Excellent summary Austin! I can relate to so much of what you're written here. I was also a film guy before starting my own (in my case, failed) design business and just like you, discovered brand strategy concepts through The Futur. I'm grateful to them for that. The problem in my case was that I was seeing many of the same superficial models at work. So I also started finding content from real experts, professors and researchers and reading proper literature ("How Brands grow" also blew my mind). And recently, I completed Mark Ritson's Mini MBA in Brand Management. I highly recommend it. Now I'm the one at work questioning the current methods, which is hard when you're "just an art director".
I think the you that helped your friends build a brand identity all those years ago was a bit hard on himself. I do think that there is a place for relative differentiation and targeting, so your intentions weren't completely wrong. It's just that building a brand takes years and is reliant on proper and consistent tactical execution. And that's where a lot of "experts" stop. They go all in on a strategy that never actually does anything.
Thank you for this. It' brought back a lot of memories so I will reread quite a few times.
Thanks for the kind words! I've considered taking Ritson's course. I think relative differentiation is certainly possible and often necessary, but I also think it's incredibly difficult to pull off unless you're confined to a niche, and I'm not always convinced of his market leader examples. e.g. KitKat's tagline and 90s jingle seems to be more associated with literally breaking chocolate than having a break from work or stress, which is a case for distinctiveness rather than differentiation, at least in the US. I assume the same is true in the UK, but I can't speak to that confidently having never lived there.
Regardless, as a designer the debate is largely unimportant. All brands should be distinctive, regardless of the brand's differentiation strategy. And "meaningless distinctiveness" is the best fail-safe method of distinctiveness. I believe that cancels out most strategy approaches for design, but not all.
With my example, I meant more taking Do's resources and copying them to a tee. I do think I should have questioned a motion designer with no real brand strategy experience teaching brand strategy. But I also just had what was most accessible, and the most accessible brand design resources are heavy with what I call "brand strategy theater," not Ritson's approach to brand strategy.
Regarding the KitKat case, Ritson actually references this as an example of effective and consistent brand code application (at least in the Mini MBA). Coincidentally, I was in York a few weeks ago and visited the Chocolate Story, which showcases the history of chocolate and candy in York, where the original KitKat was created: Rowntree's Chocolate Crisp, as a chocolate bar that people, particularly the working class, would pack into their lunchboxes and share easily. So there is some differentiation there, but it is relative.
You're totally right about the halo effect. I think, regardless of which resources you read or watch, it's good to keep in mind that theories and models can be changed or proven to be wrong. Sometimes language needs to be updated or adapted. Sometimes the data is one thing, but the conclusions aren't as cut-and-dry as the writer(s) may have us believe. I mostly read content from Kanta, Ritson, System 1 and EBI these days, but I don't think any one of them is 100% correct. And most of them would probably agree with that.
Yea, and I wonder if that still exists. That was KitKat's original intention, but most don't know that story. It's like the NBC Peacock being designed to showcase their new color TV. It's not relevant today, but it shaped the meaning of the logo at the time. I would be curious to see the research on this with KitKat.
My skepticism comes from how ingrained in the culture Ritson seems to suggest (at least outside of Mini MBA). I think it's true for some. Perhaps even for many, but certainly not most (in the way Apple and design are synonymous). I think his case would benefit from better examples.
But yea, I generally agree. All of them get a lot right and are worth listening to, but none of them should be listened to in isolation.
Excellent summary Austin! I can relate to so much of what you're written here. I was also a film guy before starting my own (in my case, failed) design business and just like you, discovered brand strategy concepts through The Futur. I'm grateful to them for that. The problem in my case was that I was seeing many of the same superficial models at work. So I also started finding content from real experts, professors and researchers and reading proper literature ("How Brands grow" also blew my mind). And recently, I completed Mark Ritson's Mini MBA in Brand Management. I highly recommend it. Now I'm the one at work questioning the current methods, which is hard when you're "just an art director".
I think the you that helped your friends build a brand identity all those years ago was a bit hard on himself. I do think that there is a place for relative differentiation and targeting, so your intentions weren't completely wrong. It's just that building a brand takes years and is reliant on proper and consistent tactical execution. And that's where a lot of "experts" stop. They go all in on a strategy that never actually does anything.
Thank you for this. It' brought back a lot of memories so I will reread quite a few times.
Thanks for the kind words! I've considered taking Ritson's course. I think relative differentiation is certainly possible and often necessary, but I also think it's incredibly difficult to pull off unless you're confined to a niche, and I'm not always convinced of his market leader examples. e.g. KitKat's tagline and 90s jingle seems to be more associated with literally breaking chocolate than having a break from work or stress, which is a case for distinctiveness rather than differentiation, at least in the US. I assume the same is true in the UK, but I can't speak to that confidently having never lived there.
Regardless, as a designer the debate is largely unimportant. All brands should be distinctive, regardless of the brand's differentiation strategy. And "meaningless distinctiveness" is the best fail-safe method of distinctiveness. I believe that cancels out most strategy approaches for design, but not all.
With my example, I meant more taking Do's resources and copying them to a tee. I do think I should have questioned a motion designer with no real brand strategy experience teaching brand strategy. But I also just had what was most accessible, and the most accessible brand design resources are heavy with what I call "brand strategy theater," not Ritson's approach to brand strategy.
Regarding the KitKat case, Ritson actually references this as an example of effective and consistent brand code application (at least in the Mini MBA). Coincidentally, I was in York a few weeks ago and visited the Chocolate Story, which showcases the history of chocolate and candy in York, where the original KitKat was created: Rowntree's Chocolate Crisp, as a chocolate bar that people, particularly the working class, would pack into their lunchboxes and share easily. So there is some differentiation there, but it is relative.
You're totally right about the halo effect. I think, regardless of which resources you read or watch, it's good to keep in mind that theories and models can be changed or proven to be wrong. Sometimes language needs to be updated or adapted. Sometimes the data is one thing, but the conclusions aren't as cut-and-dry as the writer(s) may have us believe. I mostly read content from Kanta, Ritson, System 1 and EBI these days, but I don't think any one of them is 100% correct. And most of them would probably agree with that.
Yea, and I wonder if that still exists. That was KitKat's original intention, but most don't know that story. It's like the NBC Peacock being designed to showcase their new color TV. It's not relevant today, but it shaped the meaning of the logo at the time. I would be curious to see the research on this with KitKat.
My skepticism comes from how ingrained in the culture Ritson seems to suggest (at least outside of Mini MBA). I think it's true for some. Perhaps even for many, but certainly not most (in the way Apple and design are synonymous). I think his case would benefit from better examples.
But yea, I generally agree. All of them get a lot right and are worth listening to, but none of them should be listened to in isolation.
Love it 📚