Just call me the Excel spreadsheet of design.

Some days as a designer, I find myself feeling very anti-designer. The scores of commentary and self-important opinions we feel the need to unleash on each and every Armin Vit post can make my stomach turn.

Why do we insist we have the answer?

Take, for example the merger between United and Continental that had the design community in a huff over the decision to also merge the visual identities. (For the full recap, I defer to Armin here and with a follow-up here.)

Clearly the design community felt that the powers-that-be had it all wrong. And, interestingly enough, even Lippincott’s Connie Birdsal struggled to explain why the brand consultancy allowed this to happen under their watch. In a talk she recently gave, I watched as she maneuvered her way through the topic with comments like “these things happen… decisions can be made for reasons beyond design… sometimes we don’t win…” whilst progressively getting redder in the face.

Well, guess what? While the United Airlines identity may not win any design awards, a study published by the Harvard Business Review suggests that they get the last laugh.

The report studied 216 companies formed by large mergers that took place from 1997 to 2006. First they divided them into three groups on the basis of their corporate branding strategies (coined: assimilation, business as usual, and fusion) and then they analyzed the performance of each company’s stock from the date of the deal’s closing to three years after the merger was complete, and calculated the average return for each of the three groups relative to the market as a whole.

Sure, one could argue that it’s so many other factors that lead to this type of performance, but I still view this as a highly satisfying “so there!” to the design community. Great design is one thing, but performance and evidence-based results can be far more compelling.

I’ve been Google’d. A lot lately. And if you’ve arrived at this site as a result of a Google search, I apologize for the lack-luster results in your query.

I know this to be true because I occasionally check the [pitiful] traffic to this website. I also occasionally check the traffic to my company’s website and both have a lovely little feature that shows traffic sources. Somehow, my name in a Google search is the clear leader. By a lot.

Strange…

I see two plausible reasons for this. 1) There is someone more famous than I named Meghan Still who happens to get lesser SEO than I do, or 2) I’m just a new person in a new city who is meeting a lot of new people… these people happen to Google.

Discovering this, of course, caused a surge of panic. I quickly Google’d myself thinking “oh crap! What can people find out about me!?!” Unfortunately, my Facebook page was little help in clarifying that because I still can’t figure out what my settings block and don’t block. (And, even if you’re really bored, don’t bother going… there’s nothing there but a few really unflattering photos that I’ve been “tagged” in.)

Despite myself, I couldn’t help but think about these things that people may find (this page, my company’s page, a few odd photos, and an old article from my college paper) and how I felt about being defined by them. Like it or not, a person’s Google results are in many ways a snapshot of who they are. That’s what people are looking for in the first place, right?

The buzzwordy term for caring what people find is “personal branding.” I’m trying really really hard not to be someone that cares. The last thing I want to be is someone who embraces personal branding and cultivates it for their own gains. True, I work in branding… but branding for a company is a necessity. Branding for an individual is not.

The thing that scares me the most is to hear someone on the Real Housewives of Orange County say “this year I’m really going to focus on developing my personal brand.” Is it just me, or does that really translate to: “this year I’m going to over think who I am as a person, be painfully self-aware, and say and do things only because I’m trying to control what you think of me”?

I think what truly draws people to other people is authenticity. I know what draws me is real-ness, lack of ego, and those odd little connections you form with people over the most surprising things.

Tina Fey, for example, is very good at staying seemingly real and un-calculated. Perhaps it’s no surprise that her book is selling like hot cakes? I read it, my mother read it, my sister read it, my husband read parts of it over my shoulder, and the guy in front of me on the plane was reading it as I wrote this. Could the same be said for this book?

My hope is that Google is revealing something about me that is closer to Fey than fabricated… but maybe what I should really hope for is the ability to stop wondering.

Tweet

Brenna Ehrlich
Mashable

As I mentioned once before, I can be a little behind the curve when it comes to new technology. New, fancy methods of staying in touch and getting connected seem to be coming along all the time and, for me, QR Codes had fallen onto the list of “huh?”s.

It wasn’t until I saw this resume posted by a clever young man named Victor that the concept clicked for me.

What Victor made clear is that QR Codes may be what the world has been needing for quite a long time: a medium for bringing the tactile world directly into the digital world. Quickly. And easily. And, when used thoughtfully, it can be an opportunity to make someone smile or have some fun.

