We know that people have a need to wrap things up, compartmentalize, and see things in tidy boxes. It's how we're wired. When creating communications, we keep that tendency in mind and find ourselves boiling down complex ideas into more manageable bites, or diagrammed out via doodles... or both.
The framework of the universe that a brand creates is no different. The idea behind Mr. Clean is just as easily drawn as it is conceptualized... but when drawn, you can see how something might live outside of the "brand universe" it has created.
In our branding classes, I encourage students to "draw it out" as well. Following my mantra: If you can't draw it, you probably can't properly explain it... by drawing out how a brand presents itself (and where it lives and/or doesn't live) can help to structure it in any number of positive ways for both the designer and the audience... generally helping to frame it in the minds of both.
These types of frameworks generally live as a variant of existing chart types, most commonly a Venn diagram and a line (X/Y) or scatterplot-type chart. But past that, what terms would be considered? Where would you start to think about what to chart?
One way is to remember the idea of keywords... and buzzwords. Buzzwords are different from the lofty keywords that serve as brand mantras. They're important yet pragmatic words that probably are within something like a Mission Statement or Brand Description.
For instance: the new Blackberry might be about “securing communications between government and business” [Mission]… The Keywords might have been innovation, strength, and reliability which are far too vague for this exercise but might have yielded some aspirational ideas earlier on. Buzzwords might be things like: business, government, people, secure, security, confidential, communication, information, and data… these words aren't necessarily aspirational, but something that underscores and is weaved within the brand.
Now that you have some ideas, how can you apply them to existing models?
First, you'd look over the terms and think which might be interrelated and if they are parts of a whole (or a whole itself) or things that might have ranges. This will help determine which chart might be best.
The Venn Diagram (Whole/Parts)
The Venn diagram looks at terms and their relationship to one another. More specifically, for this purpose, it looks at one trait and the parts that make it up (the whole and its requisite parts). In this model, the terms above can be explored a bit. In the case of the Venn diagram, it's important to only explore one term at a time (and the parts).
Again, taking from the idea of grouping, maybe we can group an approach like this:
people/places/things...
• [people] who the brand effects
• [places] where the brand effects them
• [things] what part of the whole is the brand effecting (dissection of one trait)
If I were to look at Blackberry example from the people/places/things idea:
[people]: I think: Who is securely communicating? … Well, business and government. In this case, I’d draw two overlapping circles: (business) + (government) with a thick box around it labeled [secure communications]. This might be a good way to look at Blackberry. Maybe a third player might be involved: Academia. In this model, the whole is the idea of "secure communications provided by Blackberry" and the parts are government, business, and academia.
[places]: I might look at secure and think: Where are these communications secured? I might imagine the “state” of communication: physical or virtual… or how they’re delivered: through the 5 senses (with a focus on the obvious two: sight / sound)… for this, since Blackberry used to do only digital, written (text) communication, it might be more interesting to show how they’ve expanded into the physical (printed... and even in-person) and visual (pictures) realms. I’d also draw the same two circles, but I might subdivide into categories past that.
[things]: I might look at the word communication and think: What makes up communication? In this way, I might try to take the multitude of ways we communicate and boil them down into 6 major areas (which is convenient because my logo has six sides): For this, I’d have to remember the idea about “pie” and keep this pie chart balanced: both flavor and slice size. I’d start with a brainstorm and list all of the types of communication: emails, love letters, hand gestures, whistles, texts, voice memos… and I might have to invite a few friends over to come up with ideas and help to categorize later (and past the simple physical/virtual idea above). I’d probably come up with: some themes: data versus conversation / sight versus sound / live versus recorded … and then I’d start to subdivide from there. I could do the same for the idea of secure: What could that be comprised of?
The Line/Scatterplot Chart (Ranges v. Ranges)
For a Line (X/Y) chart, your brand needs to have two traits that are meaningful to one another as they increase: like “love over time” (i.e.: my love for you increases over time). With this type, you're charting terms that have ranges within them.
Using the above example I might take the same buzzwords and think: Are there levels, numbers, or ranges involved here?
Security: level of security
People: Numbers of people involved
Communication: complexity of communication (text to multimedia)
Biz/Gov: Levels of “security clearance” … based off of the idea of national security clearance.
And then I would think: Which have a relationship to one another?
- [increasing level of security] vs [numbers of people involved] … At any necessary level, there are options for an number of people. [ultra-encryption data transmission for one person) or (casual surveillance monitoring for a company meeting]
- [increasing level of security] vs. [levels of “security clearance”] … Hmm. That doesn’t make as much sense. Not everything has a relationship to one another in the same dynamic way.
- [increasing level of security] vs [complexity of communication] … Ok. That makes more sense...
Focusing on terms that are core to what the brand is about can be a good way to look at the way your brand is presented to the world in the “brand universe” view.
Comments