|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
Symbol? Or Wordmark? |
|
|
|
Of
the 15 marks in my "1996" article, nine are essentially "wordmarks," while
six feature graphic symbols (Lucent, NCR, Imation, Pharmacia & Upjohn,
McGraw-Hill, and LG; I count Nortel as a wordmark, but its "O" can also
function as a freestanding symbol).
Which logo strategy is best?
When should a CEO choose a wordmark, when a symbol? In general, consider a
symbol only when:
Your name is too generic, too long, doesn't
translate well globally, or is hopelessly deficient in
personality.
You need an emblem on the product, as on a car
hood-or a sneaker.
You need to link subsidiaries to the parent
and can't easily use the name. (The Bell symbol served this function for the
old AT&T and its operating companies.)
You have (or can afford)
ample media, to teach us what the symbol means.
Choose a
wordmark when:
Your name is reasonably distinctive but not (yet)
a household word.
You want to associate products or subsidiaries
with the parent more clearly and directly than a symbol
permits.
Communication funds are limited and should be focused on
name recognition.
A case in point: In 1995, Novell wanted to be a
more powerful umbrella brand over its various software names. Consultants
Frankfurt Balkind designed a striking new N symbol, appropriately expressive
of a focal "enterprise networking" concept, accompanied by an elegant
low-key wordmark.
In 1996, the "dots" were banished from
marketing communications, to better focus on the branding essential-the
Novell name. Rationale: "We don't have time for trinkets that serve no
functional need."
Bottom line: Wordmark or symbol, make sure your
identity consultant provides a strategic application-based rationale-not
just a pretty face.
|
|
|
|
|
|
