Essay: Re-branding of a companies image in response to public criticism (Uber and BP)

Introduction
This dissertation will look at the re-branding of a companies image in response to public criticism. It will explore the connection between the visual branding and the identity branding of two separate case studies which directly link to public criticism, to explain what factors cause companies to choose to re-brand or not.
The motivation for this dissertation was the recent rebranding of the transportation network company and food delivery service, Uber. The highly controversial and recently public scandals have caused the company to undergo a rebrand to change their image after the sexual harassment, and poor treatment of employees had been uncovered (BBC News, 2018). Many different companies in a vast amount of industries will meet the same problem, that is, coming into contact with public criticism and especially in the 21st Century, where approaches to branding themselves can have tighter ethical restrictions to meet, to satisfy their ever-expanding audiences. In a whole, these companies will not be dealing with worldwide criticism, but in some cases, the exposure to public criticism they receive is large enough for them to need to rethink their image.
It is important to mention early on, the research I will be undertaking for this piece of writing isn’t purely looking at how companies have rebranded themselves, but also how companies have managed not to rebrand themselves and explore why this is due to lack of literature for the Uber case study I have used predominantly internet research. The reason for this is that it is a re-brand which took place in 2018. Where I could, I have used articles, which have been published about the rebrand. In regard to how branding affected BP I have reviewed articles and websites. To gather research from designers I have used books and articles.
I will be firstly delving into the history of brands and branding and using this information to explore how companies brand themselves in the 21st Century compared to how they branded themselves at the startup of the company and touch on how it has affected current branding. Looking at the history of branding I aim to explain how forms of mark making, advertising, marketing and communicating came about and how they have translated to modern day.
The dissertation will then move on to the case studies, first of which will be looking at how the company which motivated this dissertation, Uber, re-branded themselves after receiving public criticism. This will be one side of the discussion. The second case study will be of the oil company BP, and how their history of rebranding allowed for them to have an entirely different take on the public criticism they received. This case study will be the other side to the discussion and will show interesting comparisons of approach. Throughout these case studies, I will involve smaller comparisons such as the approach to the trust of the public, whether the re-brands have been successful concerning public criticism and the effects of the rebrand on the design agencies themselves. Finishing the dissertation with a rounded conclusion of my findings and delivering a response which takes both sides of the discussion into account.
Due to this being a case study forward dissertation the perspectives will be formed by the two companies themselves and Design Agencies which branded Uber and BP. The notable agencies are Wolff Olins who re-branded Uber and Landor who re-branded BP. Using these companies and others who work close to them, this dissertation will be as factual and informative as possible. Finally, I will be looking at the companies and public responses to evaluate and draw conclusions on how re-brands have altered the future of the company.
Methodology
This dissertation will use a case study methodology, it will explore multiple viewpoints on the topic of re-branding; covering the companies view, the designers related to the branding, and the public view. Using all three aspects, this dissertation will aim to build an observation on how the relationship between each, have an impact on the decisions companies make to allow for their image and name to remain trusted in the long term.
Public relation is an essential aspect for companies, especially those who hold a lot of significance in how our world is affected. A mistake in re-branding made by a company and design agency connected to a rebrand can have repercussions on each company, designers, and the world. It will explore if re-brands caused the companies negative public image to widen or if it would be wiser to not re-brand and continue with a once trusted brand image.
This dissertation will not use primary research from either Landor or Wolff Olins, neither will it involve primary research gathered from Uber or BP. All information was taken from in-depth case studies, and well-documented re-brands found both in printed books and the internet.
