Brand logo redesign

Evolutionary versus Revolutionary Brand Logo Change:

Higher Degrees of Brand Logo Change Hurt Brand Recognition for Highly

Brand Conscious Consumers

Bo van Grinsven en Enny Das

b.van.grinsven@vu.nl

• Introduction

• Examples of logo redesigns

• Studies on logo redesigns

• We developed an experimental paradigm to

provide rigid tests of the effects of objectified

degrees of logo changes on consumer responses

Evolutionary and revolutionary logo redesigns:

- Evolutionary redesigns: without losing or changing brand identity or brand values.

- Revolutionary redesigns: are typically associated with major strategic shifts, like mergers, name-changes, or bankruptcy.

Evolutionary versus revolutionary changes

Hypotheses 1 & 2

New and unfamiliar elements will demand more attention and more capacity to be processed and stored in the memory system.

H1: An increase in degree of change, decreases brand recognition

A single exposure may be sufficient to store logos that have undergone a slight adjustment, but may not suffice to store substantial logo redesigns.

H2: Increases in exposure induce increases in brand recognition in particular for substantial degrees of logo change.

Evolutionary versus revolutionary changes

Brand Consciousness

Brand Consciousness: a personality trait that indicates the degree to which a consumer is oriented in buying well-known branded products (Sprotles & Kendall, 1986; Shim & Gehrt, 1996; Liao & Wang, 2009).

Consumers perceive the purchase and consumption of products to be ‘vehicles for self-expression’ (Belk, 1988, and Sirgy, 1985, in: Nan & Heo, 2007, p.67).

Changes in product information, like a brand logo redesign could affect the perceived consumer-brand relationship:

Highly brand conscious consumers are sensitive for this kind of information

H3: Increases of degree of logo change negatively affect brand recognition, in particular for highly brand conscious consumers.

Evolutionary versus revolutionary changes

• Study 1 - Participants and design

• A preliminary study to test the effects of degree of logo change

• 3 (degree of change: no change, small change, substantial change) between subjects design.

• 121 undergraduates (75% female, Mage = 20.4, SD = .43)

01/08/14

Evolutionary versus revolutionary changes

• Materials Study 1• Redesigned by graphic designer,

• Based on Müller, Kocher, and Crettaz (2011)

• All FMCG Brands

• Combination of word mark & and brand logo

• Pre-tested materials (N = 20): t(8) = -19.83 , p < .001

01/08/14

Evolutionary versus revolutionary changes

• Measure• Brand Recognition: Adjusted Lexical Decision

Task (Meyer & Schvaneveldt, 1971).• Because brand recognition is a spontaneous,

unconscious process.

• Recognize whether you see an existing vs non-existing word

• We used pictures instead of words

01/08/14

Evolutionary versus revolutionary changes

• Results• H1: An increase of degree of logo change decreases brand

recognition: F (2,116) = 4.57, p = .012.• Bonferroni post-hoc: no vs small change, p > .05• no vs substantial change, p = .013, small vs

substantial, p > .05

01/08/14

Evolutionary versus revolutionary changes

• Study 2 - Participants and design• 3 (degree of change: no change, small

change, substantial change) x 2 (Exposure: 1 vs 3 times) between subjects design (brand consciousness as continuous moderator).

• 148 participants (56.9% female, Mage = 25.03, SD = 7.82)

01/08/14

Evolutionary versus revolutionary changes

• Materials Study 2

• Different product categories • FMCG, computer brand, financial sector• National and international brands• Redesigned according Müller, et al. (2011)• Pre-tested (N=51),t(8) = -19.83 , p < .001

01/08/14

Evolutionary versus revolutionary changes

• Measures• Brand Consciousness: six-item, 7-point Likert

scale (Nelson & McLeod, 2005), α = .82 (e.g., brand name products that cost a lot of money are good quality’).

• Brand Recognition: similar to study 1: adjusted Lexical Decision Task (Meyer & Schvaneveldt, 1971).

01/08/14

Evolutionary versus revolutionary changes

• Results (1)• Interaction effect between degree of change and

exposure: F (2,132) = 3.25, p = .042.• Simple effect analyses: marginally significant effect for

difference in brand recognition between original brand logo (M = 514.67) and substantially changed brand logo (M = 681.23, p = .061), only in 1-exposure condition

• No further effects found.

01/08/14

Evolutionary versus revolutionary changes

• Results (2)• Interaction effect between degree of change and brand

consciousness, F (1,132) = 3.307, p = .004.

• No median split, thus retaining all observations in the analyses (e.g., Royston, Altman, & Sauerbrei, 2006), following Aiken & West (1991)

Evolutionary versus revolutionary changes

• Results (3)• Interaction effect between degree of change and brand

consciousness, F (1,132) = 3.307, p = .004.

• Simple effects: Marginally significant: Brand recognition decreased when highly brand conscious consumers were exposed to a substantially changed brand logo (M = 652.66, Se = 52.38) as compared to the original brand logo (M = 472.47, Se = 61.61, p = .082).

Evolutionary versus revolutionary changes

• Findings and discussion• Exposure neutralizes effects of brand logo redesigns

• Effects on brand attitude, brand identity and reputation need further examination!

• Only effects for highly brand conscious consumers: brand recognition decreased when exposed to a substantially changed brand logo

• Tunnel vision?

01/08/14

Evolutionary versus revolutionary changes

Effects were found for FMCGs, so it is even more interesting to

examine effects for transformational or high involvement

products/brands.

Present research presents a first step in the experimental paradigm. The next step is to examine effects on other consumer responses.

Questions?

b.van.grinsven@vu.nl01/08/14