(or how American Apparel took over the world)
In our early classes, we look at Gestalt principles and learn that people are coded to be a bit lazy — that we tend to see things in groups, lines and structured arrangements... and even if they're not truly there, we kind of make them up simply to put our minds at ease. As communication designers, knowing these things helps us connect to our audiences more effectively. The same principle helps movie makers make more enjoyable films. It helps chefs make more interesting dishes.
When we look at brands, we can also look at these same tendencies. We can look at the sentiments of stability, trust, and comfort that these ideas bring to our minds... These are things that brands generally strive to achieve.
[Speaking of uncomfortable: When your critically acclaimed (and awesome) show is canceled, and all that's left are re-runs and bottles of cleaner on the discount rack...]
IN THE CLASSROOM
In GR604: The Nature of Identity, the challenge for students is to re-discover the soul of a dead, dying or defunct brand. The soul is not what a brand makes, but what it stands for.
Avon isn't about make-up, it's about women and opportunities. The soul of Mary Kay is similar, but a bit different, a bit more business-focused — and with a pick Cadillac — a lot more demonstrative. Pan Am is about cultural exchange. Maxtor is about preserving information and memories. Tupperware is about organizing the precious things in your life.
After choosing their brand and doing a lot of research, students are then challenged to envision where else their chosen brand might be able to take an offering like this. If Mary Kay was about opening doors to business opportunities for women, in 1963, that meant (to them) selling make-up door to door. What could that mean in today's context? What kind of service could they offer? What kind of educational offerings or co-branding opportunities could exist? This obviously goes far beyond the logo. This is also why this class lives at the graduate level. It's a lot of fun and yields some amazing projects. Our students can not only make pretty things, but know how things work — and most importantly why they work.
However, in the knowing of how and why, the idea of structured thinking comes into play... or as I've begun to call it in class: Diagrammatical thinking.
I often say:
"If you can't draw it, you probably can't really explain it."
But what does this mean and how can a student absorb, synthesize, and apply it...? Well, first: Words can often unnecessarily and accidentally obfuscate.
See what I did there?... A fancy word like obfuscate can often confuse the issue. Tone, delivery and all sorts of linguistic smoke and mirrors often hide what's really going on — and sometimes completely accidentally. Not that falsehoods can't be hidden in charts and graphs, too, but we're not really talking about purposeful deceit here. We're talking about trying to communicate more clearly.
I propose: If you can diagram something out well, there's a pretty good chance that you can clearly explain it. As they say, a picture is worth a thousand words. So, a doodle must be worth a least a hundred.
Otherwise, as it all applies to structured thinking, we might apply a few principles to help us along:
WORK WITH FAMILIAR STRUCTURES
Like the way in which we tell any story, if we begin to tell a brand story based on something an audience is already vaguely familiar with, there will at least be a point of entry and something for them to grab on to. When looking at your brand, is there a way to look at it through a simple, yet wide lens? Can you categorize it in broad terms yet one the brand can adapt to? Sometimes this can be location based: home, work, school. Sometimes this can be life-stage based: baby, teen, adult. Sometimes this can be more holistic: mind, body, spirit. Whatever the breakdown, using forms — and groupings— that are familiar will help understanding.
Familiar forms: Forms could take the shape of a lot of things, but you can look to familiar information graphics for a good place to start. One thing to note, the form is structural, not illustrative. It's not helpful if that circle becomes a Christmas wreath because there's a lot of noise associated with that.
- Venn Diagrams
- Scatterplots
- Line (XY) charts
- Trees (organic structures)
- Maps (urban structures)
- Instruction manuals (informational structures)
- ...
Familiar Groupings: These things often come in threes, but could be from 2 to 6... past 6 it gets hard to process.
- Food / Clothing / Shelter
- Mind / Body / Spirit
- Work / Home / School / Play
- Sex / Drugs / Rock+Roll
- Proteins / Carbs / Fats
- Spring / Summer / Fall / Winter
- Air / Fire / Water / Earth
- Inner / Outer
- Vocals / Guitar / Bass / Drums
- ...
- (Note: the above aren't literally brand groupings, just groupings we're all culturally familiar with that tend to roll off the tongue)
Sometimes it can be where your brand might have otherwise had an effect and will have an effect in the future — and the diagrams can show areas of new opportunity (or conversely, areas of previously missed opportunity).
For instance, in the below example, we might look at Greyhound — a tired travel brand. Currently, they only sell a seat on the bus, but they're also one of the last remaining carriers to own The Great American Roadtrip. Knowing the new places travel brands are needing to go to uncover brand loyalty, where else can Greyhound go? In this example, we visualized the trip as a holistic experience (a variation of a scatter plot diagram) with 2 sections: Journey and Destination... with 2 subsets each: On the Bus / Off the Bus and Before you Arrive / While You’re There. In this diagram, “a seat on the bus” occupies very little space, but think about it: What else could Greyhound offer in each of these areas? There are a lot of opportunities when you look at it through this lens... from travel stops and sightseeing opportunities to concierge services and loyalty (badge) programs.
