For a brand, change can be vital, but uneasy. It costs millions and risks consumer loyalty because, as Will Gordon, Senior Vice President for Brand & Communications at Synovate, points out, “Most people dislike change – period.” Even the promises of higher quality, more options and better value somehow inconvenience us. More importantly, “Logo changes that signal positive change must be met in actuality or customers will feel tricked,” Gordon says.

Changing the packaging but not the content usually stinks of deceit to consumers. Gordon notes other pertinent questions: “Will it be clear why the logo changed – will it be ‘explained’ or will it be confusing?  Will the new design convey the intended benefits and promise? Most of these types of changes accomplish nothing and some actually denigrate the brand.”

The ultimate goal for any brand is to transition – smoothly – between having a logo and becoming an icon.

Tropicana’s packaging re-brand in January 2009 lasted just two months before being reverted. The re-brand misstep was a modern, clean-cut carton featuring a sans serif font, replacing the original logo, iconic orange and drinking straw, which indicated the product’s pureness. Complaints from consumers said that it looked like a generic store brand. Neil Campbell, president at Tropicana North America, claimed it wasn’t the quantity of complaints but that they “underestimated the deep emotional bond,” between consumer and brand.

In recent years, a number of other re-brands have instigated international commentary in a whip of social media frenzy. So what drives the change? “Well-guided changes can stem from strategy – focus on new markets, new customers or new distribution channels. Misguided changes are often tied to leadership or ownership changes that may or may not justify the associated expense and risk,” explains Gordon. If the logo is the face of a brand, it’s easy to see why consumers get upset. But in today’s faster-than-ever world, more and more logos are fighting for recognition amongst the crowd.

“Media clutter and complexity make it harder for the simplest of symbols to be seen, interpreted or understood. Many companies believe a simpler logo or packaging will be more easily recognised and absorbed in a nanosecond,” says Gordon.

The iTunes 10 release in September 2010 left the logo without the familiar CD image, initiating a short-lived Twitter account (@iTunes10icon) and a guide from MacLife about how to upgrade iTunes but maintained the old logo. Designers worldwide posted endless alternative logos online. According to Steve Jobs, Apple chose to “ditch the CD in the logo,” based on the projection that iTunes would outstrip CD sales in the second quarter of 2011. Noting Gordon’s cautionary words, Apple made their change before fulfilling that promise.

Perhaps the biggest logo change controversy remains the Gap debacle from October 2010 – a change which survived only one week. The unannounced Gap roll-out led to tweets like, “Seen new Gap logo yet? I think it definitely captures essence of this generation, that is: ‘meh’.” A Facebook fan wrote, “Epic fail by Gap. A hockey / baseball / football team can change logos because the identity is the team. A clothing retailer’s identity is the logo. You just sold the team.”

Despite President of Gap North America Marka Hansen’s statement that they were honouring the "heritage through the blue box while still taking it forward", design forum discussions that criticized the use of the Helvetica font (also used by 3M, Panasonic and American Apparel) pushed the company to suggest an open design submission. The company then came under fire for crowd-sourcing. A Facebook user commented “…it undermines and devalues the quality and commitment that highly-skilled professionals do and the ability for these designers to make a living...” Was this all just a marketing stunt? Most likely not – the move from backlash to backtrack undoubtedly cost Gap more than just dollars.

Fast-forward to January 2011, when Starbucks made the move from logo to icon by removing all visual elements but the Siren. A mixed online response criticised the marketing department and commented that “it feels like the Siren is lonely...” Others noted that the green ring ‘made’ the old logo. However, Starbucks’ reasons behind the change were clear – the company would focus on beverages like the Frappucino, marking its territory as a high-end beverage provider thinking “beyond coffee”, as signaled by CEO Howard Schultz during the unveiling.

“It’s clear that well designed and well-orchestrated changes that have clear reasons behind them can energize customers, ultimately strengthening their bond with the brand ­– like Starbucks, Apple, etc.” says Gordon. “Remember: It comes down to relevance, relevance, relevance.”

 For more information, please contact Will Gordon, Synovate Senior Vice President for Brand & Communications, at will.gordon@synovate.com.