Chapter 1 History
Origins of branding:
The word branding in the most basic of explanations comes from the Old Norse word “brandr” which meant “to burn.” (Holland, 2017) Branding started a long time ago during the Greek and Roman ages, they used mark making to sell products and goods such as pots, metals or produce. These helped to identify the craftsman as well as the reputation and contents of the goods. (Moor, 2007 p16) This was done to inform consumers that a person had a service at a specific location. Usually, this was spread by word of someone’s name, (Murphey, 1993 p, 13) their name, then, becoming a part of their brand. This can still be seen in businesses today such as Ted Baker, Ralph Lauren and Tommy Hilfiger all of which are fashion companies which link to the first trade of materials for clothing. (Figure 1.1) In the days of the Roman Age, shops would use images of the products they sell, for example, three hams were used for butchers, a boot for a shoemaker and a cow for dairy sellers. (Figure 1.2) Many of which have translated into images we see promoting pubs and eateries in our modern day. (Ibid, 1993 p,13-14) We also see this happening in companies that use real pictures for their logos such as Shell, Nestle, and Apple. (Figure 1.3) All of these symbols and marks used during various periods lead to two overall importance’s through-out branding history, that being, the quality of the goods that the symbol or mark communicates and the visual tie to the values of the company or person.
Branding until 15th Century
From around 950 AD the word brand referred to a piece of wood which was on fire, from here on, the use of the word brand was used to describe slightly different things; In the 1300s the word brand would represent a type of tool in which wood was being burnt, for example, torches. In the 1500s the word brand referred to the more commonly known meaning of the word brand, which is the brand used to mark cattle for possession. (Shadel, 2014) These came in the form of symbols which were unique to the ranch owner. (Ibid, 2014) The reasoning for branding in the 1500s is very similar to the reason we brand in this modern day, to communicate ownership and values.
Branding until 20th Century
Packaging in a commercial form can be found as early as the 1550s (Moor, 2007 p,18) but before the 18th and 19th-century products were marked by hand which made for a systematic problem in commercial branding. (Moor, 2007 p,18) Due to the vast growth of technology in the 19th Century and the access to large-scale printing and packaging machines, commercial branding found its place. The 1890s were often stated as “the first golden era for modern brand marks,” (Ellwood, 2002 p, 13) this was the case because around this period many very successful and well known to this day brand names were created and publicly advertised to the consumers. Companies such as Coca-Cola, Heinz, Avon, and McVities were already leading brands during the 1890s. (Ibid, 2002 p,13) The 19th Century was when the start of modern commercial branding was introduced, where companies first started having individual brand names, which are called word marks (Murphey, 1993) most of these names were derived from the founders of the companies. (Ellwood, 2002 p,13) This gave a personal feel to the company but also allowed the logo and the visual brand to personify the values of the owners. (Ibid, 2002 p, 13)
21st Century Branding
The birth of modern brands as we know it today came around in the mid 20th century, (Arons, 2011) because of this companies were required to find new ways to separate how they sold their products from their competition. Brand Management was developed in the 1950s and was used by the likes of Unilever and Procter and Gamble (Ibid ,2011) The brand manager of a company would be responsible for the identities (ibid, 2011)
In the 21st century brands have found themselves in a strange position. Because of a continually evolving and developing the world, brands which come out on top are those which are described by Neumeier (2006, p. 8) as “tribes,” because they are more like a lifestyle choice than just a simple momentary interaction with a company. For example, the choice of choosing Apple or any other Android product is more than just owning a piece of technology, and It’s become about how you want people to perceive yourself because of the products you own. This signifies the importance of rebrands, if a brand is incorrectly branded it can damage its reputation and its consumers trust. The competitive market isn’t new to how brands conduct themselves but because
“copycat brands increasingly imitate names, logos, package designs and product features of original brands to take advantage of their brand equity and compete against them,” (Nguyen and Gunasti, 2018 p. 1574–1597)
brands have started to rely heavily on customer loyalty and trust. This trust can be lost so quickly especially because mistakes that companies make can be shared easily on social platforms and covered vastly and in detail on the news.
Chapter 2: Uber
History of branding:
Uber the taxi/cab and now food delivery service was founded in 2010. Uber entered the transport industry by offering a quick and easy service of ordering a cab in one press of a button. With features such as being able to log details about your journey, the company offered a safe and convenient service at the time. (Dawood, 2018) After running their first brand identity for three years, Uber rebranded in 2013, the next rebrand after that came in 2016 and again in 2018 yet another rebrand was made. (Zuker, 2018; Dawood, 2018) The history of the branding of Uber has been fueled by public image and attempts to build a company with a new and modern idea in a time where the controversy lies in everything.
