Comments on: Ikea Takes an Allen Wrench to its Branding

By: Michael Weinmayr

Michael Weinmayr — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 17:08:56 +0000

I care about fonts… I used to read U&lc magazine in elementary school (Wow, it still exists!). However… http://www.notquitewrong.com/rosscottinc/2009/08/31/the-system-270-ikea-and-typefaces/

By: jason

jason — Sat, 29 Aug 2009 21:06:08 +0000

Well, technically speaking, the typeface used for the body copy in catalogs, brochures, and other collateral is covered under “brand,” but if all we’re talking about is the product descriptions below the photos, then that’s a big WTF? I can see people getting a little twisted up over a familiar logo, but simple copy? Jeez, talk about much ado over nothing…

By: Brian

Brian — Sat, 29 Aug 2009 20:20:27 +0000

I should clarify: the article suggests they’ve changed the font in their catalog. I drew up the logo with Verdana font as kind of a joke. I don’t know if they’re also changing their logo, although I would suspect not, given the enormous cost of replacing all the signage on all of their stores/buildings. But, you never know…

Agreed on the importance of brand manaegment. I’m not sure I see as clear a line betwen what you do and things like New Coke, etc.. A product that isn’t aligned with a company’s brand image can be as damaging as changing the brand image itself. This is why you never see Barbie cigarettes or Mickey beer.

Either way, in this case, we’re talking about the same words, the same products, and the same marketing, just in a different typeface. I’m not sure such a subtle change has ever caused this much furor before and, quite frankly, I’m not sure why…

By: jason

jason — Sat, 29 Aug 2009 19:59:59 +0000

Hm. I don’t think this is exactly analogous to the New Coke/Apple Newton/PC Jr scenario. Those were new products that the public rejected; the Coke/Apple/IBM brands — of which a logo is an integral part, because the visual cue is what the public associates with the company’s values and products — remained unharmed. What Ikea’s done by messing with its logo is to risk changing what people think of its brand, and hence the company itself. Marketing professionals work very hard to establish brands and they protect them fiercely — trust me, protecting brands is part of my job, in addition to hunting down stray commas. Certain words must never be used in combination with certain others, logos must be used in specific ways and absolutely NOT in other ways… that sort of thing.

Personally, I don’t see this sort of thing as all that important — it’s just a component of my job that I perform without much feeling, if you know what I mean. (Although in this case, I do think the original font just plain looks better. For whatever my opinion is worth.) But I imagine the sorts of people I work for would consider this logo redesign a major gamble…