The recent scandals that are racking Penn State right now have brought up an interesting dilemma of which Buna High High School no longer has to worry about being associated with (other than this blog post and all the past hoopla over copyright infringement and cease and desists that will remain searchable on the innerwebs). Right now, I would imagine any school or athletic association involving young boys that may have been “inspired” to use the Penn State Nittany Lion logo are now (or should be) scrambling to divest themselves of any connection to this brand. Because the Penn State Nittany Lion as a brand, now represents a tarnished, dare I say, trashed brand that will invoke emotions of outrage and scandal for many years to come.

If ever there was a case study involving the value of a brand through the loss of its value through an overnight scandal (albeit one that took over 12 years to come to full light) this is one of the best, or worst as the case may be. For Buna High School’s sake, I’m very glad that they were able to divest themselves of at least the visual attachment to a now tainted (to put it mildly) image and have been able to establish their own, unique identity in their region of high school athletics.

Not that anyone could have had the foresight to have even guessed that something like this might happen to any brand, but it definitely heightens the reality and liability that comes from associating one organizational entity with any other brand that is not within your control. It is exactly the inverse of why most schools that are tempted to “borrow” or be “inspired” by the current good brand image of any other sports-related mascot or brand, in order to benefit from the good design and good image that has been established. The flip-side of that coin, which is now in full-display in regards to Penn State, is that if anything ever does happen to tarnish a brand to that degree, it will also have its residual impact on whatever organization had thought to infringe upon the previous good will that had been created with that brand.

All that is to say, that if any organization chooses to infringe upon another organization’s brand image in order to take advantage of whatever perceived positives there may be, that it has to take the good with the bad. And in this case, the bad is really, really bad. Thankfully, Buna High School does not have to share that bad image with Penn State any longer. Go Cougars!

In light of Starbucks choosing to update their logo on their cups for their 40th anniversary by streamlining and isolating the mark and ditching the name to join the ranks of iconic brands Nike and Apple. Rather than get angry, I thought I would give it my (tongue firmly in cheek) take on what I think would be the next logical evolution of the iconic brandmark.

Original image from Starbucks

My take on the change as a designer, I think I would have explored a containing ring around the mark, and maybe even tried experimenting with size and orientation (which I would assume was part of their internal process), but I take my hat off to them for making a gutsy decision to take the next step and elevate the brand above being just about “coffee”. I think that removing the concentric ring, takes it out of the crest-style and negates the need to let it stand in isolation. I think they could have had a little more fun with it. But I also understand their desire to not mess too much more with the equity in the existing imagery. Would love to see the stages of exploration that they went through to arrive at their final design.

My take on adding concentric ring outside logo. Just had to see what it would look like

Fellow designers, don’t be too critical of my execution, this was just meant to be a quick, five-minute diversion that like all jobs that take three times longer than planned, turned out to take 15 minutes. So, there are nuances of curves that I would normally take more pains to smooth, etc. Also, the fact that by focusing on just the face, I realize that several other key elements to establishing the iconography are missing, notably the star-crown, hair and mermaidish apparitions of the siren. In hindsight, and if I had the time to indulge, I would have added at least two other steps in the evolutionary chain showing a more gradual reduction. The goal here was getting it to it’s minimal essence—actually, more like past it.

I think I’ll go put another pot of coffee on. And, get back to werk.

I recently had a book recommended to me by a friend that has evidently been must-reading for entrepreneurs for years called, The E-Myth Revisited, by Michael E. Gerber. I was aware of the book, but it had never been on my reading list. After my friend flat-out told me that, “You have to read this book” while simultaneously thrusting his well-worn copy into my hands I decided to take him up on his exhortation. While it has more of a Zen influence then I would like, I still found myself quite captivated with all of the business possibilities it stirred up in my mind (and heart). While there were many insightful sections that have stirred me to re-evaluate my own business model, I found myself in a bit of a frustrating quandary. For those who haven’t read the book, I won’t spoil too much (other than they all die in the end) by revealing that much of the business model is based upon developing a franchise-able vision for your company. My quandary was that I could not reconcile my appreciation for the franchise model which relies on developing systems that deliver quantifiable and repeatable, consistent results, with the reality of my business which at its very essence relies on uniqueness, abstract thought, subjective opinion and thinking “outside the box” as it were. How could a design business be modeled as a business that could be franchised?

