Marketing Profs asks “Would you really want to spend $100 on a logo?” I think the answer is “Yes” if the logo was the Nike Swoosh, which famously cost $35. Alternatively, you could spend GPB14,000 and develop a stylish, creative logo like the one that UK’s Office of Government Commerce unveiled in April and has subsequently decided not to use (for reasons which, while lamentable, are perfectly understandable!)
I’m a big fan of the Marketing Profs newsletter and I agree with the main point that generally, if you’re going to mess with your brand, then you probably want to invest in the services of a professional company to do it. However, to say that the only good logos are expensive logos is patently not true.
Yes, the logo is the first impression people will have of your company, but what the logo ultimately comes to mean will depend on a million things, none of which can be purchased from a professional design service. Most significantly, if the subsequent impression is negative, then the money you spent on your glitzy new logo has been wasted.
At the end of the day, the brand is not contained in the logo but in the way the attitudes and behaviors of the company are viewed and interpreted by its stakeholders.
Of course, as a professional graphic designer David Airey has an axe to grind (as do I) and I think his post and the subsequent discussion is well worth a read. Ultimately, in design as well as in corporate communications, you very often often get what you pay for. However, to use a biblical aphorism, you also reap what you sow. Branding dollars are often better spent improving the experience to better meet your stakeholders’ needs and expectations than on creating and launching new corporate identities.
Hello Steve,
It’s not that I have an axe to grind, as there’s more than enough business out there for everyone, it’s that I believe a designers’ job description includes educating, and to think you can continuously create effective logo designs for just one hours’ work isn’t right.
Don’t you agree?
Hi David. Thanks for swinging by.
Please don’t misunderstand – my comment on axe grinding was not meant to denigrate – we maintain blogs because, in part, they represent our various professional interests. My interest lies in helping companies communicate with their stakeholders, yours lies in helping them design their image. Both equally valid but indicative of a certain point of view.
I certainly agree that you can’t do a good job in an hour (any more than you can “knock out” a good media release in an hour as some practitioners of my particular discipline are often expected to do!).
Ultimately, my point is that the whole experience creates the brand, not just the logo. The Nike Swoosh is globally recognised not because it was expensive (as you know, it wasn’t) or because it was part of a carefully thought out branding initiative (it wasn’t). It is instantly recognisable because of how the company positioned itself and continues to position itself in the minds of the people who encounter it. That logo today is priceless because of what Nike made it, not what they paid for it.
You’re very welcome, Steve, and I completely agree with your reply.