But an homage to QR is not actually why I’m writing this. The larger discovery is that perhaps the reason why I don’t feel that I “get” some of the newer innovations in technology is that I have yet to see them used to the their optimum capability.

To date, the best use I found for Twitter is to ask @HallsKC if they carry @MarioBadescu. I had my answer (“no”) in a matter of moments, which saved me a five minute drive to the store. (Arguably, however, I spent the same five minutes finding the Halls username, writing the tweet, cross checking the spelling of Badescu, and checking my @ messages for a response.)

Twitter, Facebook, QR Codes, and even things like everyday email, voicemail, blogs, etc. seem to run the gamut in terms of performance. At times they are a perfect medium and at other times they are a train wreck of horrific misuse.

I suppose there are only a few innovations that are going to get it right every single time. Here are a few I’ve thought of:

1. E-Z Pass
2. The little red light up things that restaurants hand out when you are waiting for a table.
3. Texting
4.
5.

(Suggestions are welcome.)

Perhaps what we should strive for is to think better about the mediums we have today and learn how to use them as best we possibly can. Moreover, we should recognize that the best opportunities for these new mediums may still be undiscovered and major breakthroughs in how we use them could still be on the horizon.

Thanks, Victor, for leading the cause.

Tweet

Gordon Bock
Rejuvenation Catalog

I’ve joined a tribe. A brand tribe, so wonderfully characterized in Marty Neumeier’s book the Brand Gap. It’s the tribe of Rejuvenation Classic American Lighting & House Parts. Is that a lame choice for my tribe? Some may think so but perhaps that’s part of the reason why joining has such a feeling of satisfaction.

Around two months ago my little family and I traded our rental townhouse in the Maryland suburbs of DC for a 1927 bungalow in Kansas City, Missouri. There are many things that prompted the move – none of which I need to go into here – but the relevant part is that buying this house realized a vision that my husband and I have always shared for our life together… finding an old home that needs some help, restoring original character, and making it our own. (Corny? Probably.)

Amidst the chaos of moving halfway across the country (and taking a hefty hiatus form this blog) I couldn’t help but peruse the web, at odd hours of the night, for all the furnishings and fixtures the house could have in its final form. This was when I discovered Rejuvenation and all the period specific light fixtures and door knobs and switchplates that I now obsess over. We placed an order or two (or three) but it wasn’t until the first delivery came last week that my self-proclaimed membership in the tribe was confirmed.

You see, the delivery included a catalog. And, unlike the website, the catalog takes you on a journey into the world of Rejuvination. As expected, the products and fixtures are displayed with clarity and detail that you can’t get on screen (which sends my heart a-pitter-patter at the sight of pressed glass cabinet knobs in “milk blue”) but, what’s not expected, is the clear invitation for tribal membership.

Take, for example, the small insets peppered throughout the catalog of memorable spaces of times gone by, coming from contributors like “John Knudstson of Roseburg, Oregon”. In his story he muses about his father’s workshop filled with his grandfather and great-grandfathers myriad of unmarked boxes that held everything from drill bits to gemstones.

John likes this kind of thing… I like this kind of thing too, John.

Then take the op-ed piece on page 132 (Page 132? Have I really spent that much time in this catalog?) called “Drive to Restore” by Gordon Beck, writer and former editor of Old-House Journal. “Some people look at an older house and immediately see problems,” he writes. “Old-house folks, though, look at the same house and only see possibilities.”

Needless to say, this is the point where I say, “Hey, that’s me… I see possibilities too… I’m an old-house folk!” But the scary part is – despite being so fully aware of the catalog’s intentions to get me to say just that – I say it anyway. And not just say it but relish it. And turn the pages with great fervor for what else my old house needs because, you know, I’m an old-house folk and that’s what we old-house folk do.

Perhaps I’m a fool. But perhaps I’m only human, as well? In an age where social borders are falling away, cultural fabric is deteriorating, and 30 million viewers are tuning into the same episode of American Idol to see who gets kicked off, it can only be a natural instinct to want to build walls of separation. That’s what brand tribes are all about; aligning oneself with the characteristics of a brand as a means for self identification. At the end of the day we all strive to be recognized as unique individuals and if a brand can find a way to tap into that and help us express it, then they should find a huge advantage in securing customer loyalty and growth.

Rejuvenation, for one, has landed an old-house person for life.

Tweet

Jon Bond
Quoted in Fast Company: The Future of Advertising

So many articles popping up these days about the state of advertising and the 30 second media-buy model being a thing of the past.

