View
141
Download
2
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Designing Visual Recognition for the Brand�
Toni-Matti Karjalainen and Dirk Snelders
The present paper examines how companies strategically employ design to create visual recognition of their brands’
core values. To address this question, an explorative in-depth case study was carried out concerning the strategic
design efforts of two companies: Nokia (mobile phones) and Volvo (passenger cars). It was found that these two
companies fostered design philosophies that lay out which approach to design and which design features are ex-
pressive of the core brand values. The communication of value through design was modeled as a process of semantic
transformation. This process specifies how meaning is created by design in a three-way relation among design
features, brand values, and the interpretation by a potential customer. By analyzing the design effort of Nokia and
Volvo with the help of this model, it is shown that control over the process of semantic transformation enabled
managers in both companies to make strategic decisions over the type, strength, and generality of the relation
between design features and brand values. Another result is that the embodiment of brand values in a design can be
strategically organized around lead products. Such products serve as reference points for what the brand stands for
and can be used as such during subsequent new product development (NPD) projects for other products in the brand
portfolio. The design philosophy of Nokia was found to depart from that of Volvo. Nokia had a bigger product
portfolio and served more market segments. It therefore had to apply its design features more flexibly over its
product portfolio, and in many of its designs the relation between design features and brand values was more implicit.
Six key drivers for the differences between the two companies were derived from the data. Two external drivers were
identified that relate to the product category, and four internal drivers were found to stem from the companies’ past
and present brand management strategies. These drivers show that the design of visual recognition for the brand
depends on the particular circumstances of the company and that it is tightly connected to strategic decision making
on branding. These results are relevant for brand, product, and design managers, because they provide two good
examples of companies that have organized their design efforts in such a way that they communicate the core values
of their brands. Other companies can learn from these examples by considering why these two companies acted as
they did and how their communication goals of product design were aligned to those of brand management.
Introduction
Recognition is key in a competitive market. In
a situation of high competition, markets are
often saturated by a constant flow of signs
and messages from numerous brands. As a conse-
quence, the creation and management of recognition
for the brand becomes a major communication ob-
jective. Companies have set out to achieve brand rec-
ognition through various means. Product design is
among these, and it has been put forward as a main
ingredient in fostering a strong visual identity for a
brand (Schmitt and Simonson, 1997; Stompff, 2003)
and in creating brand value (Borja de Mozota, 2004).
There are many examples of companies who have
successfully communicated their brand values
through product design. The Caterpillar brand, for
example, communicates its core brand values of
comfort and performance not only through its adver-
tising, website, and slogan (‘‘Industry leading com-
fort and performance’’) but also in the design of its
products. Caterpillar has ensured that its products
are comfortable to use. Just as Caterpillar shoes have
warm and soft padding on the inside, so the opera-
tor cabins of Caterpillar’s trucks and loaders have
been fitted with soft interiors and come with noise
and dust prevention features. Furthermore, the sturdy
color scheme and logo signal that the products
perform well in tough situations. These design aspects
apply as much to the heavy machines the company
produces as to its shoes, which are targeted at the
consumer market. Thus, Caterpillar’s core brand
values are connected to recognizable and meaningful
aspects of its designs.
�The authors thank Oscar Person, Maria Saaksjarvi, and threeanonymous reviewers for their comments on earlier versions of thispaper.
Address correspondence to: Toni-Matti Karjalainen, IDBM Pro-gram, Helsinki School of Economics, P.O. Box 1210 FI-00101,Helsinki, Finland. Tel.: þ 358 50 357 4047. Email: [email protected].
J PROD INNOV MANAG 2010;27:6–22r 2009 Product Development & Management Association
This paper looks at how companies strategically
aim for visual brand recognition through design. Rec-
ognition is a mode of attention defined by Krippen-
dorff (2005, p. 91) as ‘‘identifying something by its
kind (name) and in view of the use to which it could be
put.’’ Note that this definition is somewhat different
from definitions of recognition used in the past in ad-
vertising or marketing research (e.g., Du Plessis, 1994;
Finn, 1988; Singh, Rothschild, and Churchill, 1988).
In these fields, recognition has often been defined as a
weak (aided) measure of a consumer’s memorization
of an advertising message or a product, and it is typ-
ically juxtaposed to recall a strong (unaided) measure
of this. This implies that in advertising and marketing
research recognition is regarded as a type of declara-
tive knowledge, established by a consumer who states
that a certain advertisement or product has been seen
or noted before. Krippendorff’s definition, used in
this paper, is somewhat broader, in that it describes
recognition as a process of identification (connected
to the work of Biederman and colleagues on visual
recognition of faces; e.g., Biederman, 1987; Biederman
and Ju, 1988) that results from semantic memory
(abling classification of the product) as well as proce-
dural memory (which helps to understand product
usage). In addition, the process of recognition can be
conscious or unconscious, and therefore consumers
can recognize the product and its features without
much awareness of it. Thus, the term recognition here
includes both conscious (declarative) and unconscious
(implicit) knowledge of a product, about both what
the product is and what one can do with it.
Across different industries, scholars have looked at
the role of the visual appearance of products in cre-
ating recognition for the brand. From the viewpoint
of strategic management, design can be used to reflect
corporate and brand values, to develop greater con-
sistency over the product range, and to define the dis-
tinguishing attributes of brands and sub-brands in the
company’s brand portfolio (Kotler and Rath, 1984; Ol-
son, Cooper, and Slater, 1998). However, it is unclear
how companies aim for the recognition of brand value
through the visual design of their products. An impor-
tant starting point for exploring this issue is a series of
case studies by Ravasi and Lojacono (2005) that looked
at how companies organize their strategic design effort.
Their study shows the importance of a design philoso-
phy that establishes a connection among the core capa-
bilities of the company, its strategy, and brand image.
This paper examines how such a design philosophy can
be an instrument in creating visual recognizable designs
that communicate the brand’s core values. The key
question in this paper is the following: How can com-
panies strategically employ design to create visual rec-
ognition of the brand’s core values?
The departure point for our analysis of visual
brand recognition is a model of semantic transforma-
tion, which allows for an in-depth analysis of how
design can communicate the brand message. The ex-
istence and working of the process described in this
model is then demonstrated by two case studies at
Nokia and Volvo. These case studies show how the
core brand values of these two companies are trans-
formed into a visual design language for new products
and how this involves an array of strategic decisions
that are partly made before, and partly during, new
product development (NPD). In addition, this paper
corroborates Ravasi and Lojacono’s (2005) earlier
finding that a design philosophy provides the strate-
gic basis for establishing a coherent visual identity for
the brand. A last contribution is the finding that the
stage of strategic renewal requires a process of se-
mantic transformation that is more sensitive to issues
of brand heritage and that is organized around so-
called lead products. For lead products, the design
effort of the company implies a focus on product fea-
tures that have more explicit and more widely under-
stood references to the core brand values. Such
products serve as internal and external reference points
for what the brand stands for, and they can be used
as such during subsequent NPD projects that receive
less design-strategic attention. Taken together, an
overview is provided of the deployment of a design
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHES
Dr. Toni-Matti Karjalainen holds the degrees of Doctor of Arts
(art and design) from the University of Art and Design Helsinki and
M.Sc. (economics) from the Helsinki School of Economics. He
works as research director of the International Design Business
Management (IDBM) Program at the Helsinki School of Econom-
ics and also has several years’ experience as project manager at the
Business Innovation Technology (BIT) Research Centre at the Hel-
sinki University of Technology. His research on product design,
design semantics, brand management, and new product develop-
ment is conducted in close collaboration with international compa-
nies.
Dr. Dirk Snelders is associate professor of marketing at the De-
partment of Product Innovation Management at Delft University of
Technology in the Netherlands. His background is psychology, and
his current research interests focus on the role of design in market
research. Dr. Snelders has published earlier on consumer decision
making, consumer perceptions of abstract product attributes, aes-
thetic product judgments, and the role of novelty and surprise in
design.