Multiple Rebrands
Companies get rebranded all the time (Miller, 2012), A website of a corporate company can generally be seen having a re-vamp every four years, this can be a sign of a business which needs a revamp as well. Every brand has a shelf life, brands age and their image can fall apart naturally, this is without the pressure of public criticism. (Ibid, 2012) Small changes can be seen in lots of different companies over the years, and usually, the consumers don’t mind unless there is a drastic change. In the last three years, Uber has done precisely that, twice, once in 2016 (Figure 2.1) and again in 2018. (Figure 2.2)
Zucker (2018) states the 2013 rebrand “was a bold identity, fitting a high-growth, well-funded global disruptor.” This branding involved a recognisable ‘U’ (Figure 2.3) which Uber became quickly famous for in terms of their visuals. When rebrands take place, this shows how a company is confident it’s making a change into new directions in the best intentions for both themselves and the consumer. But the lack of confidence can sometimes be seen in a company which can’t decide what they want to stand for visually and value wise. (Zuker, 2018). Three years on in 2016, this rebrand was changed to a “bits and atoms” icon. (Ibid, 2018) Gibson (2018) quotes Uber saying, “the rebrand left people wondering where the ‘U’ went”. This shows that Uber knew that they had something which worked and had made a mistake with their new identity. This clear understanding led to the logo later being scrapped due to the confusing and controversy of looking like a sphincter. (Gibson, 2018)
Public Image
In 2017 just a year after rebranding, Uber was hit with multiple allegations of sexual harassment and mistreatment of drivers. (Booth, 2017) Google filed a lawsuit for stealing trade secrets regarding self-driving technology, (Ibid, 2017) and the CEO Travis Kalanick recorded berating a driver. (Ibid, 2017) Uber released TV adverts after sexual harassment claim arose, this campaign was aimed to represent the possibilities of using Uber, this campaign also follows allegations of supporting Donald Trump with a social media backlash occurring with the hashtag #DeleteUber trending. (Gee, 2017) With social media and app usage being at the forefront of the company something which can tarnish the brand image happening to close to home can have real effects.
The reputation of Uber according to YouGov’s brand index fell from 6.7 points down to -15.9 in on years, and this caused Uber to be at the bottom of the list in transport. However, the apps “Customer satisfaction” raised to 7.1 placing it 6th for most popular. (Gee, 2017) This would suggest that the design behind the app still hasn’t been tarnished entirely, but the app is only one part of the companies identity, and that was seen by the new CEO of Uber Dara Khosrowshahi appointed in September 2017. There is a difference behind the perception of the aesthetics of a company and the brand value the company has. An Unknown Author for Design Week on BRANDING: Identity Crisis (2005) says “It is not usually the use of colour, shade or logo design that destroys a rebrand – it is business, rather than design issues.” This applies to Uber during the time of the allegations, they say further “However, unless the wider issues are handled properly, the public will continue to blame design for money wasted on unnecessary rebranding.” This is where both brand values and brand identity changed for Uber. In September 2018 Uber had its most recent rebrand which looked to bring back all things good from previous brand branding and values.
2018 Re-brand
The rebrand was taken on by design agency Wolff Olins, a well-known agency which Uber trusted to put back onto the correct visual path. Khosrowshahi’s primary goal with the new brand was for it to be the “safest transport platform on the planet” (Surico, 2018), safety was Khosrowshahi’s main concern, and he wanted his brand to become the “Industry standard” for safety (Ibid, 2018). Uber put these words into action and added many safety features to their app, including panic buttons.(Figure 2.4) The logo has been changed back into a word mark which was developed by Ubers in-house design team, and Wolff Olins called Uber Move. The typeface is clean and legible and stands for the corporations focus on safety. (Zucker, 2018; Gibson 2018) Using a word mark allowed for Uber to build a personal connection with the public again, it also allowed for them to incorporate the ‘U’ back into the logo which was something which was talked about the most in research done by Uber. (Gibson, 2018)
The return to the use of ‘U’ allowed Uber to make that personal connection, because the ‘U’ visually translates to the word “You”. A simple colour selection of black and white which was a decision they made due to strong feedback on that being the colour they should use, and the shape of the U being used as marketing material by surrounding images allowed for Uber to connect with its audience and show they still have them in mind. The high contrast created between the black and white makes the text as legible as possible which allowed the text to be read by everyone. (Gibson, 2018; Rebrand 2018 | Case studies | Design at Uber, 2018) Uber created a rebrand which built off of their strength, a tactic to highlight the positives and shadow the negative.