It’s written about here.
And here.
I even touched on it once before.

In short, the digital age is turning consumer purchasing paths inside-out and Madison Avenue is left in a tizzy. The industry is starting to catch on to the fact that media buys have been making more money for agencies than for their clients. Traditional advertsing is suddenly – gasp – not working.

This should come as a surprise to no one. When was the last time you made a purchase decision that was driven by a television or print ad? Likely, what your friends are saying, what you’ve seen vetted in blogs, and the places that have steered you well in the past are the resources you’re using when it comes to spending your cash.

Ad agencies are eager to jump into the digital space and spread their influence through new channels but it’s not easy. For example, Wieden + Kennedy’s innovative Web campaign for Old Spice garnered tons of publicity yet Ad Age speculated that the boost in sales may well have been due to a coupon.

While I feel terrible for the thousands of individuals who face losing employment because the agency they work for has been unable to catch up, there are actually a number of positive things to consider in this:

1. Clients win: Better prices, better work, and innovation are on the horizon.

2. Opportunities abound for little guys: Tech saavy start-ups and small companies now have the chance to compete with the WorldGroups and Omnicoms.

3. Our environment may improve: Half-baked promises and advertising gloss may soon be replaced with honesty and authenticity.

4. Brand lives on: This industry stays relevant no matter what the advertising/purchasing scenario. The need for identity and “perception control” (which is my new favorite way to define “brand”) continues to be valuable and relevant in the evolving advertising landscape.

And for the ad agency, it’s not all doom and gloom, either. Let’s not forget that advertising is still very real and very dangerous for atleast one category: children.

Case in point is the Pillow Pet that will be waiting under the Christmas tree for one very happy two-year-old, thanks to this ad that has been running relentlessly on PBS Kids.

I know for a fact that my daughter did not develop her deep desire for a puppy Pillow Pet (to be named “Cow”) as a result of product reviews or tallying “likes” on Facebook… this is 100% the power of advertising drilling straight into her soul.

Tweet

I have been listening to a lot of Design Matters lately. (Debbie Millman’s podcast that interviews designers that you’ve heard of or haven’t heard of yet but should have.) What I particularly like about it, is that the conversations don’t always center on design. With Milton Glaser she talks about being a good person. With Natalia Ilyin she talks about the concept of home.

With Marty Neumeier, however, she talks about branding. Having read his books, I was a bit un-enthused by this because I was hoping to get some fresh and off-the-cuff perspectives from the guy. The interview and his ideas, however, came off exactly as they do on the printed page with nothing new really sprinkled in.

What he did touch on was the evolution of branding and I was glad he did because I had wholly forgotten this point that he has made before. (And it’s a good one.)

He says that in the beginning, marketing or positioning a product was all about answering the question “what does it do?” Logical, of course, because – back in the day – new products typically served purposes previously left unaddressed. There wasn’t the myriad of selection that we have today and a product could stand on its own. Once that started to change, the question became “How is it different?” Again, logical. If you’ve got competition in the market, the surest way to get ahead is by communicating why your product or service is different and/or better.

These days, that idea has totally taken root and just about everyone who offers anything has points of differentiation. Often, branding is still defined by this question and money is still made by helping organization’s answer it.

Is that enough? Neumeier says no. There’s a new and far more poignant question in town: “If I buy that thing (or support that organization) what does that make me?”

Sidenote: I hesitated on the word “new” in the last paragraph and realized that I’m writing this post at the risk of sounding really out-of-touch. You may be saying to yourself “gaaawd. This is so 2006.” And you would be right, my well-read and educated friend. But as much as this blog is for you, it’s for me. And it serves as a place to record thoughts and ideas, even if they’ve been gathering dust in some small corner of my brain for several years.

Anyway, back to the question. Think about it. When you buy or subscribe to something, would you not agree that you consciously or subconsciously ask yourself “does that suit me?” or “does this agree with the person that I am?”

For example, when I need a new pair of jeans I go to Levis despite the fact that jeans are sold in nearly every apparel outlet known to man. I don’t go to Ralph Lauren because I’m not a country club WASP. I don’t go to BeBe because I’m not downtown Julie Brown. I don’t go to Kmart because I like to think I have regard to taste. I go to Levi’s because I’m plain and no frills and like things that have heritage. I’m aware that my jeans may say something about me and I want to be sure it’s something that won’t make me blush. (I’m fine with “plain”.)

