GAP’s mistake, Starbucks’ success

Months ago the apparel brand GAP introduced its new logo in stealth mode. It created such a backlash that even the experienced brand professionals were surprised. Literally, no one was expecting such fury. Eventually, the brand had to take a step back and announce that they will use their old logo. That incidence is a prime example of the shifting power in mass communications. No longer corporations can push their message and expect consumers to accept it. Instead they have to facilitate two-way dialogue. And the ones that do that succeed. Case in point: Starbucks.

The coffee company successfully launched its new logo. Does everybody like it? Of course not because in a way, we human beings are like cats: deep down we don’t like change. But the new logo of Starbucks (even though the changes are more drastic than those of the GAP’s logo) attracted much less criticism. Do you wonder why?

What differentiates GAP from Starbucks is that the latter brand was upfront with its business strategy. GAP launched its new logo and let people react to “design”. The reason behind the change, the intentions, the new strategy… None of these were announced. Therefore, the criticism focused on the “visual” elements. Obviously, every single one of us has an opinion on what looks good and what looks bad. But very few of us is capable of challenging a big corporation’s business strategy. And since Starbucks was upfront with its new strategy (being more than a coffee company), people had tougher time criticizing the new logo. By setting the context, and by being transparent Starbucks managed to launch its new brand identity with little problem. It also helped that they let people know that it was not the first time they changed their logo. Once we saw the visual evolution of the brand’s identity, we had easier time accepting the changes.

For more, you can read this wonderfully-written article by Landor’s Ayo Selignman. What do you think?