DESIGNING VISUAL RECOGNITION J PROD INNOV MANAG2010;27:6–22
7
philosophy, and of design itself, for the strategic pur-
pose of creating brand recognition.
These results are relevant for brand, product, and
design managers, because they provide two good ex-
amples of companies that have organized their design
efforts in such a way that they communicate the core
values of their brands. Other companies can learn
from these examples by considering how the commu-
nication goals of product design can be aligned to
those of brand management. Managing the transla-
tion of brand values into the design of a product
requires an understanding of what designers in a team
are doing when they express brand value through
product design. Both in NPD and during stages of
brand strategic renewal, managers can benefit from
the insight that design communicates brand value
in its own way and that the direction of the design
process needs its own targets, checks, and balances.
Intentional Communication through Design
Design is but one of the media through which a com-
pany can communicate its core brand values. Accord-
ing to Aaker (1996), the communication of brand
value should be done in a synchronized way, so that
all communication channels deliver a concerted brand
message to customers. This interactional or holistic per-
spective on brands (for an overview of brand perspec-
tives, see Harkins, Coleman, and Thomas, 1998; Harris
and de Chernatony, 2001; Louro and Cunha, 2001)
implies that product and brand meaning are intertwined
and that together they lead to a powerful mix of asso-
ciations that point to the core brand values. In product
design, the brand message is composed of a number of
product features (hereafter called design features) that
embody the core brand values. Together with the other
communication media, the design features represent the
brand’s identity. If the design features contribute to the
desired communication, other forms, like advertising,
can be used more effectively and efficiently (Mooy and
Robben, 2002).
Kreuzbauer and Malter (2005) stress that the con-
nection between the design features and brand value is
based on more than repeated exposure. Building on
the work of Barsalou (1999), Biedermann (1987), and
Zaltman (1997), these authors argue that brand rec-
ognition is not purely an exercise of semantic classi-
fication based on a set of otherwise arbitrary design
features. Instead, they point to the relevance of the
design features themselves in codetermining the mean-
ing of the brand. Kreuzbauer and Malter speak of
embodied cognition in this respect, by which they
mean that the identification of products as members
of a brand is dependent on visual appearance, which
can carry a set of associations of its own. In this sense,
the design features should be seen as a direct embod-
iment of (interlinked) product and brand associations,
capable of communicating core brand values of their
own accord, and in their own special way.
Product design can thus play an important role as a
persistent and nonarbitrary reminder of the brand’s core
values. In this sense products can be regarded as lan-
guage and their features as ‘‘talking’’ to people (Oppen-
heimer, 2005). All manufactured products can be seen as
stating something through their design, intentionally or
unintentionally, passively or actively (Giard, 1990). The
intentional view of design is that of a strategic activity,
concerned with how things ought to be, and devising
artifacts to attain goals (Simon, 2001). This intentional,
value-based view of design implies that design has a
strategic, goal-oriented character and that, in a business
setting, it should function in coordination with other
strategic intentions of the company.
In a multiple case study among 11 companies that
had recently undergone a process of design-driven
renewal, Ravasi and Lojacono (2005) looked more
closely at the strategic role of design. For these
authors, design has the potential to drive strategic in-
novation on the basis of a design philosophy. Such a
philosophy comprises a stylistic identity (based on
value-based design features) and core design princi-
ples (a coherent set of beliefs and principles about the
company’s approach to design). A design philosophy
is one of the driving forces of strategic renewal in a
company, other forces being the company’s core ca-
pabilities, its competitive scope (as expressed by the
core brand values), and its strategic intent. For Ravasi
and Lojacono (p. 71), it is imperative that the design
philosophy co-evolves with these other forces, ‘‘to
help designers relate their work to broader issues of
competition and market positioning.’’
Semantic Transformation: From Strategic Intentto Value-Based Design Features
The relation between brand strategy and product
design is established through acts of ‘‘semantic trans-
formation’’ (Karjalainen, 2004). Through these acts,
qualitative brand descriptions are transformed into
value-based design features, and these generate the
intended meaning of products. The notion of semantic
8 J PROD INNOV MANAG2010;27:6–22
T.-M. KARJALAINEN AND D. SNELDERS
transformation is derived from design semantics, which
deals with the issue of how meaning is formed and me-
diated by signs that are embodied in products and rec-
ognized by others. In this field there exist a variety of
approaches toward product analysis to help designers
understand how their work becomes meaningful to
others (Krippendorff, 1989, 2005; Mono, 1997; Muller,
2001; Steffen, 2000; Vihma, 1995). With few exceptions
(Warell, 2001), this literature has looked primarily at
the communication between individual designers and
society at large. Here the potential of semantic trans-
formation is explored to function as a model for the
deliberate effort of companies to communicate specific
brand values to customer target groups.
The theory of signs by Peirce (1955) and Peirce
Edition Project (1998) provides a potential entry
point to the semantic analysis of products (Karjalainen,
2004; Vihma, 1995; Warell, 2001; Wickstrom, 2002).
The theory suggests that the process of signification (the
attribution of meaning) is regarded as a triadic rela-
tionship among a Representamen (a perceptible object,
R), an Object (of reference, O), and an Interpretant (the
effect of the sign, I). Meaning is constructed through
this triadic interaction. Applied to design, R can be
regarded as a design feature that functions as a man-
ifestation of the sign through its properties (e.g., form,
shape, color), while O relates to a brand value with
which the design element has a reference relation
(Figure 1). For example, specific design features of
Nike running shoes (R) can be a manifestation of the
dynamic orientation of the Nike brand (O). The context
of interpretation (I) comprises the subjective realm of
the interpreter and the environment in which the inter-
pretation is made. Three dimensions of the semantic
transformation process play a role in this.
Genuine and Stringed References. R–O relations
have a bidirectional nature, which means that design
features create associations that connect the product
with specific brand values, and, at the same time, the
brand values and their historical representations
strongly affect the interpretation of the design fea-
tures. This latter process, from historic brand value to
feature interpretation, can be regarded as an interpre-
tation bias, since it implies that the meaning of design
features will always be affected by expectations set by
the brand. As a consequence, the relation between
design features and brand value is often ‘‘stringed’’;
that is, the associations that the design features evoke
are themselves entangled with additional associations
evoked by the brand. As a group these associations
create a thematic connection between the design
and the brand values. In contrast, a direct ‘‘genuine’’
reference of a design feature would be the first (unbi-
ased) association that a design feature brings to mind
(after Peirce, 1955).
Stringed references are usually culturally formed
and time and context dependent. As such, stringed
references are as much a product of the market as of
the company, and control over them is very difficult.
Still, companies can make use of stringed references
under some circumstances. This is when (parts of)
stringed references are based on ‘‘coupled’’ associa-
tions, which are sets of (often two) associations that
frequently co-occur in products and that have become
predictable and manipulable. Coupling can bring new
interpretations to an initially simple reference relation
(Janlert and Stolterman, 1997). For example, chrome
details in cars or aluminum in mobile phones are
coupled with the association of premium quality.
Through coupling, companies may exert some con-
trol over stringed references, and this may allow them
to communicate brand values through design in more
ingenious, and less direct, ways.
Explicit and Implicit References. Recognition of
the core brand values can be built through both
explicit and implicit visual references (Karjalainen,
2004; see also Crilly, 2005). Explicit references are
embedded in design features that designers implement
with the intention of being immediately perceived and
recognized. These are often features in the product
that have relatively distinct object boundaries (e.g.,
the kidney grille and quad headlights of BMW
cars) or that are repeated over a large portion of the
product (e.g., the variety of concave and convex
‘‘shark’’ surfaces on the body of recent BMW cars).
Implicit references are based on features not so
readily distinguished in the product but implemented
with the intention of being inherently perceived and
Rdesignfeature
Obrandvalue
Iinterpretationcontext
Figure 1. The R–O–I Framework for the Analysis of Brand Ref-erences in Design
DESIGNING VISUAL RECOGNITION J PROD INNOV MANAG2010;27:6–22
9
recognized without customers being consciously aware
of them. These references are based on design features
that are not easily detected by uninformed customers.
