Logo Does Not Equal Brand
“I have a brand! See? Here’s my logo.”
This simplistic view of branding is as tempting to overworked marketers as it is to the CEO that doesn't want to think about funding a full-out brand effort. It's also a lot easier to understand than the complex art of true branding, which evokes multidimensional meaning and association to communicate tons of information through the placement of simple visual, verbal and auditory stimulie (i.e., messages). Yeah. Like a logo.
Even though it's understandable to want to simplify complexity, "keep it simple" is not really a compelling justification for a reputable should-know-better industry group that recently hyped a strategic brand seminar this way – “Strategic branding [makes] the tactics of branding work best-from advertising to great graphic design,” implying that branding is a result of hook lines and logo design.
The best brands do use logos and other visual elements to evoke positive and deep associations for their audience, but the professional marketer – like the people who are putting on that seminar above – really should know better than to confuse the graphic design with the associated meaning underlying the brand itself.
Good marketers know that a strong brand evokes emotional associations with its logo, but why is it the logo and other visual elements don’t constitute the brand itself? Where does the experience underlying the association really come from? These are some of the issues B2B Marketing Excellence explores in our professional development courses on strategic branding (next course May 8, 2008), but let’s examine the basics. Come to the course if you want to understand the subject in depth and learn how to make branding work for your company or client base, but absorb the simple meaning of the concept here.
