STRATEGIC DESIGN LANGUAGE – TRANSFORMING BRAND IDENTITY

INTO PRODUCT DESIGN ELEMENTS

Toni-Matti KARJALAINEN
TAI Research Centre, Helsinki University of Technology – P.O.Box 9555, 02015
HUT, Finland
University of Art and Design Helsinki
[email protected]

Proceedings of the 10th International Product Development Management Conference,

Brussels June 10-11 2003

ABSTRACT
This paper discusses the role and use of product design elements as brand
manifestations by suggesting a conceptual standpoint (semantic profile of products)
by which semantic references in product design may be analysed and competitive
brand associations managed. The paper is based on my doctoral research that has
approached the issue by combining perspectives of brand-related research and
design/product semantics. The empirical data is gathered through qualitative case
studies on Volvo automobiles and Nokia mobile phones. From the management
perspective, the paper illustrates the importance of consistent view on strategic brand
identity and the role of explicit and implicit product knowledge in managing strategic
design language.

INTRODUCTION
In developed product categories where technical differences between products are
diminishing, the focus is shifting towards communicative product qualities that
represent the symbolic domain of the product. The communicative qualities are often
entangled with a specific set of meanings referring to the brand that the product
represents. The importance of branding – the act of evoking strategic associations
through various means of communication – in contemporary marketplace is evident.
For customers, brands generate choice, simplify purchase decisions, offer quality
assurance, and reduce risks involved in purchase [1]. For a company, to embody
correct messages - that support strategic brand identity - into design elements is thus
an essential matter.
This means that recognition and identification of specific brand identity references
in product design, in other words, brand-specific design language, is an issue of high
relevance for companies that either live or die through the volume of their product
sales. From a company’s viewpoint, successful encoding necessitates not only firm
knowledge of the various functions and typologies of the products in question in order
to locate the domains of symbolic representation, but also (often inherently expressed)
abilities to judge whether a specific solution is coherent to the brand’s identity.

RESEARCH POSITION AND GAP

The fundamentals of brand identity are widely discussed in brand management and
corporate identity literature. The definition and strategic role of brand varies greatly
among different viewpoints, but most of the literature may be categorised into four
generic brand management paradigms: product, projective, adaptive and relational
paradigms [2]. The understanding of brand management in general, and particularly
the management strategies of the most powerful brands emphasise the importance of
relational approach, being in constant interaction with customers. Within product
development, this puts specific emphasis on finding proper methods for gathering
customer information. In my research, however, I take the relational (and adaptive)
paradigm predominantly as given, and focus on the means of transmitting strategic
brand identity (that is thus based on proper information gathering) to customers
through product design. This positions my research in the projective paradigm.
In addition to conceptual discussion on brands, various texts provide frames for
managing brand identity [3] and stress the importance of coherent and well-justified
brand messages. It is important for a company to define “competence associations”
[4] that, by definition, are in the core of company’s competitive advantage. A
company may define this core identity – the essential message – by using different
analytical tools. These may provide assistance to strategic brand analysis, to the
holistic design of brand identity system and its implementation [5]. It seems to be
essential to recognise and define a consistent brand platform [6] that functions as the
basis of brand behaviour and communication.
Within the area of brand management, there is a clear lack of research that would
address the issue of brand identity management particularly from the standpoint of
semantic product design. The significant role of design in strategic brand
communication is recognised in the design management area [7] and in the visual
marketing communication [8]. But although the direct relationship between brand
experience and product experience is recognised [9], and the general opinion within
the professional field of design admits that product should communicate brand ethos,
there appears no deep discussion that would take this issue under conceptual scrutiny.
To fill this gap, the most natural field to look would be product/design semantics that
has focused on the representational qualities of physical products [10]. Products have
been analysed, for instance, by assessing their underlying functions, typologies and
physical manifestations from a semantic perspective [11]. Within this discussion,
brand and/or company identification has been often mentioned as an important aspect
but has been left without deeper consideration.

RESEARCH OBJECTIVES AND METHODS

My doctoral research builds a conceptual framework to combine the perspectives
of brand-related research fields (brand management, corporate identity, design
management) and design/product semantics. The objective is to study how brand-
specific identity references are formed in product design. Accordingly, theoretical
goals include clarifying the construction of brand identity concept and conceptualising
the role and location of identity references in product design. The empirical goal is
also twofold. First, I focus on studying the essence and representation of brand
identity through specific company and product cases, and second, on explaining how
these attributes are communicated through product design elements. My study
approaches these themes in a qualitative manner through the in-depth cases of Volvo
cars and Nokia mobile phones. These cases were selected in accordance to their
relevance to my study, rich contents and easy access to the data [12].
The prior data sources within the cases may be grouped into three categories. First,
public documents and internal company documents have been used to describe and
analyse various representations of brand identity. Second, the products under scrutiny
and, in specific, their design features (as they occur) have been analysed in order to
clarify functions their semantic profile. Third, and most importantly, personal
interviews have enabled potential insights of the design process as experienced and
described by designers themselves. The collected data has been analysed by
organising it in a non-cross-sectional manner and interpretation has been conducted in
a merely descriptive manner by complicating the data [13].