Having worked at Wendy’s during my late high school and early college years (advancing to assistant manager shortly after graduating H.S.!), I learned many of the advantages of a well-run franchise system. My daughters cringe whenever I tell one of my now oft-repeated Wendy’s stories when cooking or cleaning the kitchen or reorganizing storage shelves in the garage.  Later in my career, I worked in the in-house marketing department of Red Lion Hotels (hey, did you know I designed that logo?) and was able to see a large-scale franchise system in a whole new light. So, I have a deep appreciation for the franchise model and most everything that I was reading rang true with my own experience with the exception of the most important experience of all—my own company. The book had me enthusiastically exploring many exciting possibilities in my mind of potential businesses that would fall into this model perfectly, but when it came to applying this mindset to Whitestone Design Werks, I found myself deflated as I realized the difficulty in quantifying something as subjective as the design creation process. While its true that many of the areas that are common to all businesses such as basic bookkeeping, marketing and business development also apply to any design business, but the core, essential element of any successful design firm has got to be its ability to create unique solutions based upon a wide-range of varying parameters for each client. My mind just short-circuited when it tried to make this square peg fit in the round hole.

I was coming to the conclusion on my own as I continued reading but Michael pretty much put the nail on the head when on p. 100 he made the point that, “The Model Will Be Operated by People with the Lowest Possible Level of Skill” referring to the process of creating a prototype system that can be replicated through standardized processes on a consistent basis (think McDonald’s). He reiterated his point by stating that “…if your model depends on highly skilled people, it’s going to be impossible to replicate.” The conclusion I came to was that while the book was definitely a great resource of inspiration for a truly entrepreneurial approach to building a vision for a business that can be developed to run as efficiently as a franchise model, not every type of business has to take this approach in order to be successful. One thing to note about the book is that it isn’t talking about creating a franchise system for every business, but that the process of creating a system that can be franchised, is the same process that should be applied to make a business successful—whether it is ever franchised or not .

The positives that I could still take away were the facts that I am a “technician” by nature that was overcome by an “entrepreneurial fit” when I started this business and that I needed to remove myself from the technician role and rethink through the business from a more truly entrepreneurial mindset that looks at the whole of the business and not just the commodity or service that it sells. There were many other take-aways from the book that I will be working through as well (and for that, I would heartily recommend reading the book for any business owner or anyone who is thinking about starting a business), but back to the main point of this article was the fact that I was working through the question about whether a design business or even the creative process of design could be incorporated into a franchise-able model.

That question led me back to thinking through the process of design and the value of design. Until the advent of “desktop publishing” and the idea that, with a Macintosh computer, Aldus Pagemaker, Adobe Illustrator and an Apple LaserWriter printer with Adobe PostScript (or even worse, a Windows 3.1 PC with MS Word, MS Publisher and CorelDraw!), “anybody” could now design a brochure or newsletter. It took between 10 and 15 years for most businesses to finally realize that you still needed to have someone with some level of true design talent and more than the “lowest possible level of skill” to operate one of these magical machines.

So, to get back to the question of whether or not the business of design could be molded into a franchise-able model; until recently, I would have confidently said no. Even with the advent of the computer, design had still not been reduced to a commoditized service—until now. Now, I would have to say a reluctant yes. But just because it is possible, doesn’t mean it’s a good thing.

With the advent of internet-based crowd-sourcing design sites (I’m intentionally not naming or linking) and the proliferation of “Affordable Logo Design” sites, these have worked together to erode the perceived value of design (logo design in particular) down to the same price range as a disposable inkjet printer. At first blush, the reasoning seems sound; every business needs a printer as well as every business needs a logo. Why should I have to pay more for a logo than I do for a printer? Seems like a reasonable request for a budget-conscious business just boot-strapping itself up and looking to save costs wherever and however it can. You’d be a fool to not consider only paying $250 for a logo as opposed to $2,500 (or more) when you’re basically getting the same thing. Or are you?

