Featured cases
- ABM Industries 2012
- AkzoNobel 2008
- Alcatel-Lucent 2006
- Alliance Boots 2006
- Apple 2007
- Aramark 1994
- ArcelorMittal 2007
- Assurant 2004
- Bausch & Lomb 2004
- BDO International 2010
- Belgacom 2003
- Boise Cascade 2002
- BP 2000
- Broadview Security 2009
- Brocade 2007
- CA 2005
- Cardinal Health 2003
- CEC Bank 2008
- Chemtura 2005
- Cisco Systems 2006
- Cision 2007
- Computer Associates 2001
- Covidien 2007
- Credit Suisse 2006
- CSC 2008
- Daimler 2007
- Delta Air Lines 2007
- Devon Energy 2007
- DSM 2011
- Eastman Kodak 2006
- EDF 2005
- Experian 2007
- Federal Express 1994
- FedEx Corporation 2000
- FICO 2009
- Fiserv Inc. 2009
- Fortis 1998
- Fortis 2006
- Fortis 1991
- Genworth 2004
- Gillette 1993
- Grant Thornton 2008
- Harcourt General 1993
- Harlan Laboratories 2008
- Hyperion 2006
- Ingersoll Rand 2005
- Intel 2006
- Invista 2003
- Johnson Controls 2007
- Kemper 2011
- Lineage Logistics 2012
- LM Wind Power 2010
- Lucent Technologies 1996
- Marathon Oil Corporation 2011
- Marsh & McLennan Companies 2011
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) 2003
- McGladrey 2010
- Meredith Corporation 2009
- MFS Investment Management 2012
- Morgan Stanley 2006
- Nielsen 2007
- Nokia Siemens Networks 2007
- Novartis 1997
- NXP Semiconductors 2006
- Outward Bound USA 2005
- Polycom 2012
- Princeton University Press 2007
- Reliance ADAG 2006
- Rockwell Collins 2006
- Samsung 1993
- Sensata Technologies 2006
- Shipley Energy 2011
- Sistema Telecom 2006
- Smith & Nephew 2003
- Sprint (Sprint Nextel) 2005
- Starbucks 2011
- Tenneco 1995
- Texenergo 2011
- The Joint Commission 2007
- The Paley Center for Media 2007
- The Phoenix Companies 2006
- Thomson Reuters 2008
- Tyco Electronics 2007
- Umicore 2001
- Unilever 2004
- Unum Group 2007
- Vale 2007
- Vantiv 2011
- Velfina 2004
- Wolters Kluwer 2005
- Wyeth Pharmaceuticals 2002
- Xerox 2008
Case: Unum Group 2007
2007 2001 In 1999 Unum and Provident, leaders in corporate-benefit disability insurance in U.S./U.K. markets (and a competitor to Aflac), merged to become "UnumProvident." It was a name noteworthy for its awkwardness; and, if the cultures were uncomfortable with one another (as they were), it was guaranteed to prolong their mutual discomfort. To make matters worse, the name decision was wrapped in American stripes... not too smart, for a enterprise with international growth aspirations. In 2003 a new CEO took charge, Tom Watjen, who tackled such cultural problems as disunity, bloat, arrogance in the marketplace, poor pricing discipline, and a challenged benefit-delivery reputation. Four years later, he could say "Given the progress we have made both operationally and financially in recent years, we are essentially a new company." Late in 2006 he commissioned a rebranding, to mark the transition from fix to grow. The New York office of 'The Gate' won the competitive assignment. The parent name change decision, from UnumProvident Corporation to Unum Group, was followed by a logo launch and a new ad campaign. Beau Fraser of The Gate says "The logo walks a fine line between the stature and strength investors want to see, and the softer and more human side of the business, the company's focus on people." Formal name: now Unum Group. Some units are Unum-branded, others (using Provident and Paul Revere and Colonial Life names) will be verbally communicated as Unum Group companies. An informational tag line, "Better benefits at work," helps to establish what Unum wants to mean. Tony Spaeth
CREDITS The Gate Worldwide (NY) CASE INFO Submitted by: Tony Spaeth, 25/04/2007 |
MATRIX DATA
DRIVERS | TOOLS | ||
Strategic driver: 90% | |||
Broaden scope/scale/visibility Remove limiting geographic association | 5% | x | Identifier tactics: Logo change: Wordmark-dominant |
Broaden scope/scale/visibility Elevate public profile | 35% | x | Identifier tactics: Name change: Brand |
x | Identifier tactics: Logo change: Wordmark-dominant | ||
x | Identity system elements: Verbal elements: Tag lines | ||
x | Change event : High visibility: Campaign | ||
Change internal culture Enhance pride & confidence | 10% | x | Identifier tactics: Name change: Brand |
x | Identifier tactics: Logo change: Wordmark-dominant | ||
x | Change event : High visibility: Campaign | ||
Change internal culture Transfer affiliation from unit to parent | 10% | x | Identifier tactics: Name change: Brand |
x | Identifier tactics: Logo change: Wordmark-dominant | ||
x | Identity system elements: Unit signature system: Verbal or no endorsement | ||
x | Change event : High visibility: Campaign | ||
Change expressed personality Renew/refresh public image | 20% | x | Identifier tactics: Name change: Brand |
x | Identifier tactics: Logo change: Wordmark-dominant | ||
x | Identity system elements: Verbal elements: Tag lines | ||
x | Change event : High visibility: Campaign | ||
Change perceived composition Modify parental 'umbrella' presence | 10% | x | Identifier tactics: Name change: Brand |
x | Identifier tactics: Logo change: Wordmark-dominant | ||
x | Identity system elements: Verbal elements: Formal/legal names | ||
x | Identity system elements: Verbal elements: Affiliation descriptions | ||
x | Identity system elements: Unit signature system: Verbal or no endorsement | ||
Functional driver: 10% | |||
Name weakness Increase name impact & recall | 10% | x | Identifier tactics: Name change: Brand |
x | Identifier tactics: Logo change: Wordmark-dominant | ||