Logos and Brand Identity

I don’t love it, but I think it will grow on me

nike-swoosh-6This was the comment Philip Knight, the founder of Nike made when he first saw the design for the iconic swoosh logo. The year was 1971. He had commissioned Carolyn Davidson, a graphic design student at Portland State University to design the logo for a fee of $35.

I love this story for two reasons. First of all it is a true success story, especially considering how long Nike has come since then as a brand. Second, I think there is a lesson to be learned about designing a brand identity here. Nowadays companies pay thousands of dollars to agencies for design and branding services. But sometimes a $35 logo is all you need to start…

Great marketers don’t make stuff. They make meaning.

People often use the words ‘brand’ and ‘logo’ interchangeably. A logo is simply the visual representation of a business. It is the central element that helps consumers to visually (or sometimes auditorily – think McDonald’s audio logo) identify a brand. A brand, on the other hand, is so much more than a logo. It is a collection of perceptions, associations and memories that are created over time as the consumers interact with a product. One of the greatest definitions of a brand is one that Seth Godin gave: A brand is the set of expectations, memories, stories and relationships that, taken together, account for a consumer’s decision to choose one product or service over another. This is such an accurate description, as it encompasses the entire brand experience.

1404824_10151974692817164_1236733174_o

When you close your eyes and think about Nike, it is not just the swoosh that you are envisioning. It is the feeling you had when you bought your first ever pair of Nike shoes; Your favourite athlete that you pretended to be when you were playing soccer as a kid; Michael Jordan’s signature fadeaway jumper moves and so many more interactions and memories that you developed over the years. Now you may not be a Nike fan but you can try this exercise with any brand that you truly like and you will realize how the meaning of that brand to you is influenced by several external factors.

What this means is that you don’t always have full control over the development of your brand. When people start using your products and experiencing them in millions of different ways, your brand starts evolving through these interactions and develops its own personality. And sometimes, no matter how great a job a business is doing, some people will develop negative associations and memories. You can do everything right with your branding efforts but if a consumer buys a brand new pair of your expensive shoes on the same day as a bad life event, he/she will have a negative association to your brand that is completely unrelated to your product. This is why branding is an ongoing effort and not a one-time achievement. A business has to be constantly working on forging positive associations to its brand to overcome these unfortunate experiences.

Back to the swoosh
It took Nike $35 and decades of persistence to bring its brand to where it is right now. While there are many great lessons to be learned from this example, the biggest takeaway for me is that you can’t simply buy a brand. Nike spent $35 on its iconic logo that became so much more than a logo. Over the years it became so recognizable that they don’t even need to use the business name with it anymore. So it doesn’t matter whether you spend $35 or $35,000 on a logo design, it will still take years of hard work and consistent marketing communication efforts to develop a truly memorable and strong brand.

The Decoy Effect

Marketers will try anything to get customers to buy the product/service that they are selling. In a fiercely competitive environment, one has to come up with smart marketing ideas and get creative. One such technique is the decoy effect that we all encounter on a daily basis but probably do not pay too much attention.

Here’s the idea in a nutshell: If you want to sell more of a product, offer your customers a similar but slightly more inferior product in the same price range. Sounds pretty counterintuitive, even borderline stupid right?

Turns out this tactic actually works like a charm! Dan Ariely, who conducts extensive research in behavioural economics, ran a little experiment to see how it actually plays out. When he came upon a banner on the Economist magazine’s website, advertising their subscription plans, Ariely could not make sense out of the two plans that were priced exactly the same but one of them was clearly a much better alternative.

economist

Puzzled by this, he created two versions of this ad, one that included ‘print subscription’ and one that did not.

versions

One group was shown version 1 and the other group was given version 2 to decide which subscription model they prefer. The results are quite interesting.

When people were asked to choose from all three options, 84% of them said they wanted the print & web subscription, 16% went for the online-only plan, while not a single participant signed up for the print subscription, which clearly provided no value. It all makes sense so far. Here’s where it gets interesting: When the subjects were given only two of these options (online subscription or print & web subscription), 68% of the respondents chose the online option while only 32% said they would go with the print & web alternative.

Let’s put this into perspective. If we calculate the company’s sales from each scenario based on 100 participants, here are the results:

Price Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Profit 1 Profit 2
Online $59 16 68 $944 $4,012
Print $125 0 N/A 0 0
Print & Web $125 84 32 $10,500 $4,000
$11,444 $8,012

 

By simply adding a third price plan (decoy), the company has increased its sales significantly in the first scenario, even though the decoy plan had no subscriptions.

The decoy effect works for a very simple reason: relativity. Human brain is designed to think in relative terms. We as a species have an extremely hard time processing information in absolute terms. In this case, introducing a less attractive version of the product that you actually want to sell makes the superior version of that product look even more attractive. Not just relative to its inferior, but also to other products.

