When you change the spark plugs, you know what is going to happen. If that car was a complex system, you'd change the spark plugs and have to wait and see what happens

Branding is an unpredictable complex system because it involves humans. 

There's no way to predict with 100% certainty that a subtle change, a new direction, a refresh, or a radical rebrand (like Jaguar) will be a success or failure.

If the complicated system in a brand guide is supposed to leave a lasting impression, then you need a human to impress. And the moment there's human interaction, the system becomes complex. 

When you do one thing it affects many things. And you don't always know if they'll be positive because humans are complex. So when it comes to branding, you can't fully anticipate the long-game results.

Doesn't matter if it's a business category code, a culture code, or even an esoteric subculture code. They are begging to be changed.

Use branding to stand out within a boring-ass category.

You're a sheep. But why not be the black sheep?

any designer worth their salt wants to solve the problem, not the symptom. And we live in a world covered in band-aids treating symptoms.

Sometimes there are so many band-aids that you will never be able to uncover the problem.

Design isn't just a step in the chain. It IS the chain.

And YOU are a designer even if you're not a "designer."

A brand system should not be tyrannically rigid or aimlessly flexible. 

It just needs to be distinctive, repeatable, and recognizable.

But I don't think it's a matter of guarantees. It's a matter of brand.

Chrysler was shit and people knew it. Some might have even experienced it first-hand. Chrysler burned them. That's essentially betrayal—a trigger for some of the most powerful negative emotions a human can experience.

So yeah, no one believes your stupid crazy guarantee. You could almost say the Chrysler brand was so bad that the word "guarantee" became tainted (at least to some).

Your logo, name, colors, and product/service are all like wormholes into the crazy spacetime of brand. Make sure the wormholes go to the right places in time.

A logo can be like that bruise on your thigh that never goes away. A constant reminder of that time you bumped into that table (geez, you're so clumsy).

When you stack your branding with all 4 assets you inflict much more than a bruise.

It's more like a beatdown. 

"Most people make the mistake of thinking BRANDING is what it looks like. People think it's this veneer—that the designers are handed this box and told, "Make it look good!" That's not what we think BRANDING is. It's not just what it looks like and feels like. BRANDING is how it works."

People overcomplicate this whole brand thing.

Here's a really simple way to think about it: Brand is like a batting average.

Lebron and I are playing the same game. But we're not playing the same GAME, ya know?

So, stop comparing, emulating, and idolizing big brands like Nike, Apple, Liquid Death, etc.

You're not playing the same GAME.

But have you ever heard someone admiring the power of authentic branding by mentioning a person or brand they dislike?

Of course not. NO ONE does that.

When people admire "authentic" branding or "authenticity" it's totally biased. And it's usually some trending or topical brand the world is in love with. Right now it's Liquid Death. 

The devs were basically saying:

"We'll give you this little bit for free. Our shit is so good that you'll be compelled to copy and share the demo with friends and buy the full version."

If people weren't stoked, then it was destined to be buried with all the other BS shovelware.

Shovelware and shareware. Kinda the same, but not. Like, at all.

I'm not saying fake it. Never do that.

But there's a balance between being authentic and what the world will accept. 

Authenticity is not the formula for success. At best it's a gamble. And sometimes you roll snake eyes.

Yes, the more boring a system of branding is to use, the better it is.

The boring ENABLES the good.

Think about it like an assembly line.

You DO NOT need a logo to have a brand. I say this begrudgingly because I love to make logos. Let's break it down.

Let's start by asking: What is the bare minimum you need to have a brand? In other words, what is a Minimum Viable Brand (MVB)? 

I spontaneously spotted a Koozie logo and my brain melted. How have I seen thousands of koozies but have never seen the logo? How have I never even thought about WHY we call it a koozie?

This just proves that a logo is NOT a brand and that you don't even need a logo to create a brand. 

What your employees do, and the decisions they make, affect how customers perceive and remember your business.

Cliches, tropes, and stereotypes (oh, my).

Branding leverages this stuff to steer first impressions.

We're talking about mental shortcuts. That’s all.

This is the reason a ton of chicken shops have a chicken mascot in their logo. When you see a logo like this, you know they're cooking up some fire chicken.

What matters the most is how it looks and feels and sounds to customers and clients.

To them, a lack of consistency looks sketchy. And when you let your personal emotions direct how you go about branding your business, you're introducing sketchiness.