A new colour which Uber implicated throughout their new brand is a unique colour to Uber called “Safety Blue.” This colour has been added to areas of the design which highlight interaction between Uber and the consumer and in moments of support. This colour is used as little as possible, (Rebrand 2018 | Case studies | Design at Uber, 2018) as to show that they run an operation which is safe. It was revealed that there were more than 100 drivers accused of sexual harassment (Surico, 2018) This feature enables people to feel more at ease when using the app and while engaging with Uber.
The 2018 re-brand used imagery of old and young to represent the global market that Uber now aim to gain custom from, by making this design decision, they have shown that they were working towards making the service accessible to everyone and safe for everyone. (Dawood, 2018)
Trust
Wolff Olins have worked with many well-known companies and events such as EE and The Olympics (Wolff Olins Our Work, n.d.), they have an extensive portfolio of work, multiple books have been published such as On Brand, and they have 6 D&Ad awards (Wolff Olins | D&AD, n.d.) The Uber rebrand was a project which needed a cultural understanding as well as good design expertise to build an identity which understood and stood for the safety that Uber wanted. Wolff Olins have designed the branding for two separate Olympic Games; one was in 2004 (The Surprisingly Smart Strategy, 2012), the 2012 logo was won in their 2006 bid which focused on social and cultural areas of the event and games. (ibid, 2012). The understanding of a global piece of branding shows that Wolff Olins knowns how these projects work and that was evident in the re-brand of Uber. Wolff Olins understood the problems and designed a visual representation of safety around the globe. In the book On Brand written by Wally Olins, he uses pages 90 – 107 to talk about how different companies have conducted themselves on a global scale (Olins, 2005 p,90-107). Having founded Wolff Olins, the knowledge held at the company and the style and attitude to working on a global scale would show enough trust for the like of Uber to allow a piece of rebranding to happen.
As of 2018, according to YouGov’s brand index, Uber has a 28% positive opinion against a 30% negative opinion and 37% neutral opinion. (Uber popularity & fame | YouGov)
Chapter 3: BP
History of Branding:
In 1958, designer Raymond Loewy designed the original green BP shield which followed AR Saunders shield designed in 1947. The logo was recolored in 1989 and reshaped by Siegal and Gale. (Figure 3.1) That logo was used until 2000 where design company Landor took on the task to rebrand the company as more of a green oil company. This symbol used for the logo was called a Helios which represented the Greek God of Sun. The logo consisted of various shades of greens and yellows which were to symbolise energy in different forms. (“BP Logo – Design”, 2012) such as sustainable energy.
Rebrand In 2000 (Green Attempt)
Following Siegal and Gales attempt to make the logo more green, Landor designed a new logo in 2000 which looked forward into the companies future. The rebrand was timed poorly due to the rises in the cost of fuel (Davies and Paterson, 2018). Automotive Service Company RAC retaliated saying:
“People dependent on cars, particularly those in rural areas, the elderly and the disabled, are having a tough time because of the cost of fuel. They will not be too pleased to see that the company is spending so much money on its corporate image.” (Ibid, 2018)
The rebrand cost BP £4.2 million with a further £132 million needed to rebrand stationary and all 28,000 petrol station at the time. (Davies and Paterson, 2018)
Ever since BP launched their campaign which lent towards promoting green energy their conflict with Greenpeace, a non-governmental environmental company increased. Since they started the Green Campaign in 1999, they have had an ever-increasing conflict with Greenpeace, to the point of BPs centenary celebrations being cancelled due to activity threat to demonstrate. (Garcia, 2010 p.57-59) This was one of the most significant and most news media covered conflicts within the “go green” movement. (Ibid, 2010) Regardless of the negative media coverage, BP receive a massive payoff in environmental and marketing awards, they also had their brand awareness significantly rise from 2000 to 2007, from 4 to 67%. In 2007 they too were identified by 1,525 members of The British Public that they were the most environmentally friendly major oil company (Bodkin, Amato and Amato, 2015 p.256-275)
