One of the things I have always found fascinating is hearing how agencies explain their work.
It’s always so brilliantly detailed.
So articulate and precise.
So different to how any of the work I’ve been a part of came about.
In my personal experience, the process to the creative work has looked like this …
That’s right. A bloody mess.
Chaos rather than clarity.
Back and forth rather than a clear line.
Exploration and rabbit holes rather a smooth and efficient act of precision.
Got to be honest, I prefer it that way.
The idea of everything being so pure that you know the answer before you get to the answer scares the hell out of me.
Maybe that’s why I like giving creatives the best problem rather than a good solution.
Let them work out a way to solve it rather than expect them to just execute my answers.
The reason I say all this is because I recently saw this colour chart …
Putting aside that some of the brand/colour associations they’ve suggested make no fucking sense at all [ie: Nike = neutral/calm balance] it is interesting and frightening how much brands align with a colour stereotype.
Or should I say, a suggested colour stereotype.
OK … I’m being a dick, I know there is a lot of research in this field, but that doesn’t mean that just because your brand logo is in a character defined colour, you automatically convey that character.
But of course, this is what a branding company would say in their pitch …
“We chose orange as orange is a colour that conveys friendliness and we believe this makes you even more accessible”
But the reality is colour theory is the driving force behind logo colour recommendations, I would say it’s because of 2 reasons:
1. It’s how the brand wants to be perceived. [Ego]
2. It’s to hide how the brand is really perceived. [Fear]
Am I being a prick?
Probably. But as they say in the movie Dangerous Liaisons … people don’t answer questions with the truth, they answer questions in ways that protect their truth.
This is why I’ve always talked about ‘dirty little secrets’ … because often insights end up being about ‘convenient explanations’ of actions/behaviours/beliefs whereas the real driving force is something more personal. More conflicting. More interesting.
It’s why I find it far more interesting BP are in the green colour – nature, health and growth – than Animal Planet.
It’s also why I find BP far more differentiated than the friendly, orange colour of Gulf Petroleum.
Because while colour choice for logo design is important, anyone who tries to claim it defines what the brand is and/or how it is perceived in culture is either a fucking bubble-dwelling idiot, a ‘category convention’ sheep or someone who believes the Pepsi logo design strategy is up there with Leonardo Da Vinci.