Every organization should pre-empt this question. Having a brand is about having an identity and giving people every opportunity to try it on for size.

Tweet

Evan Metropoulos
Bloomberg Business Week: Keeping Pabst Blue Ribbon Cool

I read this article a few weeks ago in Bloomberg Business Week and immediately felt the need to dissect it, here at this blog. The problem, I found, is that the subject of Pabst Blue Ribbon and managing its brand for growth is a very very complex issue. Worse is that I’m merely trying to make a passing comment on the matter… the Metropoulos brothers have the very real task of not f’ing this up.

Let me back up…

Rob Walker
New York Times: The Back Story

There are a lot of things going in the world that I just don’t get. I’m only just starting to understand the value of Twitter and Facebook is still utterly and totally lost on me.

The new example of time-filler (and people complain about being too busy, you know?) described in Rob Walker’s NYT article is a way to attach hidden value and a back story to inanimate objects through the use of barcodes that you can scan with your phone. The scan will turn up factoids or maybe even a video. I’m pretty sure you can adapt existing bar codes to do this. Or maybe it’s just fancy custom ones that you stick on. Or maybe it’s both. I’m not sure… I was distracted…

I think I was trying to figure out what the point was and getting frustrated with the world’s eagerness to adopt anything that is new and cool and gadgety even when it doesn’t make a whole lot of sense. Authenticity and transparency seem to be really big themes these days and — while the theory behind that is really appealing — the end result just feels like information overload and mixed messages about what is actually meaningful and valuable in our lives.

I Neflixed Art & Copy last night which is a documentary about advertising – an industry many of us scoff at for generating mindless clutter and environmental garbage in the name of making of buck. (Is that too harsh?)

For everything this industry does wrong, however, this documentary reminds us that there have been a few instances where they have done things right. And not just kinda right but really right. The kind of right that cuts straight to the heart and soul of things that matter to people and speaks to them on a more primal level than advertising was ever intended to do.

The most successful ads, it seems, take a product or service and find the story within it. Something that resonates with people as a truth in life. This can be presented in a way that makes you laugh (“I can’t believe I ate the whole thing”) or a way that makes you appreciate the better parts of society (“It’s morning in America”) or a way that inspires you to get off your tuff (“Just do it”).

In all cases, these ads resonated with a vast audience and inspired support for the brand while having only a peripheral connection to what they’re actually endorsing (active ingredients, a presidential candidate, athletic equipment).

How can this apply to branding?

In this field (branding), the majority of firms I can think of define their service as developing a means of identifying their clients and potentially honing in on ways to differentiate them from their competitors. The delivery is most often a logo, a style manual, and a cohesive range of communication materials, a website, and other collateral.

There are definitively positive results, here: the organization will undoubtedly appear more credible, there will be increased recognition, and they may be able to convey a hint of their personality before saying hello.

But is that the best we can do?

In branding, we have the unique opportunity of identifying truths that matter and that have a profound influence on individuals at the very inception (or re-inception) of an organization. Perhaps it should be our job to tell a story in an emotive way from the get-go.

I propose we ask better question to get to the heart of why a certain product or service actually matters. (And I mean really matters – not just in the way that the organization wants you to believe.) Once that is revealed, stories can be told, a deeper connection to the audience can be made, and the brands we develop can actually have a soul.

One could argue that you can’t tell a story in a logo… and I absolutely agree. Logos, however, are not brands. Unfortunately they are often where a branding process starts – save for the ocassional strategy document – and I wonder if that needs to change. Perhaps the place to start is actually the most complex element with the greatest number of components? This way the full story can be explored as a cohesive whole (considerations on the brand promise, language, tone of voice, imagery, typography, color, etc.) and the individual aspects of the brand may be extracted to fill that all important style manual.

Am I alone on this?

Tweet

Stephanie Strom
New York Times: YMCA Is Downsizing to a Single Letter

The YMCA has announced it’s re-branding and name change to “the Y” which was described by their chief marketing officer as “a way of being warmer, more genuine, more welcoming, when you call yourself what everyone else calls you.”

Maybe so, but can’t you call yourself what everyone else calls you without making a legal and editorial requirement change?

Editor’s Note: This new brand announcement represents a transition in the correct way to refer to the Y in writing. “The Y” should be used whenever referring to the collective organization. “The” should be lowercase unless it is used at the beginning of a sentence. YMCA should be used when referring to a specific location, i.e., “The YMCA of Greater Louisville.”