Here’s some interesting research that looks at Apple’s branding and its impact on viewers:
[Researchers at Duke University] found that exposing people to a brand’s logo for 30 milliseconds will make them behave in ways associated with that brand …
Surveys found that people felt similarly about the two companies in every way except creativity, where Apple came out ahead, and competence, which was IBM’s perceived strength. After exposing them to the brands, the researchers asked subjects to describe as many uses for a brick as they could.
Most people mentioned a door stop or a paperweight. “But the subjects who had seen Apple’s logo also came up with uses like tying it around my roommate’s foot and throwing him in a deep pond … “
So Apple’s brand makes you a creative psychopath. This follows Scott Magdalein’s recent post, Brands Are Bigger Than Logos. Your logo is the figurehead for your brand; when people see it, do they feel creative? Bold? Confused? Your brand is who you are; your logo is a way to reinforce your brand at a glance. (link via clusterflock)
brad
April 9, 2008
I’m starting to believe that our church’s logo is of almost no importance. If a brand is bigger than a logo, and the brand is carried in the hearts of minds of church members, then what significance is a logo? I’m pushing for our church’s website to have no logo visible on it anywhere. How counter-cultural is that!?
Brian Jones
April 9, 2008
I loved this post. For the past 4 years we’ve been without an official logo. Primarily because we’re still trying to figure out what we want to be when we grow up. I’m passing this on to our staff.
Press on,
Brian Jones
http://www.brianjones.com
Laure
April 10, 2008
It seems to me that getting rid of your logo or having no logo it a step in the wrong direction. Certainly it’s better to have no website than a bad website, but how will people know what church the site is for if there is no logo?
You’ll probably answer with “there will be text that says the name of the church.” But, you’ll have to pick a typeface that reflects your church brand, right?
Voila! Logo.
Jason Faber, Marketing Ministries
May 22, 2008
Having a logo is as critical as having a face that goes with your name.
Let me explain, when you are introduced by your friend to someone you’ve never met before, your name and your face go hand in hand in identifying your uniqueness. Most people will recognize another by their face first, before their name.
Your name and your face will be logged into their memory under “experience”, but its up to you (or the church) to deliver on the experience. The greater the experience, the greater its committed to long term memory.
The logo is the primary brand’s identity. It helps people to visually recall you (or your church). This eliminates confusion, and we all know who the ultimate author of confusion is.
I will add, however, in terms of branding priority — the name needs to be addressed before the logo itself– especially when it comes to our mass-media culture. We’ve done re-branding of ministries, and we always start with the name. Get a great name, and design a face that’s easy to look at… and now the real work begins…
michael kern
August 1, 2008
Well said, Jason.
We’re a visual society. If your church (brand) isn’t represented visually by a logo it will be some other visual symbol of your church – a building or whatever else if most familiar with people. If there’s nothing to connect with visually you’ll miss opportunities to connect with people and build familiarity and trust.
Branding IS about what’s in the hearts and minds of the people in your church – your internal audience. It’s influenced their collective experience, which hopefully reflects the results of strategic leadership and planning. Your logo can reflect that.
What about people checking out your church? They probably look at your website now before they step through your door. Why should they come to your church? What makes you different? Your logo tells a story. Again, it can be an asset that reflects these values.
As to the Apple viewers saying a brick could be used to tie around someone’s foot – it may be psychopathic, but I think you’ll agree that it’s more creative than a doorstop (- which is not an endorsement to do so)…