Why is this not a good thing? At face-value, it seems like a no-brainer for any small-business owner. I have to admit, the designs being produced by these sites are occasionally not that bad and sometimes surprisingly well-done—to the consternation of many designers trying to convince potential clients that their higher costs are justifiable to an increasingly web-savvy clientele. To add insult to injury, any business that does even a half-hearted Google search for “logo design” is going to come across the alluring temptation of one of these sites long before they ever find a good local designer or design firm’s site. Unless that designer/design firm has established a word-of-mouth referral reputation and/or coupled it with an effective self-promotion strategy, there is a shrinking pool of small to medium-sized businesses that are looking for their services or even care. Designers that don’t have a client roster of companies that understand the need for good design and are familiar with the process and costs normally associated with producing that level of design have had to rely on trying to attract smaller business start-ups that are seemingly clueless about the value of their identity in establishing their brand in their target market. To them, when faced with a simple cost-to-savings question, will choose the lower cost almost every time. It is increasingly rare to find a new business start-up that truly understands the importance of their identity and has made the decision to allocate a priority place in their budget to invest in the creation of their brand-building image—which is much more than just a logo.

In a future post, I’ll explore some of the issues involving the speculative and exploitive nature of crowd-sourcing design and how it is neither the best solution for the business nor the designers who take part in the process. I will also take a look at how a business should realistically look at the value a good designer or design agency can bring to their business identity and the value it adds to implementing an effective branding strategy.

In the meantime, if you’re looking at investing in the identity of your business either as a start-up or as a business that has recently realized the importance of re-establishing the position of your identity to reflect its maturing vision and capabilities, I challenge you to consider the value of that identity and hopefully you’ll come to the conclusion that it is worth far more than a plastic HP inkjet printer that will end up being a money pit of ink cartridges and paper and a jammed paper path that to repair would be more expensive than just buying another cheap, plastic HP printer. Hey, maybe I should start an inkjet cartridge-filling franchise! At least I know a cheap place to get a logo.

After experiencing tremendous growth and unparalleled success as a dynamic start-up in the affiliate marketing management industry, JEB Commerce – Affiliate Program Manangement realized their logo, while professional looking, was more fitting for a business in its infancy than the maturing powerhouse it was becoming and the respected leader in their industry they were aiming to attain. Even as a relatively new player, they had already amassed an impressive client list that included brands like: Elance, Ligonier Ministries, philosphy, OfficeFrog to name just a few as well as successful experience working with brands such as Dean & Deluca and Zappos.com.

After trying an online crowd-sourcing logo design solution and being less-than-impressed with the submissions, JEB Commerce decided to approach Whitestone Design Werks to come up with a design for a new logo in order to refresh and reposition their brand. What Jamie Birch, owner of JEB Commerce thought was a simple request to design a logo, turned into an education about the difference between “just a logo” and what a well-thought out and designed identity system was and how it was crucial for developing JEB Commerce’s position as not just a well-respected brand but an authoritative, leading brand in their space.

After lamenting to Jamie (more like whining—until Jamie told me to man up) about how common a misunderstanding it is among small to medium-sized business owners about the fact that while a simple logo does become an identity by default, it is much different to have a logo deliberately designed to be applied into an identity system than to just have a logo that has been designed in a white box that you then take to a printer, web developer or sign fabricator and allow them to interpret how it is applied based upon their whims (and questionable design abilities).

After arriving at an epiphany we hit upon the idea that documenting this process would be a helpful exercise to help other small business owners understand some of the issues involved with facing the maturing of their business and its growth, but recognizing that its now time to put some “big boy (or girl) pants (pant suit)” on, as it were, and take the opportunity to invest in their identity to help elevate their brand position in order to attain their business’ ultimate goals.

In the coming weeks, Jamie and I will be highlighting the process of going through a complete identity design overhaul for JEB Commerce. I will be posting the progress and will for the first time, grant access to what is normally only a client accessible area to the general public in order to view the comps online and even provide feedback in the process. However, we will reserve the right to ignore said feedback if we disagree.

Jamie, for his part in the process, will also be posting to the JEB Commerce blog with his thoughts and updates of the process along the way in order to help educate the multitudes of Affiliates that work with and follow JEB Commerce.

So, stay tuned for what I hope will be an educational process that just might open your eyes to the value of investing in a true identity system that has been thought-through and designed to communicate the essence of your brand and then can be applied to all your points of contact with your customers thereby elevating your brand to the level of respect and authority you have earned over the years, but are being held back by an immature identity.

