Featured cases
- ABM Industries 2012
- AkzoNobel 2008
- Alcatel-Lucent 2006
- Alliance Boots 2006
- Apple 2007
- Aramark 1994
- ArcelorMittal 2007
- Assurant 2004
- Bausch & Lomb 2004
- BDO International 2010
- Belgacom 2003
- Boise Cascade 2002
- BP 2000
- Broadview Security 2009
- Brocade 2007
- CA 2005
- Cardinal Health 2003
- CEC Bank 2008
- Chemtura 2005
- Cisco Systems 2006
- Cision 2007
- Computer Associates 2001
- Covidien 2007
- Credit Suisse 2006
- CSC 2008
- Daimler 2007
- Delta Air Lines 2007
- Devon Energy 2007
- DSM 2011
- Eastman Kodak 2006
- EDF 2005
- Experian 2007
- Federal Express 1994
- FedEx Corporation 2000
- FICO 2009
- Fiserv Inc. 2009
- Fortis 1998
- Fortis 2006
- Fortis 1991
- Genworth 2004
- Gillette 1993
- Grant Thornton 2008
- Harcourt General 1993
- Harlan Laboratories 2008
- Hyperion 2006
- Ingersoll Rand 2005
- Intel 2006
- Invista 2003
- Johnson Controls 2007
- Kemper 2011
- Lineage Logistics 2012
- LM Wind Power 2010
- Lucent Technologies 1996
- Marathon Oil Corporation 2011
- Marsh & McLennan Companies 2011
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) 2003
- McGladrey 2010
- Meredith Corporation 2009
- MFS Investment Management 2012
- Morgan Stanley 2006
- Nielsen 2007
- Nokia Siemens Networks 2007
- Novartis 1997
- NXP Semiconductors 2006
- Outward Bound USA 2005
- Polycom 2012
- Princeton University Press 2007
- Reliance ADAG 2006
- Rockwell Collins 2006
- Samsung 1993
- Sensata Technologies 2006
- Shipley Energy 2011
- Sistema Telecom 2006
- Smith & Nephew 2003
- Sprint (Sprint Nextel) 2005
- Starbucks 2011
- Tenneco 1995
- Texenergo 2011
- The Joint Commission 2007
- The Paley Center for Media 2007
- The Phoenix Companies 2006
- Thomson Reuters 2008
- Tyco Electronics 2007
- Umicore 2001
- Unilever 2004
- Unum Group 2007
- Vale 2007
- Vantiv 2011
- Velfina 2004
- Wolters Kluwer 2005
- Wyeth Pharmaceuticals 2002
- Xerox 2008
Case: BDO International 2010
BDO is a worldwide network of accounting firms. With 47,000 employees in 119 countries, and fee income (2010) of $5.28 billion, it ranks at #5. In 1973 it became "Binder Dijker Otte," and communicatively "BDO." These initials have been used (since 1988) to co-brand the heritage names of its local firms; thus BDO marketed in the UK as BDO Stoy Mayward, and in the US as BDO Seidman. But like other rebranders in this category (Grant Thornton in 2008 and PwC in 2010), BDO now feels better represented by a more seamless global identity. Thus it has imposed radical name surgery, replacing all its units' heritage names with country names... BDO Albania, BDO United Kingdom etc. The switch from local-heritage unit names to country-defined unit names required in some cases a form of reorganization, not merely nomenclature change. The rebrandings took place between Sepotember 2009 and March 2010. The global communicative name BDO and the BDO logo, however, remained unchanged. "We now get more and more rebranding jobs whose brief begins with 'don't change the logo'" says Simon Case, creative director of the design firm Greentarget. True; we have seen significant rebrandings using tools other than the logo (such as nomenclature, brand architecture and visual systems), and the Matrix must take note of them. While the backbone of this rebranding is verbal, its face and arguably its primary force is visual: it is the global imposition of an assertive visual system (including type and color palette), anchored by vertical red lines lifted from the logo. The system's universal presence is a visible manifestation of desired cooperation, coordination and discipline across national and institutional borders, which supports perception of "one network, to deliver consistent methodology, services and specialists worldwide." Because launch timing was controlled by member firms, and took place in a recession climate, there was no global launch event. CREDITS Identity counsel Fairley Associates, design Greentarget CASE INFO Submitted by: Tony Spaeth, 16/05/2011 |
MATRIX DATA
DRIVERS | TOOLS | ||
Strategic driver: 100% | |||
Broaden scope/scale/visibility Remove limiting geographic association | 20% | x | Identity system elements: Verbal elements: Principal unit names or competence list |
x | Situation facts: Subcorporate facts: Defining units | ||
Broaden scope/scale/visibility Enhance size perception | 20% | x | Identity system elements: Visual system: Typography |
x | Identity system elements: Visual system: Graphic devices | ||
x | Identity system elements: Visual system: Palette | ||
x | Identity system elements: Verbal elements: Principal unit names or competence list | ||
x | Identity system elements: Unit signature system: Monolithic | ||
x | Situation facts: Subcorporate facts: Defining units | ||
Change internal culture Transfer affiliation from unit to parent | 20% | x | Identity system elements: Visual system: Typography |
x | Identity system elements: Visual system: Graphic devices | ||
x | Identity system elements: Visual system: Palette | ||
x | Identity system elements: Verbal elements: Principal unit names or competence list | ||
x | Identity system elements: Unit signature system: Monolithic | ||
x | Situation facts: Subcorporate facts: Defining units | ||
Change perceived composition Redefine the defining units | 20% | x | Identity system elements: Verbal elements: Principal unit names or competence list |
x | Situation facts: Subcorporate facts: Defining units | ||
Change perceived composition Modify parental 'umbrella' presence | 20% | x | Identity system elements: Visual system: Typography |
x | Identity system elements: Visual system: Graphic devices | ||
x | Identity system elements: Visual system: Palette | ||
x | Identity system elements: Verbal elements: Principal unit names or competence list | ||
x | Identity system elements: Unit signature system: Monolithic | ||
x | Situation facts: Subcorporate facts: Defining units | ||