ESTABLISH PARALLEL TERMS
Keeping things even is important. In writing, this idea is called “parallel structure” where we strive to have the terms in agreement. In philosophy, we have logical fallacies due to the misuse of terms. In layman’s terms, this is often said as “comparing apples to apples”... or in the illustration below, we’ll talk about pie. It's crucial when establishing the above-mentioned groupings that the terms are even — that they not only have some sort of inter-connected relationship to one another (in this case, they're all wedge shaped), but when viewed as a collection, they are a relatively even distribution of the terms (with nothing left out) and that they're truly parts of the same whole.
We might be initially fooled, but eventually something doesn't sit quite right (in the same way quiche really doesn't still well next to pizza in the same pan even though they're both the same shape).
The bottom line: keeping things even — and in order — is important.
[A STUDY OF PIE: While people strive to have equilibrium, they will also force things into order if necessary (a type of Isomorphism) and we can often fool ourselves into thinking that because the shapes of quiche, pizza and blackberry pie are similar that they might share lots of other traits... when really, they don’t. Of the pies above, the left-most pie isn’t balanced at all, really (although it might look like it is)... and the right most pie is the most balanced of all. Why? Because while the middle pie is comprised all fruit pies which are similar (and better than the left one), the right-most pie is all made of berries which are very closely related in shape and form (even biologically — all from the genus Rubus). While we don’t expect you to get bio-nerdy here, when sorting things visually and conceptually, try to have things as balanced and evenly distributed as possible.]
BEWARE OF OUTLIERS
Just as people have a need for structure, that structure has boundaries. When those lines are crossed, things get (cognitively) confusing. While it might make sense for a brand to extend in one direction, if they extend in another, it might get weird. Weird is bad. Brands need to find new places to extend themselves in order to find new places to... make money. However, they have to do it carefully.
[Discount stores are a great place to find brand outliers that didn't work in the marketplace. What would Ed Hardy beer taste like? Bad cologne and regret?]
For instance: Mr. Clean makes things that keep the house clean. He hangs out in the kitchen and helps around the house. When Mr. Clean extends that into things that swish the Mr. Clean juice around (like Mr. Clean branded mop), that makes sense, right? Totally.
However, Mr. Clean’s Auto-Dry is the one product that Mr. Clean makes that leaves the comfort of the home. He leaves the house and goes into the driveway and starts to mess with the car. If we were to draw a diagram of this, the dot that represents the Auto-Dry would be considered an “outlier”.
In the world of brands, outliers aren’t generally good. In this case, it didn't take long for the Mr. Clean team to see that it seemed weird, too.
In the case of the projects our students are tackling (and maybe in general), it's best to limit or eliminate them until you have a good footing. In some cases, this is why brands establish sister brands or even parent brands... so that good ideas have a place to go.
RECOGNIZE ACORNS AND TREES
For many brands, they are an acorn and they really should be a tree... or they're an acorn in need of a tree. In the same way that we have a need for structure, as consumers and people, we also have a need for structural and cognitive stability.
Let's oversimplify a fairly famous example: Disney. When Disney Animation Studios made its name known by way of a mouse, it would be hard to grow that brand into what we know today through a simple animation studio. It needed something larger to spread that spirit. It needed to become "The Wonderful World of Disney" (The Walt Disney Company) — the tree — of which Disney Animation Studios was an acorn. Disney Cruise Lines could also fall as an acorn... as could Disney Parks + Resorts... and Disney Media. Sometimes the soul of a brand is even larger than the acorn itself and needs to grow into a much larger tree and spread its branches out a bit. So, Walt (or a wise friend) had the insight to grow that acorn into a tree (and have it re-drop the same acorn... along with many others). Now, as long as the brand extension retains the soul and mission of Disney, it will remain cognitively on-brand in the hearts and minds of Disney fans everywhere.
Sometimes, brands invent their parents like Google did with Alphabet. Sometimes they get acquired like Dropcam did by Nest in order to find a proper home — and then get acquired by Google. There're all sorts of paths, but the result is the same: A structure that allows for expansion and growth rather than one that limits it... and not just financially, but cognitively and culturally... people need to believe in it as much as engineers and bankers. More, really.
In the case of our student projects, perhaps Delorean Motor Corporation needs to expand past motors to reach its full potential. Perhaps High Times (Magazine) needs to branch out past the "Times" (the magazine) to promote cannabis literacy. Perhaps American Apparel could look inward before it looks outward...
KNIT IT INTO THE NARRATIVE
A few weeks ago, I wrote a story one morning to illustrate how structure (and current events) can actually fuel some ideas. In the below, a dying brand (American Apparel), the concern surrounding the 2016 election, and Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs are merged into a brand narrative that is on one hand very far fetched... but also somewhat believable because it's based on things that we're already familiar with: current events, past history, and existing structure ...