The rebrand was initiated because both the merging companies Amoco and BP had the self-awareness of the problems the two companies were causing for the world around them. In the case study produced by Landor, they state that BP wanted to go from being seen as a “company which desires for economic growth” to a “company which had a desire for a clean environment.” This also came with wanting to be not be seen as a big oil company but a company which was leading in energy. (Landor, 2018) The rebrand helped start to make this vision a reality. The logo alone was designed to “reflect the brand’s environmental sensitivity” (Ibid, 2018) Colours have an impact on how consumers perceive the brand. According to Chang and Lin (2010, p.3350) “red and yellow represent values, and the yellow brand is more distinctive than other colours.” They also say, “green brands are comfortable.” These colours apart from red appear throughout the re-brand that Landor produced in 2000. This shows how BP has an impression of being a green company by using, green and yellow throughout all of their branding. The green approach was effective, and BP brand was awarded a lot of success in their business, their sale increased between 5-10% above industry average, globally their sales were increased but 23% and According to Management today and Fortune they had “recognition as the most admired company” (Landor, 2018)
Oil Spill
In 2010 BP had had a successful ten year run of a green campaign, until an oil spill happened in the Gulf of Mexico, which was subsequently named The Deepwater Horizon Spill. The spill resulted in 11 crew members losing their lives and was known to be the largest oil spill In America. (Meigs, 2016) This had impacts on how BPs brand perception changed in both the industry and the public. The 10-year green approach has been revealed as a greenwash campaign, the apparent lack of distance the company put themselves from the strapline of “beyond petroleum” didn’t help BPs image. (Sheppard, 2010) Non-Governmental Political Party Greenpeace used this spill to tarnish BPs image further. Greenpeace took this opportunity to invite the public to re-brand the logo of BP which became iconic images that are still recognisable today. (Figure 3.2) The oil spill hurt BP, its share price dropped after the incident. Straight after the event it fell by 2% and by 2011 had more than halved in percentage, this is when it reached a company low of 302.95p. Not only did their share price fall but also the confidence of the consumers lowered.
BP ranked at 23rd in the Superbrands list of UK’s most successful brands before the oil spill. In 2011 BP struggled even to enter the top 500.
(Tesseras, 2014 p,5)
Campaigns
BP had suffered bad media coverage following the oil spill, which caused BP to create advertisements, this approach to communication was to open up and communicate with the public, this allowed BP to start rebranding their image. Adverts were released in the first three months after the oil spill which cost BP $90m, these adverts claimed oil had¬n’t entered the Gulf since the oil spill was repaired and they had spent $13bn on the cleanup. (Vidal, 2011) As well as talking about the money they have spent they also mentioned conducting a scientific study which looked at the impact of the spill and projects which involved wildlife rescue and restoration of habitats. (Ibid, 2011) BP started to compensate victims of the Deepwater Horizon accident. “Providing energy in better ways” was a new Brand Driver created and was there to bring back the original core message and to emphasise the safety within their future operations. (Landor, 2018)
Apology adverts are the hardest to make because it means a company must admit they are wrong, the advert released by BP following the accident did not get received well by the public. BP CEO Tony Hayward was the narrator for the advert, and he said, “To those affected and your families, I’m deeply sorry” and “We will get this done. We will make this right”. The words were narrated over images of clean pelicans and white beaches, but after disturbing images of oil-covered birds were released, the ads came across as in poor taste. (Apologetic BP ads draw criticism, 2010) Around the same time rumours arose regarding a possible boycott against BP as a form of protest. What most of the consumers didn’t know was that BP stations are owned locally, because of this BP created a Gulf of Mexico Package which enabled the owners to communicate the fact that they are just members of the local community and boycotting the station would be effectively hurting their community. The message worked well, and the compassion shown by BP allowed for many locally owned BP business to not become impacted and according to the John Kleine, executive director of BP Amoco, “it is accepted by many local communities.”(Reid, 2010 p. 16–17)
Standing for something was the direction BP eventually started to go down, the perfect opportunity to gain public interest and respect came about when BP showed close relations with The London Olympics. BP did a numerous number of things to partner themselves with the event; They sponsored athletes, which got their brand visuals out there for show, they supported the Olympics infrastructure and offset spectators travel emissions. (Figure 3.3) (Landor, 2018) This shows a valid example of how not all rebranding is done by a design agency. BP took the identity which gave them a positive visual and branded themselves in a way which positions them as supportive, which works well with the message of coming across as green. Not all the branding produced by a company is down to a design agency it also comes down to how a company can utilise the design which they have been given.
