a customer email, or a random snowboarder the company president runs into on the mountain. Being a rider-driven company, the business has to be dynamic and adaptable.

Burton is playing in an ever changing snowboarding, surfing and skate culture that thrives on fads and trends. So I would say it is okay for their visually identity to change rapidly with the times. The other example is Jones Soda.

For years Jones Soda has had fans upload their photos to be voted on and possibly featured on the company’s ever changing soda labels. I uploaded a photo once, but never made it to the label. Have you ever send in a photo to a brand to be featured in their marketing? Can you think of another example of a successful brand that has thrived by consistently changing their visual identity?

Brand Extensions Achieve MAXIMum Failure

~ K. Quesenberry ~ Leave a comment

On the cover of Maxim magazine the publication promises the same thing every month: ”Hot Women, Wild Parties, Cool Clothes, Trendy Drinks and High Tech Gadgets.” In June 2002 the hip men’s Magazine figuratively added ”Hair Color.” The magazine’s owner, Dennis Publishing, in a collaboration with Combe, maker of Just for Men hair color, extended the Maxim brand to hair care products. The press release stated, “Maxim Magazine Haircare is giving guys the opportunity to have an edgy look that is no longer relegated to just the stage or movie screen.” The Maxim brand really extended itself when it decided to decided to enter the hair care aisle. Youth-oriented, frosted hair dye? They did have cool color name options: Bleach Blond, Sandstorm, Black Jack and Red Rum.

Did Maxim violated marketing strategist Al Ries’s “Law of Extension” – the most violated among all the “immutable laws of marketing?” Michael Wendroff, vice president for hair color marketing at Combe said ”We did a lot of research, young guys are already entering the market, but they didn’t want to enter a salon or use a woman’s hair product. And we thought there would be nothing more comfortable for guys than Maxim. That makes it a guy thing.” ”Maxim is a real cool brand,” Manager for brand development at Dennis Publishing, Barry Pincus, said ”Guys look up to us, and women love us as well. They trust who we are. And this gives them a tangible interface with our brand that they can touch or feel.” Magazine ads showed women who could not resist the Maxim frosted male. ”Most of the people who use our Just for Men product are older, but young people have an awareness of it because of all the advertising we’ve done,” Mr. Wendroff said. ”Now we can use the sex appeal and irreverent humor to reach a new market.”

Since you’ve read the title of this post you probably already know how this story ends. Have you seen Maximum Magazine Harecare in your local CVS lately? Probably not. The product disappeared from shelves not long after it was voted the “second worst brand extension” in the 2005 brand extension winners and losers survey by New York branding consultancy Tipping Sprung and trade publication Brandweek. Then it was quietly swept under the rug.

But what went wrong? The brand managers were so enthusiastic. They had research! They simply stretched their brand too far. Most failed brand extensions don’t jibe with how consumers understand the core brand or just don’t seem to match with the company’s existing product line. “The idea of staying home alone at night and staining your towels as you dye your hair just doesn’t coincide with Maxim’s image of a guy out partying with the beautiful people,” says Martyn Tipping, president and director of brand strategy at Tipping Sprung.