Imagine a new product being launched. It is a brand new technology and nothing like this has ever been done before. It is so unique that it doesn’t even belong to any product category that we know. As a consumer, how do you decide what a fair price for this product would be? You have no anchor point, no benchmark, no reference. This is exactly how the decoy effect works by creating an anchor (the inferior product) so that the consumer can value the other options relative to that. Its simplicity is why it is brilliant.

Decisions, Decisions…

About two months ago I wanted to buy a beard trimmer. It is a very simple and straightforward device that can be found in pretty much any electronics store, drug store or supermarket. It has been two months and I still don’t have one. Not because of scarcity or the price range of the product. It is simply because of the number of choices that were available to me in the store. I got overwhelmed by the variety of different devices that were hardly differentiated from one another and finally gave up.

trimmer

Following this unsuccessful mission, I started thinking about the amplitude of choices we have for many other product categories. Every time we go shopping for virtually any product, there is an abundance of product assortments that we have to filter through. This whole experience coincided with a book that I was reading at the time called ‘The Art of Choosing’ by Sheena Iyengar. Professor Iyengar talks about this exact phenomenon in her book; how the number of choices we have actually makes it difficult for us to make a decision.

To explore this seemingly counterintuitive concept a little further, she ran an experiment in a high-end grocery store. The premise was simple: set up two different in-store tasting stations in alternating days; one offering 6 different flavours of jam and another one with 24 different options. The hypothesis was that the higher the number of choices, the higher the sales should be. After all, if you have more variety in your product line, you can appeal to more different tastes. However, the results told a completely different story.

24 Jams 6 Jams
# of customers passing by 242 260
# of customers stopped by 145 104
# of customers who purchased 4 31
% customers stopped by 60% 40%
% customers purchased 3% 30%

Two important takeaways came out of this study. The first one being that providing more options is in fact more powerful in attracting customers. The stand with 24 jams made 60% of the passers-by stop and take a look at it as opposed to 40% with the stand that offered only 6 jams. This part was completely in line with the initial assumption. While it is important to grab attention and stand out of the crowd in a competitive market, the ultimate goal is to make sales. After all, why would anyone be in business if they are not selling? And this is where the study took a completely different turn because only 3% of the customers who stopped by the stand with 24 jams made a purchase whereas the same ratio for the other stand was 30%.

It can be argued that this is just one isolated study about a very specific product, conducted with a very small sample population. It is true that there are numerous other variables in decision-making. Factors such as our environment, the price range of the product, and even the mood that we are in on that particular day are all elements that contribute to our decision-making. We live in an unpredictable world and anything that involves human beings brings with it lots of uncertainty and variability. This does not mean that the other end of the spectrum, having only one or two products per line, is the right solution. The objective is to find the optimal number of products that will work for the category in question. Unfortunately, like with most other topics in marketing, there is not a one-size-fits-all solution for this and the length of an ideal product line varies from one industry to another. Michaela Draganska, a professor of marketing who spent a lot of time researching product line management, conducted an in-depth study with yogurt brands. As anyone who has ever gone grocery shopping would agree, yogurt aisles in every supermarket are arguably the most overwhelming areas in terms of alternatives.

yogurt

Draganska sifted through years of data to build a mathematical model that establishes a connection between the length of a product line and consumer choices. As a result of her research, she found that only 3 out of the 13 yogurt brands that she analyzed would actually benefit from a line extension. In other words, 77% of the researched brands were better off keeping a lean product line with limited offerings. Interestingly enough, the three brands that were recommended to have longer product lines were all local, no-frills products, which, according to Draganska, is because a longer product line might be a signal of higher quality and boost their image on the market.

Another study conducted by Joseph Goodman and Selin Malkoc, professors at Washington University in St. Louis, revealed that consumer preference for a larger product assortment decreases as the psychological distance increases. In other words, shoppers prefer to have less number of choices if they are making a buying decision for the future. The researchers concluded that “the lure of assortment may not be as universal as previously thought.”

The Needs of the Many Outweigh the Needs of the Few

When it comes to consumer decision-making, nothing is black and white. Making choices is a complex mental process that involves multiple inputs and that can only have one output. This is why it is important to make the distinction between choice overload and information overload. The yogurt case is a typical example of choice overload where the shopper gets confused simply by looking at the multitude of options available. The beard trimmer case is a good instance of poor information, as well as choice profusion. From a business standpoint, it is critical that companies understand how their customers are shopping for that particular product, the thought process and the customer purchase journey in order to design a product line that is not stretched too far but one that offers enough variety to keep most consumers happy. It is not impossible to design a separate product for everyone’s taste, nor is it financially feasible for any company in the world. The objective is to come up with the optimal number that will satisfy the majority of the target audience.