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: Harcourt General 1993
 1993  old logo "General Cinema Corporation" was the classic case of an obsolete, misleading and thus a damaging identity. "Every new analyst we talked to, we had to explain who we're not" said Peter Farwell, VP Corporate Relations. In the 80s, General Cinema had become a holding company, a trader rather than an operator of companies. But in 1993, management believed that changing the company's image, in the eyes of the financial community, was vital to achieving new, more-focused business objectives and a higher valuation. Their strategy was to become an operating company, focused primarily on publishing (building on its recent acquisition of Harcourt Brace). The "General Cinema" name was clearly off-strategy, and so was the holding-company reputation. The rebranding tools were a name change (adopting the highly regarded Harcourt publishing brand while retaining the still-appropriate "General,") and a simple, confident wordmark (incorporating the merest suggestion of a containing shape). The change itself, promoted in full-page ads, was intended to signal financial strength. In 2000, Reed-Elsevier acquired Harcourt General for $4.5 billion. Tony Spaeth
CREDITS Lippincott & Margulies CASE INFO Submitted by: Tony Spaeth, 14/05/2007 |
MATRIX DATA
DRIVERS | TOOLS | ||
| Strategic driver: 100% | |||
|
Change direction Redefine industry or core competence | 30% | x | Identifier tactics: Name change: Brand |
|
Broaden scope/scale/visibility Remove limiting category association | 20% | x | Identifier tactics: Name change: Brand |
| x | Identifier tactics: Logo change: Wordmark-dominant | ||
|
Broaden scope/scale/visibility Elevate public profile | 20% | x | Identifier tactics: Name change: Brand |
| x | Identifier tactics: Logo change: Wordmark-dominant | ||
| x | Change event : Medium visibility: Launch event | ||
|
Narrow the scope Express a more specific focus | 30% | x | Identifier tactics: Name change: Brand |