However, when implicit references are applied to a de-
sign, they can still ‘‘make sense,’’ be it more intuitively.
For these references, the recognition process may not be
unlike that for the recognition of a human face, which
has been shown to be based for a large part on uncon-
scious processing and on facial features that people are
not aware of (Rakover and Cahlon, 2001). The so-
called Hofmeister kink of BMW is an example of a
reference that is implicit for most consumers. This small
bend in the rear window in the C-pillar of almost all
BMW saloon cars since the 1960s, named after a former
director of design at BMW, creates the impression that
the back of the car sits precisely on the rear-wheel axis.
Even after detection most people may still not be aware
how important the kink is for their perception of a
powerful, rear-wheel driven car.
Complete and Partial Attribution of Brand Charac-
teristics. Attribution by customers is an important
aspect of the interpretation context. Characteristics
whose attribution is close to universal can be regarded
as so-called complete characteristics (Janlert and
Stolterman, 1997). Certain visual features entail rather
complete attribution. Such features can be inherent ei-
ther to human nature or to culturally established codes.
For example, rounded forms and warm colors can sug-
gest that a product has a ‘‘warm, friendly, and protec-
tive’’ character (ibid., p. 299). Specific shapes and forms
can also entail complete attributions that are category-
specific. For instance, street and off-road motorbikes
can be recognized through specific form elements
(Kreuzbauer and Malter, 2005), and specific packaging
design can express the taste of the dessert it contains
(Smets and Overbeeke, 1995).
Partial characteristics, in turn, have a lesser scope
of attribution. These characteristics cannot be used suc-
cessfully beyond a limited group of customers. Outside
this group, the interpretation of the brand reference will
be uncertain. In other words, partial characteristics in-
volve ‘‘right’’ (in this case, brand-specific) references
among a limited number of customers and are arbitrary
outside this group of subjects.
The Construction of Product Lines and Portfolios
Value-based design features not only exist in single
products: they can also be replicated (with some
changes) over the entire product line, or even over
the entire product portfolio of a brand. However, the
level of consistency that is sought over the product
line or portfolio can differ strongly between brands
and industries and perhaps even between different
parts of the world. Some companies have a high con-
sistency strategy for the design of their products.
Brands such as BMW, Jaguar, Citroen, Apple, Bang
& Olufsen, and Braun have clearly recognizable de-
sign features that are repeated over their product lines
and portfolios. Brands such as Toyota, Nissan, Ford,
Sony, Panasonic, and Samsung have selected a more
flexible strategy with a focus on the design of individ-
ual products.
Some products in the product portfolio may also be
more central to the identity of a brand than others.
Such ‘‘lead products’’ (or ‘‘flagship products’’) strongly
incorporate the core values of the brand (Ealey and
Troyano, 1997). With respect to this, Kapferer (1992)
notes that almost all the major brands have pivotal
products in their portfolio that best transmit the mean-
ing of the brand. One example of such a lead product
is the Volkswagen Golf (or Rabbit in the United
States). The Golf was one of the first hatchback cars
to arrive on the market, and it was an instant and last-
ing success. To date, five Golf generations have gone
through evolutionary changes, but all have held onto a
number of design features that represent German
engineering quality, functional design, and good value
for money.
The example of the Golf shows that products can
become lead products by creating a strong brand
presence on the market, either through a high sales
volume or through the special experience they bring to
customers. A historical role for lead products is to
establish an authentic heritage for the brand. Thus,
the main design challenge from the product line and
portfolio viewpoint is to decide how to employ value-
based design features in the product line-up of the
brand and how to manage this over successive prod-
uct generations. From this perspective, it is concluded
that not all products in the present and historic prod-
uct line and portfolio will contribute to the visual rec-
ognition of brand values in the same way, to the same
extent, or at the same time.
Method
Two topics were identified above concerning the stra-
tegic management of brand recognition through
10 J PROD INNOV MANAG2010;27:6–22
T.-M. KARJALAINEN AND D. SNELDERS
visual design features: the type of brand references in
design and the organization of these references in prod-
uct portfolios and product lines. To address these top-
ics, an explorative in-depth case study was carried out
concerning the strategic design efforts of two compa-
nies: Nokia (mobile phones) and Volvo (passenger
cars). Three objectives were defined for the case studies:
(1) To describe and illustrate the strategies of Nokia
and Volvo for creating visual brand recognition
through design.
(2) To identify the key drivers behind these strategies
and the case-specific variation in how these drivers
exert their influence.
(3) To identify the implications of these strategies for
the management of brand recognition through
product design.
Case Selection
The selection of the two cases was based on purposive
and theoretical sampling, so that the cases were
deliberately chosen and varied on a theoretically
made distinction (Silverman, 2000). Strong, well-
established brands of durable products with signifi-
cant attention to industrial design were selected. In
particular, the aim was to find companies that regard
product design as a key instrument for creating visual
brand recognition. Nokia was chosen as the first case.
The company had become the global leader in mobile
phones, among other things through heavy emphasis
on product design as a competitive factor. From early
on, Nokia had emphasized design next to technolog-
ical development (Ainamo and Pantzar, 2000). More
importantly, the wealth of meanings attributed to
mobile phones and their connection to the brand
identity of Nokia made the company an appropriate
starting point for our study. Already in the beginning
of the 1990s the Nokia design strategy stated that
Nokia products should be identifiable and global and
should incorporate ‘‘soft’’ design language (Pulkki-
nen, 1997).
Volvo was selected as the second case because the
company had gone through a strategic renewal process
from the early 1990s to the early 2000s, a remarkable
process in which design played a key role. A number of
articles and analyses in the automotive press paid at-
tention to the consistent and meaningful relation be-
tween Volvo’s new design direction and the company’s
brand values and heritage. For example, the S80 model,
introduced in 1998 and the first car to unfold Volvo’s
new design direction, won the European Automotive
Design Award (voted by professional car designers and
design students from 33 countries) in the following year.
The award was justified by a press release stating that
the ‘‘Volvo S80 represents a radical change without
breaking the continuity of Volvo design’’ and that the
design ‘‘has been more successful in synthesizing the
past and the future than any other car in 1998’’ (Volvo
Press Release, 1999).
The design effort of both companies was extensive,
but it was expected that there would be differences in
their approach to product design because they oper-
ated in different industries and held different market
positions. Thus the two cases had great potential to
supplement each other, leading to greater depth and
trustworthiness of the analysis.
Data Sources
To meet the objectives of the study, data were col-
lected from multiple sources between 2002 and 2004.
The complete brand portfolios of cars and mobile
phones were studied as expressions of strategic brand
identity. Material on design concepts created by the
companies was also collected and analyzed, as well as
promotional material such as images of the products,
press releases, annual reports, and Internet pages.
An important objective was to understand why
certain design decisions had been made on the visual
design of the products and product portfolios. An
initial conceptualization of the strategic approach
chosen by the companies was developed after the col-
lection of the secondary data already described. This
conceptualization was then complemented and chal-
lenged in a number of in-depth interviews. Personal
interviews were held with the designers and design
managers of the companies to determine what
was intended with the designs and, consequently,
to achieve an additional level of interpretation. Three
people were interviewed at Nokia (one of them, the
design director, three times) and seven at Volvo
(two of them, the design directors, twice). The inter-
view duration varied between 30 minutes and 2 hours.
The interviews were recorded and transcribed.
The interview schedule was adapted to the Nokia
and Volvo cases and slightly modified from one
interview to another to take the different positions
and context of the interviewees into account. The
topics that were covered dealt with the creation of
DESIGNING VISUAL RECOGNITION J PROD INNOV MANAG2010;27:6–22
11
brand-specific design (e.g., What were Nokia- and
Volvo-specific design features? How consistently were
these features used over products in the portfolio?),
the semantic transformation process (e.g., How did
the work proceed from the verbal brief to the design
elements? How free was a designer to use his or her
creativity?), the design process (e.g., a description of
the decisive points, the manager’s role in the process),
and product examples.
