The Future in Brand Design – Professional Challenges and Opportunities

In recent decades, the tasks of today's brand designer were accomplished by professionals from a variety of disciplines such as graphic artists, graphic designers, (visual) designers, media designers or communications designers. This is reflected in the variety of approaches and traditions that are taught by the respective professional associations, colleges and universities. In practical terms, the demands on the branding profession result from the economic and technological developments in the client's environment. The following aspects illustrate trends and possible consequences for the profession's profile.

From the 1980s onward, the expression corporate identity (CI) was firmly anchored in the corporate world. It referred to the sum of the corporate characteristics that could be expressed in design, communication, culture and behavior in order to differentiate a company from its competitors. Already then, the objective was to achieve a total synthesis. Yet all too often this was not achieved, because in practice CI was chiefly shaped by corporate design (CD). CD produced visible results, but these were often isolated efforts, and minimally integrated with the other elements of the CI concept. Moreover, as time passed the concept was referred to as "CI/CD" – with the latter defining the former. Prior to developing a corporate design, mission statements and visions would be analyzed and discussed. Generally these were shaped by an inward-looking corporate self-image. The frequently stereotyped mission statements chiefly consisted of phrases starting with "We have ...", "We are ...", "We want ...". In these past 15 years, corporate managements have gained a deeper understanding of the branding concept. An increasing awareness of economic relevance has evolved – ranging from the financial market value up to the communicative effectiveness that a strong brand can provide. After the corporate identity phase and the 1990s, discussions about 'integrated communication', the communication branch has accomplished a further conquest. Brands have evolved into a vehicle for communication as well as a managing tool for corporate management. Although the basic elements haven't changed, what are new are the demands for dynamism, flexibility and the integration of outlooks: brand systems are no longer static, nowadays they must adapt continually to the dictates of management and market. The identity-oriented perspective has developed into an identity and market-oriented perspective that takes on board the main stakeholder interests, from the employees through to the customer. Driver, market and competitor analyses have become a matter of course. Corporate identity is no longer a set constant, it is the result of a number of communicative processes and continues to develop in interaction with the brand system – from an identity and market-oriented perspective. Corporate identity becomes brand identity. A communicative interaction that requires a broadening of the existent viewpoints.

Corporate design projects were grouped in CD programs and divided into sub-projects according to the individual mediums involved. This resulted in extensive guidelines for the different applications that included both specifications and dimensioning details. At the time, corporate design was long referred to as print design – which developed brand appearances for stationery and brochures. Applications for the third dimension e.g. exhibition stands and in time, the World Wide Web, were derived from this. Factually, the print aspect dominated – and, to a certain extent, continues to do so today. New appearances were and are still developed using the basic elements: logo, font, typography, layout, colors and images. Occasionally, these are conceived and implemented in individual and sequential phases. Rapid innovations in the media these past ten years such as moving images and spatial projection have provided new platforms for displaying brands. The dynamism of media developments together with the availability of new mediums are pushing the existing rigid frameworks aside and calling for a more flexible approach: brand appearances are now based on a few DNA-typical principles rather than endless specifications. Principles that then need to be developed systematically into a consistent branding experience across all channels that stretch from print media to moving images and spatial projection. On a practical level this means conceiving and visualizing the overall concept first and then aligning the various elements with it.

The controversy about the importance of form and content in design theory is as old as the discipline of design itself and it cannot be denied that in corporate design the focus was mainly on form – and finding the right form. In the past, CD agencies would strictly adhere to the definitions in their specification manuals, considering themselves to be the sole keepers of the true dimensioning formulas. The subsequent conversion of corporate design products into a communicative experience was left to the communication agencies. Hardly any collaboration occurred on a practical level. Dialog and cooperation between the corporate design agencies and the advertising agencies rarely took place. Today in the age of dynamic principles, storytelling and therefore content has been given fresh significance. Content has become the new ace card in brand management. Companies are employing narrative to present themselves as trustworthy and sustainable in order to differentiate themselves from their competitors. With respect to the branding profession this means: the more important the content, the more important the communicative implementation of the brand experience becomes. The borders delineating communication are crumbling, old barriers are becoming obsolete or need to be renegotiated.

