Do good brands v Brands that do good

In times of economic doom and gloom it is an easy call to lighten the mood by linking your brand to a good cause. Cause related branding such as buy red is on the increase. While there is no doubt that they do some good by raising awareness for a cause providing cash donations. I can't help but think that ultimately this is a selfish act. For example, for every sale of the red ipod, Apple donates just $10. The good association and boost in sales is worth a bit more surely. Also how deeply to consumers engage with these causes? There is a danger that they are merely fashion statements, another band to wear around your wrist. Easing social conscience but not affecting radical changes in opinion or action. In short they stand for a shallow way to do good.

On the other hand we have brands that do good. Brands that are inspired by a desire to generate profit to help people and the environment. Of course there are charitable brands, and they have the most sincere of approaches and powerful brands. It makes me wonder why anyone would buy an alternative to products such as suncream produced by the cancer society or pet food from the RSPCA (something I'd like to design).

There is another type of brand that does good. Brands like Patagonia and Frank water use business as a means to wholy support a cause. As a result they have a single minded powerful brand which communicates to consumers in a heart felt engaging way. Frank water exists because they "help fund clean water projects" water for water, as simple as that. Wouldn't it be great if all brands were as focussed and inspiring, and consumer choices as proactive.

Why Inside Out ?

As you can see I have changed my blog title from Odd One Out to Inside Out. This is not a shift in attitude or direction just a better expression of the values I am honing for my company. Odd One Out was representative of me, and the way I feel about myself as a designer and a general throw back to the feeling that I feel well, a little like the odd one out! Inside out is more reflective of my approach to design. Take what is on the inside of a brand/company and slap it right on out there plain as day for all the world to see. Great design is only as great as the company behind it. Clear and heart felt brand values create strong briefs, which in turn generates great design.

A brand like Patagonia...

Patagonia are a California based outdoor equipment manufacturer. On the surface of it, a not hugely exciting or world changing proposition. Wrong, this company is as progressive as they come. It's founding member Yvon Chouinard could be considered an environmental entrepreneur. He established his company to 'use business to inspire solutions to the environmental crisis.' He found his passion in climbing when he was a young man. It was Chouinard's chrome-molybdenum steel pitons that first gave him the taste for environmental business. He sold them to other climbers out the back of his car to fund his prolonged climbing adventures. He established Patagonia in 1965 and by 1970 they were the largest supplier of climbing hardware in the U.S. Today they produce climbing gear and clothing along with surfing and general outdoor equipment. All items are born out of the principle of creating items that cause 'least harm to the environment'. He describes it as 'clean' equipment. Clean in terms of the design and manufacture process and the way that the items interact in the environment.

So being as Yvon Chouinard and Patagonia are one of my heroes of business, I want to asses whether or not I feel that they communicate what they are about effectively. Words and phrases on their website like clean, environmental activist, real difference, freedom, respect, support, bare footed, organic, slow growing, risk, soul, reflection, functional and friends all bring resonance to their brand values. Overall I would surmise that they are a progressive company who are about commitment to the wild world. Commitment to wild spaces and people in equal measure. They underline these values in their company tag line, "committed to the core". Because they are committed to the wild world they strive to protect it so it may be enjoyed by future generations. So do they walk their talk? To evaluate this effectively we need ask only one question. Is every aspect of the company inspired by and true to their core values? As a checklist we look to three key areas:

Product - Is what you sell a true product of your core set of values?

Operations - Is the way that you run your business truly reflective of your core values?

Communications - Are you communicating your core values effectively to others?

Product and Operations: This is best summed up by Patagonia (obviously!) in their 'Environmentalism: What we do', section of their website

"Our definition of quality includes a mandate for building products and working with processes that cause the least harm to the environment. We evaluate raw materials, invest in innovative technologies, rigorously police our waste and use a portion of our sales to support groups working to make a real difference. We acknowledge that the wild world we love best is disappearing. That is why those of us who work here share a strong commitment to protecting undomesticated lands and waters. We believe in using business to inspire solutions to the environmental crisis"

So if we assume that this statement is true, and I don't see anything to suspect the contrary, their product and processes truly reflect their values of commitment. Commitment, on their own part, to the cause of protecting the wild planet. Also a commitment to spreading the word of environmentalism to others. You buy a Patagonia product and you truly buy into a way of life and a mental attitude as well as a bloomin great rucksack.

So in my opinion, does Patagonia effectively communicate their commitment to wild spaces? They definitely do, by what they say; They admit they are not yet perfect (100% sustainable) in their product and manufacturing processes, but express a deep commitment to improving them. They are committed to the people that work for them by offering liberal amounts of compassion and inspiration. They are committed to the cause of effecting change through business and so have a raison d'etre.

Do their values translate visually? Their human and environmental policies shine out like a lighthouse. Active wear made by a committed company for similarly committed individuals out there in wild spaces doing what they love. The website is illustrated with images of people doing extreme activities. They have ambassadors for their products, hardcore individuals who have gone above and beyond the barriers that would have had us lesser mortals running for cover. They are images that show people with a level of commitment necessary to achieve great things.

Patagonia through its verbal and visual communications sets itself up as a 'committed leader' which in turn inspires dedicated followers. This is in contrast to a company like Timberland who have adopted the role of 'guardian' - We take care of it, so you don't have to. When you buy a Timberland product you do so to support their responsible processes, it's a more one way relationship. A brand like Nike on the other hand has adopted the role of the 'motivator', they give strength to their followers to be the best they can be.

The Brand Mark:
Does the Patagonia logo simply and confidently communicate their commitment to the wild world? The brand's namesake Patagonia, has many truly wild spaces. It is also under threat from a lot of environmental concerns that echo the woes of our planet. In the logo we see a foreboding set of black mountains that do speak of wild spaces and the risk one takes when venturing into them. But that sky, that dawn, it is inviting and exciting. It has a true optimism about it, just like the company. It talks about the commitment to creating a brighter tomorrow. in its styling it is reminiscent of South American textile design, so giving it a back to nature authentic feel.

The font chosen for the Patagonia brand name is classic but a little left field. It looks in congruent with the mountain silhouette behind it. The mountains themselves are badly drawn with a thick heavy key line that forgets the dawn of more enlightened brushes in Illustrator. You might say that the logo itself could do with a refresh, a bit of love and respect paid to it. You could also argue that it's slightly clunky appearance is representative of the raw aspects of nature and a slightly devil may care attitude, setting it apart from the multitude of slick big corporate logos. Overall I would conclude that Patagonia fulfils its aim of inspiring people though action and effectively communicates their commitment to wild spaces. I would say though, that some of the styling in the logo is a bit tired and could do with just a bit of attention to gently coax it into the 21st century and the brighter - with Patagonia's and its followers' help - future beyond.