Data Analysis
The analysis of the products through images and 3D
objects was conducted first. This was done by identi-
fying the design features companies were using across
their product portfolios. The visual search was then
supported by textual data from interviews and sec-
ondary sources. The analysis of this textual material
involved a number of steps. The key thematic issues
and their relations that emerged from the literature
were conceptualized. Textual data, interview tran-
scriptions, and other text material were then coded
and organized on the basis of the conceptual frame-
work. Data organization and coding were completed
manually as a way of disaggregating the data, break-
ing it down into manageable segments, and identify-
ing these segments (Schwandt, 1997). The practices of
categorization (coding interviews into specified cate-
gories of phenomena), condensation (of the expressed
meanings into shorter formulations), and ad hoc ap-
proaches (eclectic meaning creation with no standard
method) were used in the data organization process
(Kvale, 1996). Then, data were expanded, trans-
formed, and reconceptualized through various itera-
tion rounds to create more diversity in the analysis,
which is especially important in descriptive studies
(Coffey and Atkinson, 1996).
Organization and interpretation of the data re-
sulted in initial summaries of the Nokia and Volvo
cases that were then sent to the designers and design
managers of the companies for further comment. This
allowed for a further test and validation of the anal-
ysis, and it enabled a deeper interpretation of the data.
A comparison between the two cases resulted in the
identification of a number of internal and external
factors that serve as key drivers behind the different
design philosophies of the two companies as well as
differences in the way the companies set out to create
visual brand recognition through design.
Based on the analysis, a description was made of
the strategic use of design references at Nokia and
Volvo to create visual brand recognition. A summary
of these case descriptions is presented in the following
section. Next, the key drivers behind the visual design
strategies of both Nokia and Volvo are summarized,
as well as the case-specific variation in these drivers.
Finally, some implications for the design for visual
recognition are discussed, referring to the themes
identified in the introduction.
Case Descriptions
During the latter part of the 1990s there was a sig-
nificant shift in the mobile phone industry from tech-
nology to design as the main area for differentiation.
Nokia as market leader was at the forefront of this
trend. The thematic focus of the Nokia case was on
this development in the industry and on Nokia’s lead-
ing position in design from the late 1990s to the period
of data collection in 2002–2004.
Compared with the mobile phone industry, the car
industry is relatively mature, and visual recognition
has long been a strategic goal for most manufacturers.
Design plays a fundamental role in the consumer
assessment of cars and car brands. Volvo, in addition
to being an established but relatively small brand on
the global market, had given design a central compet-
itive role along with a recently completed process of
strategic renewal. The renewal, called ‘‘Revolvolut-
ion,’’ was initiated in the design of the Environmental
Concept Car (ECC), presented at the Paris Motor
Show in 1992, and was finally unveiled in the launch
of the S80 model in 1998. Subsequent production
models (V70, S60, XC90, S40 and V50, launched
by the end of the data collection period) consistently
followed the design philosophy that had been set by
the ECC and S80.
Based on a visual analysis of the brand portfolios,
and, through the interviews and secondary source
material, it was evident that both Nokia and Volvo
used product design intensively, intentionally, and in-
strumentally to create and maintain the desired visual
recognition for their brands. However, it also became
clear that, during the time of the data collection,
Nokia and Volvo had fundamentally different ap-
proaches to their design and portfolio strategies. The
difference particularly concerned the degree of con-
sistency within the product portfolio. As suggested
in Figure 2, Volvo had adopted a consistent strategy
in launching products, and its designs also contained a
number of explicit brand references. Nokia, on the
12 J PROD INNOV MANAG2010;27:6–22
T.-M. KARJALAINEN AND D. SNELDERS
other hand, was managing the designs of the products
in its portfolio more flexibly and was also nurturing
more implicit brand references in its products. It must
be added that there was still some organization in the
portfolio of Nokia. The company nurtured a variety of
product lines, within which more consistent and explicit
references were used. However, from the perspective of
the total brand portfolio, the use of design was flexible,
and brand references seemed more implicit.
The Nokia Design Philosophy
The key strategic intent of Nokia, as analyzed here,
concerned the creation of personalized products for a
wide range of market segments. As market leader, the
company felt that every customer should find an
interesting and appealing product in its wide product
family. However, for all phones usability was the
number one priority; ease of use was regarded as a
core Nokia value.
These brand values also guided the design philos-
ophy. Personalization and usability formed the core
principles of Nokia design. Every new Nokia product
was intended to incorporate characteristics such as
comfort, balance, and pleasure of use. Nokia also
wanted its phones to be perceived as friendly, devel-
oped on the basis of a human approach to technology.
This was regularly mentioned in Nokia’s promotional
material in the late 1990s and was considered impor-
tant at a time when mobile phones were still regarded
as a professional device for doing serious business.
Making the products more approachable for a wider
range of customers was a strategic goal for Nokia.
Personalization was a design principle that led to a
careful consideration of the design features (shapes,
materials, colors, and details) that each product
should have. The ability to create personalized prod-
ucts and take various user preferences into account
was based on the effective market intelligence system
that Nokia had created, resulting from the customer-
driven approach adopted by the company. The
knowledge about customer segmentation that resided
within the company formed a core capability. Nokia
introduced specifically designed products (and com-
plete product lines) for different market segments well
before its main competitors. Moreover, the company
had gained a competitive advantage by way of its de-
sign excellence. Already in the mid 1990s, when the
industry as a whole was still mainly technology
driven, product design was considered a core strate-
gic factor at Nokia.
Nokia’s value-based approach to design became
more important in the late 1990s, when a variety of
line- and product-specific designs was introduced. The
consistency of a product portfolio with varying designs
was managed through subtle references, and some of
these were even held to function at a subconscious level.
Nokia designers claimed that their products, even those
with very different designs, were recognized as Nokia
products, because they incorporated specific design fea-
tures in a more subtle, ‘‘qualitative’’ way.
Nokia Design Features and Portfolio Flexibility
Until the early 2000s Nokia had nurtured a set of design
features that were applied consistently over the product
portfolio (Figure 3). The Y and U shapes were charac-
teristic design themes, forming the typical Nokia sil-
houette and the curved frame around the display. The
composition of the keypad and function buttons was an
additional feature for which Nokia became known. The
3310, also due to its huge sales volumes, became
the strongest representative of this design approach in
Nokia’s history. Many of these design features (al-
though executed differently and constantly evolving)
are still apparent in recent Nokia models, and they still
constitute a substantial part of Nokia brand recogni-
tion, as was noticed in a number of student workshops
organized recently by one of the authors.
At the time of the study, Nokia had radically ex-
panded its product portfolio. The portfolio consisted
of various product lines, each with its specific target
segment and each with a different interpretation of
Nokia’s general design philosophy. A basic phone
(e.g., the 3310) had to differ visibly from a fashion
phone and a premium phone. Nokia’s product port-
folio as a whole had few consistently applied design
features, and at the time of the study the versatility of
the portfolio was increasing rapidly. The product
explicit implicit
flexible
consistent
brand references
product portfolio
VOLVO
NOKIA
Figure 2. Comparison of the Design Approaches Used by Volvoand Nokia
DESIGNING VISUAL RECOGNITION J PROD INNOV MANAG2010;27:6–22
13
portfolio had expanded drastically, and many new
product lines were emerging, based on Nokia’s inten-
sive market segmentation effort. There were still many
lead products that nurtured the classic Nokia design
features, but new product lines with their own stylistic
identity were introduced as well, both as high-volume
models and models intended for niche markets.
Despite the visual flexibility over the entire product
category, there were a number of recurring attributes
across Nokia design. Usability was achieved by putting
special emphasis on the development of a user interface
that became standard in most Nokia phones. The func-
tionality and layout of the keypad was also designed to
increase usability, and it stayed recognizable over most
product lines. There was also an attempt to maintain
an impression of friendliness for all phones in the port-
folio. Curved lines were preferred over straight lines.
