Yesterday
I received an email from the President of Baylor University reassuring alumni that despite the advice of a "leading national branding consultant"
the university would not replace the interlocking BU logo on the
helmets of the football team.
At first I felt some sympathy for
the leading national branding expert because this is tough PR to
overcome. But then I realized it was their own fault because they
violated Rule 3 of the Rogers Marketing Code™.
The rules are (subject to change at anytime):
- Thou shalt not send advertising in text messages to people's cell phones without prior consent (that means you AT&T).
- Thou shalt not use your marketing powers for evil.
- Logos don't matter.
In
the case of the Baylor Incident the alumni may have a point. The
leading national branding expert wanted to replace the logo with a word
mark spelling out Baylor so the team would be more easily identified on
TV and in pictures. Arguably there are more reasons to keep the
affiliation of the football team unclear, the most recent season being
just one example.
In general logos do not matter for three reasons.
1)
No one buys your product or supports your cause because of the logo.
And they will not refuse to buy your product or support your cause
because of a logo. Google could have a logo using one color and Courier
type and it would still be the most powerful brand because they have a
great product that solves a need. The Salvation Army badge has not changed in years, and is a little difficult to read, but thousands of people support this organization, despite the logo, because they do something that matters. Instead of arguing over blue vs green or circles vs
squares invest in finding ten more ways to add value for your
stakeholders.
2) Logo projects are enormously expensive,
particularly in the time and energy they take from your organizations
leaders. In most organizations a significant amount of highly emotional
time is required from senior leaders, like the President of Baylor for example, because of the common
misconceptions that logos do matter. Unscrupulous marketers violating
rule 2 above convince unsuspecting people that all the tradition and
symbolism of your organization can be magically captured in a new logo.
Your leaders then spend a large amount of time viewing different
versions of the new charm in various colors, shapes and sizes convinced
that somehow, somewhere a logo can be designed that upon sight will
transfix all who see it with the mission and values of the
organization. Inevitably this turns out not to materialize and then the
compromising begins. Less magical versions are shown to still more people who
all have different and passionate input until some rational person
finally makes a choice (which only a minority will actually like) or ends the
whole disappointing affair. An air of defeat hovers around the
marketers who failed to use their powers of the dark arts to find the
all powerful symbol. I have never seen a logo project that ended with
broad, passionate support. But I have seen plenty, like this Baylor
example, that triggered highly negative emotional responses.
3)
Most organizations do not spend a comparable amount of emotion and time developing a clearly articulated
message on the value you provide to your stakeholders--which is infinitely
more productive. Unless everyone in your organization can convincingly
and consisently answer the question "what is it we do--that no one else
does today--that advances the mission of the organization" there is only
one marketing priority for you. And it's not a logo.