The Rise of The American Initiative*
In 1989, Dov Charney launches American Apparel with the hopes of rebuilding America — and fashionistas — from the inside out: starting with underwear.
27 years later, the US needs a change of underpants — and Presidential hopeful Donald Trump promises to “make America great again.” In November 2016, Trump is elected to the White House. His plans for rebuilding the American economy fall flat almost instantly sending the US into another economic recession causing the loss of millions of jobs and creating despair across the country. Never underestimating the power of a good slogan, Trump still promising to "make America great again" manages to capture a second term in 2020… The United States is a dark and dreary place.
In the midst of it all, in the spring of 2017, Dov Charney, after years of scandal, is brought up on charges of sexual misconduct and sentenced to eight years in prison. During this time, coupled with the collapsing economy, the company he founded (American Apparel) has drifted into obscurity having been since been sold to off to a larger holding company, and manufacturing moved offshore… thus diluting the original American Apparel spirit.
By the time Charney is released from prison, American Apparel has closed its last stores due to increased competition and the loss of its unique point-of-view. During his time of isolation and self-reflection, Charney has had the time to conceive a larger plan. He knows that — after being run into the ground by a megalomaniac leader — the US will not be saved by underwear alone. In 2024, after his release, Charney gathers a small group of like-minded investors and regains control of the American Apparel brand, changing the name of the the collective to "The American Initiative”… of which American Apparel is a designated as sub-brand. He realizes that his original vision was just an acorn. He needs to grow the tree.
Sensing a weakness in the new, current political infrastructure, Charney’s new group, The American Initiative —already growing in popularity having been bolstered by Charney’s marketing talents — approaches the new political administration with a plan: a partnership between government and private enterprise that will rebuild America from within… not unlike the programs started under the late US president Franklin D. Roosevelt (WPA, TVA, etc.). Charney is appointed to a newly formed cabinet position: Secretary of Infrastructure and — together with The American Initiative — launches several new programs in 2025 under the "American ____” name.
Charney knows that people respond best when there’s a frame of reference... and that people have inherent needs. Therefore a frame of reference that references need — like Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs — would serve well as an ideal underlying structure for his new idea. Charney outlines a multi-tier structure starting with the most basic needs: physiological. Staying true to Maslow’s diagram, this includes food, clothing, and shelter. This suits Charney well, given that he has deep experience with one of these three — Apparel.
Tier One: [Physiological: Food/Clothing/Shelter]… American Agriculture // American Apparel // American Trades
The initial offering is followed by the second wave of brands (2030) based on the more personal and family needs of safety, security, and belonging:
Tier Two: [Psychological: Security/Well-being/Safety]… American Security // American Medical // American Financial
While The American Initiative grew, Charney picked up the nickname “Papa-bear" after one of his interns learned that “Dov” was Hebrew for bear… It seemed that with his renewed 'nurturing, yet hungry' nature, the name seemed to be an apt fit — and it stuck. And in true form, Papa-bear Charney keeps going: In 2037, the third installment of The American Initiative took on more tertiary needs including personal transportation:
Tier Three: [Personal: Commercial/Recreational/Cultural] ... American Retail // American Automotive // American Entertainment
The last wave (2040) is based on the top of Maslow’s pyramid.
Tier Four: [Social: Communal/Spiritual] … The American Ideology
After a decade of runaway success, Charney is not only a US hero, but a world-wide figurehead. His nickname Papa-bear — helped by Charney’s increasing physical age — morphed and shortened simply to “Father”. in 2040, Father Charney establishes the first national spiritual/ideological platform — and with no one else yet groomed to step into a leadership position, Father takes the helm as figurehead and messiah.
Father uses his influence to reverse most tax-based protection on current church properties and bowing to new financial and social pressures, the majority of Judeo-Christian churches crumble within the first decade as the popularity of American Ideology grows … by 2050, the US is back on top, the popularity of The American Ideology has swept the country, and The American Initiative seems to have worked to indeed “make America great again” where Trump could not.
In 2051, Father makes his boldest move yet and announces his intentions to run for the seat of the US Presidency in 2052.
Given his popularity, he runs unchallenged and is appointed to the role. Having had 20 years of deep inside influence, Father forces sweeping political reform in three steps: [1] In 2053, he consolidates the other two branches of the government (Congress and Supreme Court) into a 50 person self-appointed council (chosen from the ranks of The American Initiative brands) known simply as “The Family". [2] In 2054, he abolishes term limits of the Presidency ensuring that there will not be a clocking ticking in the background. [3] Lastly, in 2054, at 85 years of age, Dov Charney … Father …declares himself Overseer, or sole monarch, of the United States, ushering in a new era of hope and prosperity … all based on the soul of the original American Apparel: to rebuild America from within.
(*yes... fiction)
[Edit: The above was written in early October 2016... In November 2016, Donald J. Trump was elected as the 45th President of the United States. In January 2017, American Apparel was sold and closed all of its stores. Truth can be stranger than fiction.]
Comments