Although the U-shaped curve around the display (as
with the 3310) was no longer standard, upward ‘‘smil-
ing’’ curves were still used in most models for the line-
up of keys in the keypad. The classical human-like Y
shape silhouette was replaced in some models by other
silhouettes, but these also stuck to curved, natural
lines, which retained the value of high usability by fit-
ting comfortably in the hand. However, the U and Y
shapes did not die out, and even to date some lead
products in the portfolio show an evolutionary inter-
pretation of these classical Nokia shapes.
The Volvo Design Philosophy
In the design philosophy of Volvo the design of visual
recognition for the brand was considered on a long-
term basis. The new Volvo design philosophy was
closely connected to the strategic intent of Revolvolut-
ion, as well as Volvo’s core brand values and core ca-
pabilities. The intention of the strategic renewal was to
shake up the Volvo brand image. The brand was losing
customers, and a fresher appearance was needed to ap-
peal to a younger clientele. However, it was important
to preserve the strong heritage and brand recognition
Volvo had achieved with earlier models. Volvo had be-
come known as the number one safety brand in the
automotive industry, based on its year-long emphasis
and research and development (R&D) spending on
safety. Moreover, the Scandinavian heritage was con-
sidered an inherent part of the Volvo brand, offering a
vital basis for differentiating Volvo from its competi-
tors. In addition to these established values of the Volvo
brand, new values were introduced that underlined the
renewal. A more dynamic approach was needed to give
the brand a more emotive character and to lift it up to
unambiguous premium status.
The strategic intent, the core capabilities, and the
new brand values were expressed in the Volvo design
philosophy. As the most central Volvo value, safety was
always put first. The Scandinavian design approach was
interpreted as a combination of functionality and sim-
plicity with beauty and elegance. Furthermore, new
Volvo design features had to provide the cars with a
dynamic appearance that promised premium quality,
which should lead to more affective recognition.
Volvo Design Features and Portfolio Consistency
Within the new design philosophy, Volvo defined a
number of explicit design features. These specific fea-
tures included the characteristic front with the soft
Figure 3. The Evolution of the Early Nokia Design Features in the Late 1990s
14 J PROD INNOV MANAG2010;27:6–22
T.-M. KARJALAINEN AND D. SNELDERS
nose and the diagonal Volvo logo, the V-shaped
bonnet, the strong ‘‘shoulder’’ line, the rear with its
distinctively carved backlight, the third side window,
and the flowing line from roof to boot lid (Figure 4).
The same features were used for all models introduced
between 1998 and 2004, although the execution varied
from model to model.
The design philosophy that lies at the basis of these
new models was guided by concerns for safety, Scan-
dinavian design, and a more dynamic image for the
brand. To start with the first, Volvo wanted to create
a stronger safety impression in the overall visual ap-
pearance of the car. The strong shoulders, for in-
stance, made the sides look more solid and thicker,
thereby appearing safer. Active safety showed most
clearly in the interior design, specifically in the control
devices and instrument panel that reduced unneces-
sary information and potential distractions to the
driver to a minimum. The clean, simple controls and
instrument panel also accentuated the Scandinavian
approach to design. A detail in the interior was the
‘‘floating centre stack,’’ the innovative instrument
panel first introduced in the S40 and then in all sub-
sequent Volvo models. Top-range versions of this
panel were made from Scandinavian oak and Volvo
designers commonly described it as ‘‘a piece of Scan-
dinavian furniture.’’ In addition, the exterior’s new
muscular look, its V-shaped bonnet, and the flowing
roof line created a strong impression of movement,
and a number of other design features and details
were carefully designed to enhance the emotional and
premium appearance of the cars.
Volvo’s new design features were also explicitly pro-
moted to the public to reinforce their recognition. The
company aimed for complete attribution of the design
features. The reason for this is that Volvo wanted not
only to make its values recognizable for its target au-
dience but also to help its target audience to be recog-
nized by others as adhering to the Volvo values.
Another aim of this communication was to show
the relation between the new design philosophy and
Volvo’s design heritage. The new design features of
Volvo differed radically from the previous generation
of Volvo cars. During the previous two decades Volvo
had become known for its functional, robust, and static
‘‘box’’ design. Except for the grille and front lights, the
new design features were not used during the box
period. However, many of the new features, such as
the V-shaped bonnet and strong shoulder line, referred
back to historical Volvo models from before the box era
(e.g., the famous PV 444/544 and P120 ‘‘Amazon’’
models from the 1940s and 1950s). Volvo made this
link explicit in its promotions and releases to the auto-
motive press. It was crucial for them that consumers
would regard the new design, with softer edges and a
dynamic appearance, as plausible for Volvo.
Key Drivers behind the Design Philosophies
of Volvo and Nokia
When investigating why Nokia and Volvo chose their
respective design philosophies, six principal drivers
were derived from the data (Figure 5). These drivers
Figure 4. Volvo Design Features Represented in the S60 Model
DESIGNING VISUAL RECOGNITION J PROD INNOV MANAG2010;27:6–22
15
are set to explain differences in the design philoso-
phies between the two companies, based on which
they had created visual brand recognition through the
design of their products. Two external drivers were
identified that relate to the product category (life-cycle
stage and renewal cycle) and four internal drivers
stemming from the companies’ past and present brand
management strategies (brand position, portfolio
width, brand heritage, and design history).
Life-Cycle Stage of Product Category
The product category in which the brand operates
creates specific requirements for the management of a
visual identity. In particular, the phase of the industry
life cycle was found to affect the overall approach to
design and the construction of the product portfolio.
The growth of the mobile phone market was very high
at the time of the study. As a consequence, more
product lines and more phone models started to
emerge, differing widely in visual appearance. The
car market, in turn, was mature and contained models
and product lines that faced direct competition from
other companies. Car manufacturers and their brands
had established positions in the marketplace. Compe-
tition was characteristically based on differentiation
between the brands, based on the explicit and consis-
tent use of design features.
Renewal Cycle of Product Models
The life cycle of a single product was another driver
that caused differences in the design philosophy. A
typical Nokia model stayed on the market for 1 to 2
years, whereas a Volvo model was designed to last
from 5 to 10 years (with minor modifications). There-
fore, car design features had a long life span, while
those for mobile phones followed short-term market
trends. This meant that a consistent strategy was not a
feasible option for Nokia and that design innovation
was regarded as a core competence of the company.
At the time of the study, mobile phone designs
followed on from each other in quick succession.
Each new model that came onto the market quickly
made its predecessor appear outdated. Thus, Nokia
was experiencing constant revolutions in design, as
new innovative designs were introduced in different
categories at an increasing pace. The whole mobile
phone industry changed radically every few years. In
contrast, Volvo’s approach to the design of new mod-
els was characterized by slow evolution. Design rev-
olutions occurred rarely. There had been only five
major renewals in the 80-year history of Volvo cars.
Brand Position
The position of the company in the market affected its
design philosophy. Nokia had reached the position of
market leader and had been one of the key companies
in establishing the mobile phone industry. World mar-
ket domination was achieved during the end of the
1990s through a series of highly successful products.
Nokia had also been one of the first companies to
develop new markets with the help of conspicuously
distinctive products. As a dominant market player,
Nokia was in a position to steer developments in the
mobile phone market. This meant that Nokia was
able to set new standards on the market and was more
likely to take the lead in trying out new directions for
mobile devices and their design features. The position
of Volvo was that of a relatively small company in a
mature and saturated market. Whereas Nokia covered
mature
growing
long
short
nichesmall,
well-definedtarget group
leaderbroad target
group
narrow
wide
long,defined
short,undefined
solid,periodic
styles
versatile,constantevolution
flexibleNOKIA
VOLVOconsistent
life-cyclestage
renewalcycle
brandposition
portfoliowidth
brandheritage
producthistory
Figure 5. The Key Drivers behind Nokia and Volvo Strategies
16 J PROD INNOV MANAG2010;27:6–22
T.-M. KARJALAINEN AND D. SNELDERS
a wide spectrum of mobile phone segments, Volvo was
forced to find a specific niche to gain a sufficient level
of differentiation. As a result, the design philosophy of
Nokia was more flexibly and implicitly translated to
design features, while that of Volvo could be applied
more consistently and explicitly.
