How Not To Get Tired Of Your Brand ID

Seeing as how I don't do posts about other people's creative work and since some folks continue against all logic to see me as one of those weirdos, I figured I'd better take a stab at a post that takes a look at some concept exploration, rather than just prattle on about life and stuff.

So gird your loins. Here it comes.

Let me preface this by explaining that Rand Brand Consultants is a fictional personal project. It's an exercise in development of a new brand name and identity. Projects like this generally happen whenever there's a spare moment and perhaps a few brain cells left over to ravage. And it's always good practice to keep the gears turning.

So. You'll see here a series of graphics that incorporates a retro look and feel; relevant to this exercise because I'm pretty retro and (if I can get all Harlequin Romance on you) it harkens back to a more innocent time, when things were simpler. And it may be distinctively apropos in this day and age because it's just now gradually dawning on folks after a wild ride over the past ten years that the dazzle of technology isn't the be-all-and-end-all of everything. Whatever sizzle a business employs to sell its steak, its flame must be fed by good old fashioned Grade "A" values and ingenuity. Because consumers and clients are savvy and overloaded with messages. And new ways of breaking through is a constant challenge. So the retro thing seemed like a good approach to explore in principium.

We won't revert here to a list of dos and don'ts about brand design simply because: 1) dos and don'ts are rules, 2) I don't particularly like rules, and 3) conceptual thinking is all about looking beyond the rules (an act which helps to differentiate a brand). So, while the rules are there I try not to think about them. If I'm working on a piece and it doesn't look right I probably broke a rule and then I think about rules.

It is typical that great corporate material is used across all applications consistently. It's called adhering to brand standards. But can those standards be pushed at the planning stage? Can one of the brand standards be not to be strictly standardized? It's certainly within our rights to ask the question anyway.

So, it's probably not a new concept – the idea of a consistent wordmark with changing icons and matching "qualifiers" (those words under the wordmark), placed to coincide with subject matter, but it's a fun one to play with. Wait. It's actually called a "Variable Icon Corporate Identity" and was invented by a remarkably astute person. A leader in his field.

Yes, I just made that term up. And yes, you can use it.

The integrity of this exploration is in its format, style, font and color use. The intriguing thing is that it's enhanced by a variety of icons that highlight various aspects of the brand.

It did occur to me that something like this might not be for all executives. Because if you don't want people constantly asking you, "What logo do we use with this one, boss?" it could prove to be something of a bother to have like – seventeen of them. The two good things about a plethora of IDs are: 1) you're less likely to get tired of your own brand, and 2) if you find you don't like one of them anymore you can just throw it out and not be faced with a complete multi-kazillion dollar corporate identity redesign.

Then again, I may be totally wacked. Let me know what you think of the idea. As they say in the business, be brutal.

Or maybe you'll just look at these and get a wonderful but completely different concept in mind – a better one – and you'll do your own thing and become very rich and famous. That would be good too.

You can ungird your loins now...