BP’s open approach to admitting their mistakes and wrongdoings worked as a secondary type of branding. The CEO of the company Lord John Browne was quoted, “Ladies and gentlemen, climate change is a reality, and we are partly responsible” (Ibid, 2018) This backed up BP’s vision of moving towards more of a green future looking at investments in solar and alternative energy. (Landor, 2018). Landor make a point of including these quotes and facts on their case study, by doing this Landor can apply the messages that BP have to say and implement them into a piece of the branding itself.
Trust
A re-brand for a company as well-known as BP isn’t a small feat, and an even harder task to do correctly. Landor was hired in 2000 (“BP Logo – Design”, 2012) to do the re-brand that subsequently saved BP from their future un-foreseen mistakes. Landor had produced some of the worlds most well-known branding, including the Levis ‘batwing’ logo, the British Airways Landor Livery and helping Pepsi ‘go blue’ (Superbrands case studies: Landor, 2002) all of which were widely popular during their lifetime and some, such as Levis logo still to this day. BP needed a brand which would visually change the vision of their company, Landor had done this previously for other companies like British Airways (BA). (Figure 3.4) Their branding changed the bland livery into more British and elegant design using the Union Jacks shape and colour under BA’s crest. (Taylor, 2009) In 1997 the liveries were changed and created consumer backlash and eventually in 2001 returned to the Union Jack. (Ibid, 2009) This example of design shows the understanding and knowledge Landor have in understanding what design is correct.
BP’s re-brand was colour led, and this is what was able to give the company a new take on which way they promoted themselves, Landor proved on many different occasions including a rebrand with Pepsi in 1996 that they know how to make colour work in design. Landor believe identities are defined by its colour and shape (Payne, 2001 p.98). The choice of blue for the Pepsi rebrand in 1996 was a risk, Coca-Cola proved in the 1980s that the market is hard to rebrand after their recipe alteration backlash. (Cooper, 1996) But because Coca-Cola was red the colour choice for Pepsi worked in favour for them. The President of Pepsi Asia, Middle East and Africa Jim Lawrence was quoted, “blue means new, exciting, refreshing” (Pearson, 1996). The campaign was successful, and again Landor proved they could work in risky environments and produce work which was successful. This extensive array of successful rebrands built a positive image for Landor which shows in BP’s rebrand in 2000.
As of October 2018 BP, rank as the 10th most popular tire & petrol station and 3rd most famous, their rating goes from 39% positive, 18% negative and 40% neutral. (BP popularity & fame | YouGov, 2018)
Chapter 4: Comparison
The two case studies looked at here are two very different examples of how companies have approached public criticism with re-branding.
Industry
BP is one of the leading oil companies and deals with much more likely but uncontainable problems, there will be issues regarding oil until it runs out because of the money in the industry and the environmental consequences of its actions. BP had a successful break managing to surround itself with a safety image which lasted for ten years and had a 102 year history before that. Uber is a new company with a history of only eight years and in an industry which problems that occur only occur because of a fault in the company. Age is a factor which decides how a company rebrands, based off of these two companies it shows how having a long-lasting brand image can keep the brand afloat without having to rebrand. BP’s problems took time to fix, it wasn’t something that could change overnight, because of that they had longer to think about how to tackle the problem. Apologies were issued immediately, but the first advert wasn’t released for three months. (Apologetic BP ads draw criticism, 2010) Uber being a fast-paced social media and mobile app driven company released their first ad within a month of the allegations in 2017 (Gee, 2017) The comparison of time comes down to the industry and how up to date a brand is with their public interaction as well as the seriousness of the incidents.