Width and Structure of the Product Portfolio
In general, the number of models on the market at a
given time drives decisions regarding consistency.
Consistency becomes untenable with many models
in the portfolio (resulting, for instance, from serving
many market segments), and a more flexible applica-
tion of a design philosophy is needed in this case. In
the case of Nokia, some consistency was sought
within different stylistic identities (represented, e.g.,
by the basic, classic, premium, and fashion product
lines). These product lines had their own visual defi-
nition. For instance, the design of the Nokia 3310 was
heavily influenced by the requirements Nokia had de-
fined for its basic line, in terms of visual appearance
and the use of materials. However, the 3310 was a lead
product for Nokia, and as such its design still had a
strong impact on the visual recognition of the entire
brand. For such lead products (usually mass-selling
models), the design requirements for the product line
were stringently applied, but Nokia allowed more ex-
perimentation in design for nonleading products.
If the brand portfolio contains only a few models
then the importance and significance of a single product
becomes much greater. In such a situation, every new
model can have a great impact on brand recognition,
and design decisions will have far-reaching implications
for brand identity. This was the situation in the Volvo
case. The messages that each new design carried were
carefully considered, because every new car model was
a considerable investment for the company and impor-
tant in terms of brand identity and business success. For
Volvo, each new model can be considered a lead prod-
uct, and therefore, each model carried design features
that it shared with other models in the portfolio.
Brand Heritage
The prevailing image and reputation of the brand on
the market affects the formation of recognition. As
already noted, this situation is typical for companies
in mature industries. A strong heritage and early-es-
tablished identity form an effective basis for brand
recognition. At Nokia, brand heritage did not play
such an important role. The company was established
as early as 1865, but the Nokia brand remained
virtually unknown outside Finland. The old Nokia
had been a totally different company from the current
Nokia. Its history restarted almost from scratch
around 1990, following the company’s structural
change from a diverse business portfolio to a strong
focus on telecommunication. Since that time Nokia
had become one of the strongest brands in the world,
and its core values were also widely recognized. New
products had to be sufficiently congruent with this
recent heritage to avoid conflicting messages. How-
ever, a strong sentiment existed at Nokia at the time
of the study that it was making history for itself, and
its experimentation with new designs may be seen as
an expression of that.
Volvo used its heritage intensively in its communi-
cations. The main values that were tied to its heritage
were safety and its Scandinavian origin. The safety
perception stemmed from the accumulated reputation
that Volvo had gained through its history of techno-
logical and functional innovation in active and passive
safety standards. The Scandinavian character was
present on a more implicit level. It was not easy to
indicate precisely which elements in the history of
Volvo’s design made the brand characteristically
Scandinavian. Still, in the design philosophy both
values were listed as departure points for new designs.
Product History
For both Nokia and Volvo, past models influenced cur-
rent design features. However, there was a difference in
the explicitness and singularity in the way the compa-
nies’ product histories were treated in the current design
philosophies. Nokia had a short product history due to
the young age of the mobile phone industry. Further-
more, Nokia carried several product lines, each with its
own stylistic identity and own history. This made it
difficult to show a clear path of historical examples.
However, the design features used in the very early No-
kia products, even if for a short time and for very small
markets, were still regarded as Nokia cues. These fea-
tures were not neglected in the current portfolio.
The new Volvo design approach made explicit ref-
erences to past models. This was important because
the strategic renewal of Volvo implied a major change
in design compared with the previous Volvo genera-
tion. This required the company to communicate that
DESIGNING VISUAL RECOGNITION J PROD INNOV MANAG2010;27:6–22
17
the new design philosophy was connected to Volvo
designs from a more distant past.
Overall, past products have a decisive influence
on product design for a surprisingly long time. One of
the greatest challenges for design is to find the right
balance between familiarity and novelty. Companies
seek the familiar in their own product history, starting
from the very first product of the brand. It is felt that
references in the design to past products can have a
considerable impact on the future recognition of the
brand. Thus, if new companies establish their brand by
accident rather than by design, they may have to rein-
vent or ‘‘clean up’’ the brand later on (Cagan and
Vogel, 2002).
Strategic Design for Visual Recognition
The case-specific variation in how the drivers exert their
influence indicates that the requirements for designing
visual recognition are industry-, product- and com-
pany-dependent. Therefore, the generic strategic guide-
lines that are given here should be regarded as
sensitizing issues for further research and for practitio-
ners who may consider them against the background of
their experience, expertise, and knowledge of portfolio
management and strategic product design.
Semantic Transformation
Once a strategic approach has been chosen regarding
the use of design features in the portfolio, the major
issue becomes how these features should represent the
core brand values. Nokia and Volvo had defined a
set of core values that functioned as a basis for the
development of their design features. As the case
descriptions illustrate, both Nokia and Volvo had
used design features that made sense given the brand
values of the company. For instance, specific curves of
Nokia phones may be interpreted as a friendly smile,
which supports the brand values of personalization
and a human approach. Volvo’s ‘‘shoulder’’ feature,
in turn, refers to the value of safety by its intended
interpretation as solid and protective (Figure 6). Of
course, both companies ensured that the key design
features of products evoked the desired associations
among target users. Knowledge concerning different
user groups, as well as social and cultural contexts
of interpretation, is another prerequisite for effective
design. User tests and customer clinics are the means
through which this kind of knowledge can be created,
as practiced by both Nokia and Volvo.
In the Nokia and Volvo cases, designers used fea-
tures to represent the brand values of safety, dyn-
amism, and personalization, and these were intended
to be understood by most consumers in the same way,
leading to complete attribution. Volvo used a consis-
tent set of design features over its portfolio, and it
considered all its models lead products, in the sense of
being the best example for the brand at the moment
of market introduction. Nokia, on the other hand,
designed models for various product lines that each
had its own stylistic identity and a continuous flow of
new models. As a consequence, the explicit references
in its products tended to have partial attribution,
because they were tied to a specific market segment,
and their aim was to differentiate the product within
the brand, against Nokia phones in other product
lines. In trying to maintain recognition for the overall
Nokia brand the models also carried more implicit
references to differentiate the brand from other
mobile phone brands, so these had to have complete
attribution. Thus, all Nokia phones, even those from
highly distinct product lines, still shared some features
that would be recognized by most people as expressive
of Nokia values.
Taking the two cases together, a tentative conclu-
sion is that lead products and nonlead products
(as variations of the lead products) can be defined
RVolvoshoulder
Osafety
Iinterpretedas solid RNokia
curve
Opersonalization,human approach
Iinterpreted asfriendlysmile
Figure 6. The R–O–I Framework Applied to Volvo and Nokia Cases
18 J PROD INNOV MANAG2010;27:6–22
T.-M. KARJALAINEN AND D. SNELDERS
by the type of brand reference that is made and the
type of attribution that takes place (Figure 7). Lead
products serve to differentiate the brand from other
brands in the market. As a result, they will have ex-
plicit references with complete attribution. Later vari-
ations of these lead products will consist of a mix of
explicit references with partial attribution (serving
further differentiation within the brand) and addi-
tional, more implicit references with complete attri-
bution (serving between-brand differentiation).
Visual Consistency of Product Portfolios
A number of guidelines for strategic decisions con-
cerning the visual consistency of the brand portfolio
can be derived from the key drivers. If the brand op-
erates in a mature product category, characterized by
established solutions for the technology-user interface
and a stable brand image, greater consistency over the
portfolio may be preferred. Consistency in the port-
folio may also be beneficial when the renewal cycle of
products and product lines is long. In addition, the
consistent use of explicit design features over the port-
folio is likely to be more appropriate for niche brands
(and possibly also for new brands) that focus on a
limited number of market segments. If the brand has a
strong heritage and, in particular, if the brand has
already nurtured a recognizable design identity
throughout earlier product generations, there may
be a greater need for consistency in the brand port-
folio and also a greater potential to create consistency
by referring to iconic designs from the brand’s past.
