Some thoughts on graphic design and visual identity
The London based design agency Browns was responsible for the creation of Invesco’s visual identity. I asked the founder Jonathan Ellery his thoughts on graphic design and the creation and articulation of visual identity.
As both an artist and graphic designer how do you define the two fields? What makes them different and what similarities do they share?
Graphic design and art are completely different things. They’re generally good friends, but they’re not to be confused. For me, and my studio Browns, there are three things that define the discipline of graphic design.
- Firstly it needs a client.
- Secondly, it needs a brief to answer.
- And lastly, there needs to be a fee involved.
In our opinion, if it doesn’t have all three, then it’s not graphic design. This helps avoid any confusion especially alongside art. This definition is its strength, it’s what makes design powerful, it has a job to do and complex problems to solve. And it certainly shouldn’t feel in some way ‘beneath’ art, which is often the case in moments of collective insecurity. Art is different. There is no brief, no client and no fee. And that definition should be its strength.
What in your opinion is key to the successful creation and implementation of a visual identity system? In addition to the manual what other methods have you used to communicate visual identity?
There are quite a few key things that need to be in place to enable a successful implementation. Any identity really has to mean something, to stand for something as a business culture, and to do that you need strong, progressive leadership. With Invesco some practical tools were also developed to move things along and educate staff at all levels explaining why things need to change and how to initiate that change. These came in the form of a brand film and a series of films that answered any questions staff might have. These all worked alongside the Brand Portal, this being the place where staff could practically access the guideline for specific things, whilst at the same time understand the thinking behind it all.
Last time we spoke you discussed how the contemporary concept of Brand has hijacked corporate identity. Do you think that the brand bubble will burst at some point in the future and corporations will once again place graphic design at the core of their brand?
From my perspective the use of the word ‘Brand’ has indeed been hijacked over the years and has been replaced by a sea of mediocrity. Everyone seems to know everything about brands both in the design and advertising worlds. But like any other discipline, very few have the ability and skill to actually build a brand. With that in mind, some time ago we made the decision that as a studio we would refrain from using the language of generic brand mediocrity and instead return to a language of ‘Corporate Identity’. This was to differentiate us as much as anything, but it’s also a belief that corporate identity really is at the very heart of things, it’s where everything comes from. It’s something that as a studio we strongly believe in.
Of course an advertising agency will tell you something different, but then again an advertising agency traditionally does not have the ability to create an identity and subsequent systems, it is not in its nature or DNA. This would explain why the use of the word ‘Brand’ can often be convenient as it broadens the remit and creates a landscape where mediocrity can flourish.
(Davis to Ellery, 2014) Featured: Major project report for a Master of Arts in Graphic Design from the London College of Communication (UAL).
Thanks for reading, please take a look at my related articles.
