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: Fortis 1998
1998 1991 Fortis had been created in 1990 as a simply a holding company, with Dutch and Belgian financial brands and global ambitions, expressed with a straightforward wordmark designed by Wolff Olins (see 1990 case). Fortis Phase Two: In 1998 the two chairmen, one from each founding parent firm, questioned their reliance on freestanding historic brands. They convened a branding task force headed by Brand Manager Cathy Feierstein, who told us "We really felt that there was a great opportunity to develop a strategic approach, to create more of a strong single Fortis brand that will represent a full-spectrum financial services provider... and to serve as an internal rallying point as well." Landor assisted with extensive counsel, as well as design. The new symbol was ostensibly derived from an aerial photograph of a European town. (The full-page WSJ ad launching the new identity -- complete with "the original photograph taken by our logo designer" -- explained the skydiver's vantage-point with references to "community.") [Feierstein adds "Frankly, with my pragmatic head, I thought the new design would be a pain to work with. But it's really generated a lot of interrest. Hopefully it says something about Fortis."] The heritage brands AG and NV Amev would be replaced with Fortis (but there were still two chairmen, in two HQ's.) The full-page launch ads (with the skydiver) used two tag lines, the thematic "Solid partners, flexible solutions" and the harder-edged identifier "Fortis. Insurance. Investments." Tony Spaeth CREDITS Landor (identity design London, research mostly San Francisco) CASE INFO Submitted by: Tony Spaeth, 21/05/2007 |
MATRIX DATA
DRIVERS | TOOLS | ||
Strategic driver: 100% | |||
Broaden scope/scale/visibility Elevate public profile | 40% | x | Identifier tactics: Logo change: Symbol-dominant |
x | Identity system elements: Visual system: Typography | ||
x | Identity system elements: Visual system: Palette | ||
x | Identity system elements: Verbal elements: Tag lines | ||
x | Identity system elements: Unit signature system: Monolithic | ||
x | Situation facts: Corporate level facts: Industry definition | ||
x | Change event : High visibility: Campaign | ||
Change internal culture Enhance pride & confidence | 10% | x | Identifier tactics: Logo change: Symbol-dominant |
x | Identity system elements: Unit signature system: Monolithic | ||
x | Change event : High visibility: Campaign | ||
Change internal culture Transfer affiliation from unit to parent | 20% | x | Identifier tactics: Logo change: Symbol-dominant |
x | Identity system elements: Visual system: Typography | ||
x | Identity system elements: Visual system: Palette | ||
x | Identity system elements: Verbal elements: Tag lines | ||
x | Identity system elements: Unit signature system: Monolithic | ||
x | Change event : High visibility: Campaign | ||
Change perceived composition Modify parental 'umbrella' presence | 30% | x | Identifier tactics: Logo change: Symbol-dominant |
x | Identity system elements: Visual system: Typography | ||
x | Identity system elements: Visual system: Palette | ||
x | Identity system elements: Verbal elements: Tag lines | ||
x | Identity system elements: Unit signature system: Monolithic | ||
x | Situation facts: Corporate level facts: Industry definition | ||
x | Change event : High visibility: Campaign | ||