On a more general level there may exist two diver-
gent strategies with respect to the maintenance of
visual recognition of products in a brand portfolio.
Companies can aim to build coherent product port-
folios where each product has a number of explicit
design features, or they can create individual identities
for different products in the portfolio. In the latter
case, brand recognition is managed by the creation of
lead products in separate product lines that each have
their own stylistic identity and their own explicit design
features. Each lead product then represents a variation
of what the brand stands for, and it is through this
variation that the brand identity is defined.
As stated before, the repeated use of design features
over different models can enhance their recognition.
Customers have to learn the design features to be
able to identify new products as belonging to a certain
brand and expressing its values, and repeated expo-
sure to the design features is critical in this. But rep-
etition can also incite boredom and reduced attention
for the brand values that are expressed through its
design. Therefore, managing the equation of renewal
and consistency in employing design features may be
crucial for sustaining the visual recognition of the
brand. This implies that there is also a need for ‘‘out-
of-the-box’’ thinking and innovative concept creation
through which the freshness and topicality of the vi-
sual appearance is ensured. The Volvo concept cars
highlighted such thinking. Besides being consistent in
visual appearance by incorporating the Volvo design
features, they explored the possibilities for renewal and
further development of the visual identity of Volvo
through a number of concept studies. In the car indus-
try, concept studies represent an established practice of
presenting design innovations and preparing the public
for changes in the future. As such they are crucial in-
struments for brand management (Karjalainen, 2006).
Managing Strategic Renewal and the NPD Process
The unity of intent and consistency of action are
thought to be starting points for the successful
management of design (Ravasi and Lojacono, 2005).
The specific challenge within NPD is to maintain
these qualities in a design process that has many par-
ties influencing decisions on the visual appearance of
products. If the core brand values are understood,
agreed upon and internalized by all involved parties, it
becomes easier to employ design for the creation of
visual brand recognition. At Nokia, design managers
played an important part in this since they were
required to translate the general brand values of the
implicit explicit
partial
complete
brand references
attribution
Lead products(between-branddifferentiation)
Variations oflead productsfor between-
branddifferentiation
Variations oflead products
for within-branddifferentiation
Figure 7. A Tentative Design Strategy for Lead Products and
Their Variations
DESIGNING VISUAL RECOGNITION J PROD INNOV MANAG2010;27:6–22
19
company to a design philosophy with many adapta-
tions for the various market segments it served. They
also had to promote this philosophy to all parties
involved and to organize the implementation of this
philosophy into actual product designs. In the Volvo
case, where the market was more uniform, the process
was less formalized. Here the current director of de-
sign acted as the main catalyst in the renewal of Vol-
vo’s design philosophy, pushing it away from what
the company was used to. By paying special attention
to lead products, concept studies, and iconic designs
from the brand’s past, the design manager created
anchor points that best expressed the core brand val-
ues and that inspired all parties involved in the NPD
process. Stories similar to the Volvo case can be found
in other companies such as BMW (Bangle, 2001).
Finally, what characterized both the Nokia and
Volvo cases was the central role that design had been
given in the company strategy. Design was not merely
regarded as answering to the requirements of other
functions. Instead, designers themselves contributed
to the design philosophy through the design features
they created. In this sense, a design philosophy is al-
ways a project under construction and never a closed
booklet with a set of examples of design features that
designers can copy and paste. As already suggested
by Ravasi and Lojacono (2005), it is important that
design is acknowledged as a driving force in itself,
contributing to strategic renewal of the brand and
corporation, driving brand repositioning and inspir-
ing strategy formulation.
Conclusion
This paper presents two cases of companies that have
strategically employed design to create visual recog-
nition for their brand values. In both cases it was
found that companies took a deliberate and planned
effort to translate the core brand values of the com-
pany to a design philosophy. This philosophy speci-
fied a number of design principles and design features
to be used in the design of the company’s products.
Both companies were found to express their core
brand values through design features, based on a pro-
cess of semantic transformation. Control over this
process enabled managers in both companies to make
strategic decisions over the type (genuine, stringed),
strength (explicit, implicit), and generality (complete,
partial) of the relation between design features and
brand values.
The influence of the design philosophy over the
design of products was found to vary over the com-
pany’s product portfolio. The influence was most
complete for the company’s lead products, which in-
corporated the design features specified in the philos-
ophy to the fullest and thus served as reference points
for what the brand stands for. The design of these lead
products received most attention from design manag-
ers, and they served as examples for later NPD pro-
jects in the company. In this way, the influence of the
design philosophy was felt throughout the company’s
product portfolio.
A between-company analysis of design and brand
portfolio management led to the identification of a
number of factors that drive a company’s strategy for
establishing visual recognition for the brand. The ex-
istence of these drivers implies that there is no simple
recipe for creating visual recognition of the brand.
Instead, the design effort of the two companies for the
creation of visual recognition was based on a contin-
uous renewal of the connection between brand value
and design features. This renewal can sometimes be
revolutionary and highly consistent and sometimes
evolutionary and multifaceted, depending on the type
of company and the market it is serving.
The insights resulting from this analysis can be
used as a basis for further research on the strategic
role that design can play in innovation processes and
NPD. New studies could, for instance, look at com-
panies that do not have such a strong focus on design
as a strategic instrument as Nokia and Volvo. Both
companies originate from the Nordic countries, where
a strong focus of design in industry has a long and
established tradition. Thus, it would be good to con-
sider cases from other regions where a company focus
on design has been lacking or where the role of design
in industry has a different tradition. Additional stud-
ies could also delve more deeply into the precise na-
ture of some of the drivers of design philosophies
discussed here. For example, the driver brand position
describes the relative size of the company in the mar-
ket, which has implications for its leadership in setting
market standards but also for its organizational com-
plexity. These two aspects of brand position could not
be disentangled in the present study: Compared with
Volvo, Nokia was more of a standard setter as well as
a more complex organization. As a result, the effect of
these two factors on the design philosophies of the
companies could be described only in combination
under the more abstract notion of brand position. The
drivers may also be interrelated. For example, the im-
20 J PROD INNOV MANAG2010;27:6–22
T.-M. KARJALAINEN AND D. SNELDERS
portance of brand heritage seemed typical for com-
panies in mature industries. A better understanding of
such relations may lead to a prioritized and more
structured view of the drivers of design philosophies.
Given the limited number of cases in this study, these
issues have not been addressed here.
The focus in this study on the company intended
effects of design on visual recognition has led to three
limitations. First, this study has looked at the inten-
tions of companies to create visual recognition,
whereas, ultimately, recognition of the brand is cre-
ated in the market. The focus in this study has been on
the company, and the assumption has been that the
companies had extensive market data on the basis of
which they formulated their design philosophies.
However, it would be interesting to further explore
the relation between the symbolic meanings that com-
panies bestow on their products through design, and
the meaning that the market attributes to products,
based on the same design. Second, the study looked
only at the visual qualities of design and by doing so
disregarded the other senses. The visual may be dom-
inant in customer recognition, but information from
the other senses (e.g., auditory, tactile, olfactory) may
also play an important role. For example, the atten-
tion Nokia paid to its characteristic ring tone led it to
produce one of the first friendly, nontechnical-sound-
ing ring tones, and as such it is a good example of
Nokia’s human approach to technology. This sug-
gests that semantic transformation of brand values
into design features into brand values might be ex-
tended to other modes of perception. Third, the in-
tended communication of brand value through design
has been studied only with the goal of recognition in
mind. Other goals for design, such as exploration of
and reliance on the product (Krippendorff, 2005)
have been left aside. For example, BMW’s position
as the ultimate driving machine is underscored by its
cars, whose road-handling qualities can be explored
extensively. Such exploration of the product can be
another goal of design through which brand values
can be communicated. A complication arises here,
because it becomes difficult to disentangle the sym-
bolic qualities of design (that communicate brand
value) from the functional qualities (that deliver the
benefits related to the brand value). However, for ex-
actly that reason the communicative role of design at
the stages of exploration and reliance is worth further
investigation.