For a long time, corporate design was the product of specialist consulting, with clients gratefully accepting advice and expertise. No collaboration took place, and client involvement was the exception to the rule. CD experts were convinced of their superior knowledge and acted according to the principle of: "We tell the client what they want." Depending on the client and the task at hand, specialist consulting continues to play an important role today and still occasionally meets client expectations. However, collaboration that involves the client and the joint development of a concept often results in an entirely new level of quality. Solutions are increasingly developed in collaborative project groups which, if positively communicated, will also result in increased identification with the topic on the client's side. The competent ability to manage complex and long-term processes while taking into account various interests from the corporate side has therefore become a critical success factor for branding service providers. The demands on the moderating and interpreting skills of those involved in these processes are becoming steadily more sophisticated. Involving the brand in the organization itself has also been carried to a new level. Integrating yet more core corporate functions into brand management, from executive management, corporate development through to human resources, opens up new fields of activities and synergies. The communicative and emotional potential of a brand can be used to drive change processes, employees can be empowered to become brand ambassadors and core brand fundamentals can be implemented for managerial training and employee evaluations. A brand becomes more than one of the facets of corporate communications, it evolves into a key management tool for corporate management.

The impact of the previous points on the discipline of branding – the list is not exhaustive – lead to one conclusion: the necessity to leave the "comfort zone" of conforming to established roles. This is true not only for the role of brand design, but also for brand consulting as well. But – and here lies a major distinction – the development of these core branding divisions proceeded along very different lines. Initially, CD agencies were managed by the designers themselves, but during the past 15 years control has increasingly been taken over by consultants, project leaders and strategists. A similar process has taken place on the client and corporate sides as well. Hence, it is essential that brand design in particular is aware and critical about its future relevance. In consequence, the deductions that can be drawn from the four scenarios may differ and even be controversial. The following six categories sketch possible brand design profiles:

The formalists in the branch remain faithful to their roots. Focusing on their core competences, they develop these methodically in accordance with new developments and stay true to traditional graphic design or pure design. This applies to the development of brand appearances as well as the managing of long-term brand maintenance, both with a focus on the conception as well as the implementation. Their creed is: we will take on board the new trends in branding, but content-based form continues to be first and foremost in any brand discussion.

Converts are experienced design professionals who decide to continue their professional education. Often, they find an area in the extremely interdisciplinary environment of branding – be this at MBA level or communication studies. By retraining they can combine their design background with new skills and advance their career. This might be in the field of financial brand evaluations or in brand and reputation management at an agency or on the client side.

Design specialists focus their skills on a specific area and make it their own. Further professional training is also a possible option for them, but unlike the convert they remain true to the field of design, the area they initially trained in. There is a multitude of specializations in a range of fields such as typography, colors, IT graphics, Social Media & Interaction design, motion design and even more specific topics such as medical or mobility design. Design specialists believe that in all the tasks that branding entails nowadays, there is a demand for expert specialists just as in any other branch.

The generalist sees the potential in long-term and consistent development and guidance of branding mandates. Generalists are a part of a project team and involved from the first analytical and strategic phase right up to the actual implementation. They use their design skills for communicative and visual rendering of corporate strategies. For special assignments, they deploy a network of specialists. They view themselves as collaborative, entrepreneurial service providers, and act in a strategic consulting role with commensurate management and project leading skills. The specific attraction of brand design to them lies in the diversity of the tasks and design possibilities.

Storytellers have a strong editorial and dramaturgical flair for communications and may also have gained experience as Art Directors in communication agencies. They understand the importance of conceiving and developing a brand as a system and also know how to deal with the topic contextually. To them brands are not simply corporate design guidelines, instead the brands are the fundament upon which their stories are based and staged. Stories, the storytellers create and concept by themselves or in a team, and implement as well. To all intents and purposes they view themselves as a mouthpiece for the brand.

Authors stage themselves and their designer status as a brand. They place themselves in the foreground and utilize the media demand for personality brands or "top" designers. They will work in a team, yet place the accent on personalizing their competencies. The collaborative aspect in the creative process is relegated to the background. Depending on their character, they are either specialized in a particular subject area, or act as a generalist, continuously increasing their scope of activity and influence. As a rule, authors are found in small to medium-sized agencies rather than in large companies. This list is not intended to evaluate the various profiles. Its intention is to sharpen the awareness of your personal approach. In reality some of the characteristics will overlap, with two or three of these traits dominating. It is unlikely that any brand designer will identify with all six profiles equally. Despite all these changes, one aspect that hasn't altered significantly since the era of corporate identity is the urge to achieve total synthesis. Accordingly the field of brand design comes with specific challenges, yet also with promising opportunities and possibilities as well. In this age of brands and branding, the potentials are possibly more promising that they ever were in the days of straightforward corporate design. Pascal Geissbühler is Creative Director with the brand consultancy Branders in Zurich.

Copyright © Branders Group AG
All rights reserved. Any subsequent further processing, publication or permanent storage for commercial or other purposes without the explicit prior permission of The Brander / Branders Group AG is prohibited.