Trust
All companies want to have is the trust and loyalty of their consumers, as Wally Olins (2005 p175) explains “the most successful brands are completely coherent” this is what puts brands ahead of others. BP and Landor made it clear in their case study that the primary goal was to gain trust back after having it for ten years. By doing things such as sponsoring athletes at the Olympics and helping with travel, as well as spending money doing environmental research after BP’s mistakes, shows the innocents of the company and the effort they are putting in to sort out their public image. This falls back into the idea that companies have to sometimes make actions which re-brand themselves without a design agency. Uber’s case study talks about what their research has shown. They consult directly with their consumers because they are a smaller company and have platforms such as social media to reach out to their audiences. They built their rebrand around the main issue the company faced which was safety. CEO Khosrowshahi built the brand up from the dangerous environment Former CEO Travis Kalanick left it in, to a safe company looking to help people of all ages, ethnicities and genders. They’ve shown they have listened to feedback and have acted on it correctly to produce the best brand they could. A similarity of both case studies is that the agencies that took on the jobs were both highly rated and both had well-known names. This helps solidify the sincerity of the design, knowing experienced designers did it.
Design Agency
Landor is a design agency with very bold values which show in their choice of clients and work they produce. Landor’s work visualises the efforts put in to change and moving forward. They specialise in brand action and have experts in their team who look to help companies mould their brand image. (Superbrands case studies: Landor, 2002) Work such as the branding for the Woman’s Political Leaders (WPL)’s Women Leaders Global Forum (WLGF) shows the level of detail that Landor goes into to create something which helps push the message of companies forward in a responsible way. ‘The Pulse’ (Figure 4.1) was designed to be responsive for all WPL, WLGF and all female workers, while also being responsible in its design and aesthetics. (Dawood, 2018)
This culture allows for companies to change for the better, this worked well for BP and due to Landor’s expertise, they had a good time rebranding what Cheryl Giovanni, Chief Executive of Coley Porter Bell pointed out as a successful redesign. (BRANDING: Identity crisis, 2005).
Wolff Olins is again another large agency which has had a widespread share of re-branding jobs. They work with companies which are at the point of inflection, pushing companies beyond where they are to benefit and expand in the future. They work with companies that are stuck but have the potential to grow past their current position. (Wolff Olins, 2018) Both agencies are largely known, and they are both are aware of risks when working on jobs. Even though the issues for both BP and Uber where different, because of the core values that both Landor and Wolff Olins have they been able to apply that to the problems and solve specific problems.
Conclusion
Using both of these case studies I have come to an understanding of many different things which ultimately decided how companies and design agencies approach the re-brand of a company which is facing public criticism. In Uber’s case, they were a modern company whose public criticism comes from very current issues such as sexual assault, workplace safety and safety of service overall. These issues were tackled straight on. Wolff Olins had a specific problem to work around and, in a world, where privacy and safety come first and with the ability to access issues through social media Uber and Wolff Olins task was to calm the public down as quick as possible and deliver themselves as a company which are thinking about peoples current and future safety. With a problem which is currently widely spoken about and a company which doesn’t hold much of a history at all, the re-brand was necessary to maintain themselves in a position of trust.
In BP’s case, the company was re-branded ten years before the oil spill which caused the public criticism, in the time between, BP allowed to build trust and an image, which allowed them to hold the same visual identity because of the assurance that the identity once had.
Both re-brands have one similarity even though the causes of the re-brands were completely different, that being, the design agencies hired. Wolff Olins and Landor, both stand at the top of design agencies and have vast and varied experiences re-branding companies from many different industries. I have found the trust in the design agency and the knowledge of past, present and future problems acknowledge by the design agency is what makes a re-brand successful. I have also found, the vision of the companies Uber and BP allowed the re-brands to fix problems and look to the future to enable re-brands to hold them in a secure and trusted position in regards of the public.
Overall the research I have found indicates that companies which need a re-brand due to public criticism, have to undergo research into design agencies to ensure that they have enough experience to know what’s best for an identity. The design agency needs to understand the position of which a company is in and brand them in a way which helps their individual needs. All companies are different and if a designer can see that successfully, the re-brand will also be successful.