It should be noted that these conclusions run some-
what counter to the idea of ‘‘design DNA’’ that prac-
titioners in many companies are talking about. The
analogy with DNA suggests that the visual identity of
companies and their brands is inherited and develops
as a matter of course, and it implies that change in the
visual identity comes slowly and over many genera-
tions. The relationship between design and brand
identity that has been found here is one that can be
planned, has to be internalized, and is open to radical
change. The notion of design DNA may also point to
design as an inner strength of the company that keeps
it fit for the market. It was found that design can
sometimes be such a driver, but it is also driven itself
by a host of internal and external factors. It is thus
recommended that design becomes a less primal and
more self-reflective strategic force in a company,
working together with corporate, technological, and
commercial strategic forces.
References
Aaker, D.A. (1996). Building Strong Brands. New York: Free Press.
Ainamo, A. and Pantzar, M. (2000). Design for the Information So-ciety: What Can We Learn from the Nokia Experience. DesignJournal 3(2):15–26.
Bangle, C. (2001). The Ultimate Creativity Machine: How BMWTurns Art into Profit. Harvard Business Review 79(1):47–55.
Barsalou, L.W. (1999). Perceptual Symbol Systems. Behavioral andBrain Sciences 22(4):577–609.
Biederman, I. (1987). Recognition-by-Components: A Theory ofHuman Image Understanding. Psychological Review 94(2):115–47.
Biederman, I. and Ju, G. (1988). Surface versus Edge-Based Determi-nants of Visual Recognition. Cognitive Psychology 20:38–64.
Borja deMozota, B. (2004).DesignManagement: Using Design to BuildBrand Value. New York: Allworth Press.
Cagan, J. and Vogel, C.M. (2002). Creating Breakthrough Products:Innovation from Product Planning to Program Approval. UpperSaddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Coffey, A. and Atkinson, P. (1996). Making Sense of Qualitative Data.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Crilly, N. (2005). Product Aesthetics: Representing Designer Intent andConsumer Response. Ph.D. diss., Cambridge University, Cam-bridge, UK.
Du Plessis, E. (1994). Recognition versus Recall. Journal of AdvertisingResearch 34(3):75–91.
Ealey, L. and Troyano, L. (1997). Cars as Commodities. AutomotiveIndustries 177(3):77–81 (March).
Finn, A. (1988). Print Ad Recognition Readership Scores: an Infor-mation Processing Perspective. Journal of Marketing Research25:168–77.
Giard, J. (1990). Product Semantics and Communication—Matchingthe Meaning to the Signal. In: Semantic Visions in Design, ed.S. Vihma. Helsinki: University of Art and Design Helsinki, b1–b7.
Harkins, J., Coleman, O.W., and Thomas, G. (1998). Commentarieson the State of the Art in Consulting. Design Management Journal9(3):35–40.
Harris, F. and de Chernatony, L. (2001). Corporate Branding andCorporate Brand Performance. European Journal of Marketing35(3–4):441–56.
DESIGNING VISUAL RECOGNITION J PROD INNOV MANAG2010;27:6–22
21
Janlert, L.-E. and Stolterman, E. (1997). The Character of Things.Design Studies 18(3):297–314.
Kapferer, J.N. (1992). Strategic Brand Management: New Approachesto Creating and Evaluating Brand Equity. New York: Free Press.
Karjalainen, T.-M. (2004). Semantic Transformation in Design—Com-municating Strategic Brand Identity through Product Design Refer-ences. Helsinki: University of Art and Design Helsinki.
Karjalainen, T.-M. (2006). Strategic Concepts in the Automotive In-dustry. In: Product Concept Design—A Review of the ConceptualDesign of Products in Industry, ed. T. Keinonen, and R. Takala.New York: Springer Verlag, 133–55.
Kotler, P. and Rath, G.A. (1984). Design: a Powerful but NeglectedStrategic Tool. Journal of Business Strategy 5(2):16–21.
Kreuzbauer, R. and Malter, A.J. (2005). Embodied Cognition and NewProduct Design: Changing Product Form to Influence Brand Catego-rization. Journal of Product Innovation Management 22:165–76.
Krippendorff, K. (1989). On the Essential Contexts of Artifacts or onthe Proposition that ‘‘Design Is Making Sense (of Things)’’. DesignIssues 5(2):9–39.
Krippendorff, K. (2005). The Semantic Turn: A New Foundation forDesign. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
Kvale, S. (1996). InterViews: An Introduction to Qualitative ResearchInterviewing. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Louro, M.J. and Cunha, P.V. (2001). Brand Management Paradigms.Journal of Marketing Management 17(7–8):849–75.
Mono, R. (1997). Design for Product Understanding: The Aesthetics ofDesign from a Semiotic Approach. Stockholm: Liber.
Mooy, S.C. and Robben, H.S.J. (2002). Managing Consumers’ Prod-uct Evaluations through Direct Product Experience. Journal ofProduct & Brand Management 11(7):432–46.
Muller, W. (2001). Order and Meaning in Design. Utrecht: LemmaPublishers.
Olson, E.M., Cooper, R., and Slater, S.F. (1998). Design Strategy andCompetitive Advantage. Business Horizons 41(2):55–61.
Oppenheimer, A. (2005). Products Talking to People—ConversationCloses the Gap between Products and Consumers. Journal of Prod-uct Innovation Management 22:82–91.
Peirce, C.S. (selected and edited with an introduction by J. Buchler) (1955).Philosophical Writings of Peirce. New York: Dover Publications.
Peirce Edition Project (Ed.) (1998). The Essential Peirce: SelectedPhilosophical Writings, Volume 2 (1893–1913). Bloomington: In-diana University Press.
Pulkkinen, M. (1997). The Breakthrough of Nokia Mobile Phones. Hel-sinki: Helsinki School of Economics and Business Administration.
Rakover, S.S. and Cahlon, B. (2001). Face Recognition: Cognitive andComputational Processes. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Ravasi, D. and Lojacono, G. (2005). Managing Design and Designersfor Strategic Renewal. Long Range Planning 38:51–77.
Schmitt, B. and Simonson, A. (1997). Marketing Aesthetics: The Stra-tegic Management of Brands, Identity and Image. New York: FreePress.
Schwandt, T.A. (1997). Qualitative Inquiry: A Dictionary of Terms.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Singh, S.N., Rothschild, M.L., and Churchill, G.A. Jr. (1988). Recog-nition versus Recall as Measures of Television Commercial For-getting. Journal of Marketing Research 25:72–80.
Silverman, D. (2000). Doing Qualitative Research. London: SagePublications.
Simon, H.A. (2001). The Sciences of the Artificial, (3d ed.). Cambridge,MA: MIT Press.
Smets, G.J.F. and Overbeeke, C.J. (1995). Expressing Tastes in Pack-ages. Design Studies 16:349–65.
Steffen, D. (2000). Design als Produktsprache Der ‘‘OffenbacherAnsatz’’ in Theorie und Praxis. Frankfurt (Main): Verlag Form.
Stompff, G. (2003). The Forgotten Bond: Brand Identity and ProductDesign. Design Management Journal 14(1):26–32.
Vihma, S. (1995). Products as Representations. Helsinki: University ofArt and Design Helsinki.
Volvo Press Release (1999).March 9: Volvo Wins European AutomotiveDesign Award. Goteborg: Volvo Car Corporation.
Warell, A. (2001). Design Syntactics: A Functional Approach to VisualProduct Form. Gothenburg: Chalmers University of Technology.
Wickstrom, L. (2002). Produktens budskap—Metoder for vardeingav produktens semantiska funktioner ur ett anvandarperspektiv.Gothenburg: Chalmers University of Technology.
Zaltman, G. (1997). Rethinking Marketing Research: Putting PeopleBack In. Journal of Marketing Research 24(4):424–37.
22 J PROD INNOV MANAG2010;27:6–22
T.-M. KARJALAINEN AND D. SNELDERS
This document is a scanned copy of a printed document. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy.
Users should refer to the original published version of the material.