Adapt or die? When total brand overhauls work, and when they don’t

For some brands, being agile enough to continually evolve is integral to their identity, and befitting of its audience. Take Mailchimp; following Collins’ 2018 rebrand, the email marketing and automation platform employed an identity under the guise of the “Expert Absurdist”, defined not only by its surreal illustrations and vibrant colours but by its perpetual, mostly-unrestricted creative growth. In 2020, Mailchimp launched its own in-house creative agency, Wink Creative, as a space to further explore where Collins’ rebrand could take them – here, the company was allowed to mess around whilst still grounding itself in a set of design guardrails that would keep the experimentation coherent. The room to be intentionally inconsistent is a privilege afforded by the creative nature of its audience; as its primary users are marketeers, design studios and in-house designers, reinvention is less of a risk.

“Mailchimp’s unique personality also strikes a chord with consumers in younger demographics,” Jeremy Jones, global head of creative at Wink points out, “who’re increasingly seeking authentic connections with the brands they interact with.” In an era of information oversaturation, Jeremy argues that Mailchimp’s offbeat, personality-driven brand has cultivated loyal connections. We’ll see, however, how the next reinvention goes for Mailchimp, as its future plans seem fairly controversial. The company has been pursuing AI technologies, which it sees as “an opportunity to keep the brand current and innovative”. Jeremy says that the brand looks to leverage AI in a number of ways, including “campaign ideation and creation”, which is currently very tricky ground amongst the creative communities it has built such affinity with – so the company will need to tread delicately.

It’s worth considering whether it’s the Mailchimp brand that has changed, or simply its advertising. Either way, the appearance of the brand today is a brand that’s lively and forward-thinking, something Jeremy puts down to the character of the creative team behind it. “It’s about having that willingness to risk the new and build the extraordinary,” says Jeremy. “We’ve tried to balance that newness with our heritage by driving the creation of radical, strange, and compelling work,” remaining both familiar and “always Mailchimpy” without feeling creatively stale. That said, it raises the question of what’s legitimate “heritage” and what is actually just a bit old. Mailchimp was founded in 2001, so perhaps these terms should be more carefully applied.

For other big reinventions, big design resets were rooted in changes to brand context, as seen in the case with paper purveyor GF Smith’s rebrand. With the help of cause-led agency Templo, GF Smith sought a rebrand that would inject more colour, movement and personality into its identity. GF Smith’s global brand director, Ben Watkinson said that “as the world evolves – becoming more digital, immediate and connected – so must we.”

Much like Mailchimp, GF Smith’s audience is creative – meaning something more “out-there” seems like it would be well received. However, that wasn’t the case with the rebrand. The new system intentionally scrapped any sense of legacy or heritage – like removing the 1885 founding date previously shown on brand materials – in favour of a smiley face, bright colours and fun, chunky lettering. The well-intentioned thought underpinning these changes, as Templo’s fellow co-founder and managing director, Anoushka Rodda, explains, came from the agency’s identification of “warmth, character and social conscience” as the heart of the GF Smith brand. Templo took this concept and ran with it, while also considering the ask for something more digital-friendly. It made a very bold move to purposely move in the opposite direction of its traditional, British, luxury aesthetic, towards a more playful, creative tone, risking the loss of its association with time-tested quality. Many people who love the brand hated the rebrand, but many stood up for it; and, as Anoushka says, only time will tell if it was the right move.

Returning to Jaguar, if we take the art direction out of the picture for a moment and look at what the primary touchpoint for a car brand is – its badge – the minimal, less textural typographic approach Jaguar has opted for feels more appropriate. If we look at Vauxhall, for example, or Mini’s rebrand in 2017, both opted for something simpler, like Jaguar. But, in Mini’s case, it went in a more nostalgic direction – and it’s now doing better than ever, in part because it tapped into the vast visual heritage and the stature that affords the brand. Maybe Tate & Lyle’s desire to appeal to a younger audience through simplified graphics and a squeezy bottle is, although well-intentioned, unbefitting. After all, Golden Syrup is pretty vintage, not just in age but use. Perhaps, a younger audience would resonate more if the brand doubled-down on its legacy and reputability. Trader Joe’s infamous tote bag isn’t popular with young people because it looks new, far from it. It’s liked because it feels old. A little bit of mom-and-pop.