Buna H.S. infringing on Penn State Nittany Lions logo on their helmets

Like many high schools with little budget and no clue as to what institutes true trademark infringement, Buna High School in Buna, Texas had been “assured” by a local sportswear vendor that using this cool cougar image would be perfect and different enough than Penn State’s Nittany Lion logo that they would be safe in using it. Not sure what alternate universe this sportswear vendor was in when they were viewing the Nittany Lions’ logo because it was a rip-off all the way to the same color, but I’m sure they felt some sense of protection in the relative obscurity of being a small high school in the middle of Texas (actually they’re closer to the coast, northeast of Houston) that no one would notice that they were using someone else’s registered trademark for their school mascot. But…someone did, and that someone notified The Collegiate Licensing Company (CLC) in Atlanta, GA, who just happens to manage the licensing of trademarked merchandise for many high-profile NCAA schools and is also charged with enforcing the protection of the trademarked Nittany Lions logo of Penn State in particular. A curt Cease and Desist letter was promptly sent to the small high school with the requirement that they immediately remove the logo from all their uniforms, paint over walls with the logo and stop using the logo for any other printed material or clothing.

After recovering from the initial shock and revelation of being evil-doing lawbreakers without even realizing it, Buna H.S. staff was faced with a brief phase-out period and scrambled to find a replacement image for their cougar mascot logo in time to have decals printed for next seasons’ helmets as well as walls and field painted and new t-shirts. Not knowing where to turn or who to trust now, they searched for the term, “cougar logo design” and started calling design firms of the more promising designs that they could find contact links for. One of those calls was to Whitestone Design Werks, and while the Buna ISD staff were initially surprised at the typical cost of producing a custom-designed logo, Russell Heistuman, the owner, (that’s me) took pity on their situation and low budget requirements and with dreams of Friday Night Lights, and agreed to modify an existing design to become the new mascot logo for the Buna High School Cougars.

Well, once I got into the project, I couldn’t help but take it much further than just an adaptation of an existing design (I had my own clientele to protect as well). The final design was enthusiastically received by the Buna staff, but they were still cautious about whether or not they were in compliance with the original cease and desist letter regarding the venerable Penn State logo infringement. Once CLC had reviewed the new design and even submitted it to Penn State for their approval too, they were satisfied that the new design was different enough as to not cause any confusion as to whether they were using any derivative version of the original infringed version (in other words: It was OK!).

So now we’re in the process of applying the design to vehicle graphics, painting on walls and applying to custom designs for shirts, sweatshirts, jackets and other items using the awesome site of Prep Sportswear. And now, Buna Independent School District is the proud owner of a mascot logo that no other school has and they are free to register it as a trademark and have for their very own…and even serve up a Cease and Desist letter of their own someday if some other upstart high school team decides to hijack their Cougar logo.

It could have been argued in the past, that Apple didn’t need to enter into the living room space, as its brand was a technology brand and not a lifestyle brand. Why not just continue to tweak the AppleTV in its current form and pair it up to any HDTV set? I think that will continue to be an option for Apple, but Apple has always been about controlling the whole widget, the whole ecosystem. As of today, this is the one area in Apple’s business model where it has left out such a vital component–and it’s the component that people look at and interact with perhaps more than any other branded technology item in their household besides their mobile phone–and Apple’s well on their way to having that covered pretty well (some may argue the refrigerator, but I’m having a hard time visualizing an Apple logo on that). But with the unparalleled success of the iPod and iPhone as well as changing the name from Apple Computers, Inc. to just Apple, Inc., Apple has already broadcast their intention (or recognition) of being a lifestyle brand.

Personally, I feel that its high-time that Apple introduced its design philosophy to the living rooms of America, and for those that can afford to, to be able to build their entertainment center around an Apple product as the whole widget, rather than just as a peripheral, and display it front and center. I believe that Apple has established a reputation of being able to deliver a dead-simple device that just works. Those that are inclined for a more affordable solution should still have the stand-alone AppleTV as an option–even if it requires a bit more technical savvy. Add to it, the open-source environment and if services like Boxee take off, Apple will soon own the living room and will have become a true juggernaut, rivaling Sony in the home electronics landscape.

Having it be announced this coming Tuesday, might be too much to hope for, as Apple has made it clear that the spotlight will be on notebooks. But there’s always the possibility that Apple may make an announcement in time for the holiday shopping season (assuming there’s still any money left in the world to spend by that time), but it seems to be more likely something that would be announced at Macworld, come next January (just in time for the Super Bowl!). We’ll have to wait and see.