Reposition or refresh?

When a brand feels tired, the conversation almost always starts with what is visible: the logo, the color, the typeface. It is understandable; it is what we see every day. But deciding the type of project by how the brand looks, rather than by what happened to the business, is one of the most expensive mistakes a company can make.

There are two paths, and it is worth not confusing them.

Refresh is updating the expression of a brand whose promise remains valid. The visual system is adjusted (logo drawing, typeface, color, digital behavior) and everything people already recognize is protected.

Reposition is changing what the brand means because the business changed: who it sells to, what it sells or who it competes against. Strategy and narrative come first. Visual identity is a consequence, not the starting point.

A refresh that erased what worked. In January 2009, Tropicana changed the packaging for Pure Premium: it removed the orange with the straw, its most recognizable signal, and replaced it with a generic glass of juice. Between January 1 and February 22, sales fell 20% in units and 19% in dollars, about 33 million dollars, according to IRI data published by Advertising Age. On February 23, the brand announced that it was returning to the previous packaging. The business had not changed; only the thing customers used to find it on the shelf had changed.

A refresh that protected its assets. In 2016, Mastercard simplified its identity with Pentagram, but kept the red and yellow circles. Three years later, with more than 80% of people recognizing the symbol without the word, it was able to remove the name from the logo. Modernizing without losing memory is exactly that.

A reposition that started with the business. When beverages already represented close to 60% of its sales, Dunkin' Donuts became Dunkin' in 2019. It changed the name because what it sold had changed, but kept the pink and orange and the typeface it has used since 1973. The visual change followed the strategy, not the other way around.

The science behind it. The Ehrenberg-Bass Institute calls colors, shapes, symbols and typefaces that the public already associates with a brand distinctive assets. Its researcher Jenni Romaniuk recommends that the default response to changing them should be "no", unless there is a clear strategic advantage. When an asset is changed to "get attention", the only thing altered is the way the customer recognizes the brand.

At IIHB, we ask three questions about the business before touching a single visual element:

1. Did who you sell to change? A new segment, a new country, or a shift from consumer to business.
2. Did what you sell change? A new category, business model or margin.
3. Did who you compete against change? New rivals or a market that moved.

And a fourth, which decides how much can move: what assets does your customer already recognize without reading your name? A color, a shape, a symbol, a tone. Those are protected in every scenario.

• Two or three "yes" answers: Reposition. The business moved and the brand has to tell a new story. Strategy, narrative, brand architecture and, after that, identity.
• No "yes" answers and the brand only looks old: Refresh. The promise is still valid. Update the expression and protect the distinctive assets.
• One "yes" answer: grey area. Before deciding, a diagnosis is useful: customer interviews, competitor review and an asset inventory.

• Using identity as a signal of internal change. New leadership or a bad year are not, by themselves, reasons to redesign.
• Doing a Reposition as if it were a Refresh. The result is a prettier brand that keeps speaking to the wrong customer.
• Doing a Refresh as if it were a Reposition. Time and money are spent breaking the memory the customer already had, as happened to Tropicana.

Choosing the right type of project is half the result. The scope of each case is defined in a diagnostic conversation with the studio.

Does your brand need a shift or an adjustment? Write to us at hola@2hb.com.mx.

• Advertising Age, Tropicana Line's Sales Plunge 20% Post-Rebranding, 2 Apr 2009
• Bloomberg, Tropicana Fiasco From Arnell Is Gift That Keeps Giving, 2 Apr 2009
• Mastercard, Mastercard evolves its brand mark by dropping its name, 7 Jan 2019
• The Wall Street Journal, Dunkin' to Drop 'Donuts' From Brand's Name, 25 Sep 2018
• Restaurant Dive, 26 Sep 2018
• Jenni Romaniuk, Building Distinctive Brand Assets (Oxford University Press, 2018) and 2019 interview