• Home
• Blog
• Portfolio
• Contact

“Bendy” Logos, Consistent Branding – Google

Posted 15 Nov 2009 - 2 Gratefully received comments

Have you ever worked for a client that confused their logo with their brand?
When this happens the client usually provides a huge booklet of “branding guidelines” that details exactly how their logo should be used, specifying sizes, positioning and colours. These guidelines are given to you to keep their brand identity consistent. There is nothing wrong with this for most companies/organisations, but sometimes it all goes too far.
Occasionally a company can be so obsessed with the rigidity of their logo that they confuse it with their overall brand. A logo alone doesn’t make a complete brand identity.

A classic example of a fluid logo that holds true to it’s overall brand identity is Google.
I’ve collected a selection of the special/seasonal logos that Google have made for their search page over the last year. I’ve selected some because they are clever and others because they are beautiful. No matter how far removed they are from the original logo, they all scream ‘Google’.

I’m sure everyone is familiar with it, but for comparison purposes, here is the standard Google logo:

I’m pretty sure I can read your minds at this point!
You’re thinking that Google is such an established brand that they can do whatever they like with their logos. They no longer need consistent branding to make it memorable.
I completely agree.

I’ve showcased the Google logos to use them as an example of the most extreme use of flexible logos. But I believe it is an example to aspire to.

So what am I getting at? How can a ‘bendy logo’ approach be helpful?

If we imagine a new company, a new logo, a new brand. The main concern is to come up with a flagship logo that is simple, memorable and timeless. This logo will be the cornerstone of it’s fledgling brand. With this thought it is very tempting to use the logo unchanged across all of it’s applications. It’s carved in stone.

At this point I’d like to quote from ‘Wally Olins: The Brand Handbook’:
“Brand Visibility – Looked at from the outside, the brand seems to consist of a few elements – some colours, some typefaces, a strapline or slogan, all topped off with a logo or symbol, sometimes of an apparently allegorical nature but frequently consisting of a simple typeface. Sometimes a brand also embraces sound or music, and even smells. All of these ingredients seem to be mixed up and then plastered apparently more or less at random over everything that the organisation owns or influences.”
I hope to give you a review of this book in the next few weeks.

So if the sum of all the parts of an identity adds up to the brand values, where is the harm in a flexible approach to their composition

I believe that making small changes to a logo/brand elements, to make it more suitable for different applications can be advantageous. These changes would usually be compositional, and there is a fine balancing act to perform to make it a successful solution.

My main argument is that three different logo compositions using the same iconography, colour scheme, fonts etc, still describes the overall brand ideals.

The example above is the identity for Hadfields, an old paint company (1966), developed by Wolf Olins. I’ve taken this example from pg 151 of A Smile in the Mind.
They use the logo elements consistently but in different ways according to it’s application. It creates interest in each piece of material but keeps the brand consistent.

If implemented, this approach will add countless pages to your corporate branding guidelines, but will open up a host of options for any designer that it is passed to. In my opinion it will make a range of branded materials more diverse, interesting and engaging.

If you introduce the idea of the ‘bendy logo’ to a brand early, it might just give you enough freedom in the future to have as much fun as Google. You can find an unofficial archive of ‘Google Doodles’ here.

Have you ever taken this approach to a client and been given the freedom to implement it?
Do you have a lot of clients that refuse any changes to their logo? How do you deal with it?
Why is this approach not used more widely?
I’d like to hear your thoughts.

If you enjoyed this post why not sign up to get automatic email updates whenever I post something new?
• Subscribe to email updates • Subscribe to my RSS feed
• Follow me on twitter • Join me on Facebook

- leave a comment!
 

© Ken Reynolds Design