BRAND IDENTITY
The metaphorical use of the notion of “identity” in the corporate contexts suggests
that, similarly to human beings, also companies can be described through specific
characteristics. This “character” gives meaning to the company and its artefacts by
evoking specific associations that are attached to the corporate brand name.

Brand identity and the underlying corporate “reality”

Whether brand identity is something that implicitly results from the company’s
existence and actions or a merely artificial construction consciously created by the
company is a fundamental concern. In this respect, it may be possible to distinguish
three broad perspectives (or theories) on the use of corporate identity metaphor [14].
First, corporate identity may be seen as an expression of corporate personality.
This viewpoint emphasises “acting in character”. In other words, corporate identity is
the tangible representation, or reflection, of the personality, the expression as manifest
in the behaviour and communication of the organisation [15]. Identity, for example,
reflects the company’s or the brand’s cultural roots. Brand may be seen as a genre that
reflects the values and beliefs of the “brand originator” who is rooted in a particular
culture [16].
The second perspective, corporate identity as organisational reality, adds an
intentional aspect to the first view. According to it, organisations have a factual
identity – internal company characteristics – that is communicated to publics
(corporate identity management). Company-specific features that comprise this
identity include the strategy, philosophy, ownership, history, business scope, the range
and types of products offered, corporate and product performance, internal systems
and structures, core values, and company’s communication. Corporate communication
is seen as representing the “essential” identity or personality of an organisation, to
which the content of communication must correspond. In relation to this view, it may
be possible to describe some brands as “value exporters” [17]. They have strong
values that are often linked to national characteristics. These brands, for instance, use
design as a tool to emphasise either their national origin or the set of values that
differentiate them from other products. Volvo is an example of such brand. It has
always retained a strong Swedish identity that is associated with safety and protection.
Safety is thus the absolute essence of the Volvo brand, being its true competitive
advantage. Volvo has succeeded in building associations related to safety and
Swedishness through consistent communication, and most importantly, through focus
on research and development of safety features in the cars.
Third, the viewpoint of identity as appearance, or corporate identity as all
corporate expressions, assumes that identity emerges in social interaction and
emphasises that multiple identities can be enacted. As the authors suggest, this is close
to the rhetorical or symbolic interactionist view of communication in which signs and
symbols issued by a company do not so much designate objects but rather constitute
them [18]. Meaning is thus not something objective to be transferred; it is rather
created by organisations in the act of communication. Consequently, the premise of
this metaphor is that identity can be deliberately created, transformed, and
restructured by the company and thus not necessarily have to refer to any inner values
or “essence”. This may result to multiple identities that are subject to varied contexts.
Companies operating in accordance to this approach may be identified as “value
collectors” [19]. Such brands may have a strong internal culture, but their external
identity is less consistent (identifiable). This strategy is needed in situations where
customer groups are heavily fragmented, cultural market differences significant, or
product life cycles short. Nokia (mobile phones), for instance, places more stress on
adapting its business idea to multiple customer segments, fast-changing lifestyles, and
local needs.

Strategic brand identity

The premise of identity as an inherently born phenomenon as opposed to the
consciously constructed set of identity characteristics may have dramatic
consequences on the analysis of “truthfulness” in brand communication and would
therefore deserve deeper consideration. However, the question of concern in this
particular paper is more about the correspondence between specifically “defined”
identity (in terms of explicit characteristics) and intentional communication (through
product design). Hence, I regard brand identity primarily as a strategic concept that
fundamentally involves the aspect of intentional actions. Nonetheless, in most cases,
the transformed message is yet on a firmer basis if it is underpinned by the
organisational “reality” that professes convergent ethos.
Brand usually functions as the central manifestation of company’s identity. It
involves the key identity attributes in a “condensed” form. In specific, the brand name
functions as a sign, connoting specific meanings by activating a network of
associations, both intended and unpredictable. In my framework, specific design
elements (brand’s “design cues”), when being linked to a certain brand, basically
function in accordance to a similar logic of embodying particular meanings. On the
symbolic level, a brand with a strong and consistent set of associations may over time
even become an entity that is most resistant to different value perceptions in different
cultures [20]. For instance, Volvo is seen as a (iconic) brand representing safety in
different markets. A key issue for most brands, in effect, would be to focus on the
“essential” meaning that the brand signals and is perhaps fundamentally known for.

SEMANTIC PROFILE OF PRODUCTS

As the basic proposition of this paper, products function as manifestations of brand
identity by evoking certain associations that, in an ideal situation, are aligned to
strategically defined message of the brand. Intentional meaning transmission through
product design, therefore, requires specific product knowledge. The analysis of
semantic profile may start with distinguishing semantic product functions from other
product functions and, on the basis of this, creating product typologies. From the
perspective of brand identity management, it is important to recognise those functions
that identity the brand. They are, in the first place, qualitative descriptions some of
which can have a direct connection to physical product qualities. A general
framework for the analysis of semantic profile is illustrated in figure 1.
 physical manifestations
> Semantic product features
references: symbolic iconic indexical

product character
> qualitative descriptions

describtion identification exhortation expression

semantic product functions

Figure 1 Framework for analysing the semantic profile of products

Product functions
In terms of product functions – the viewpoint of products in their various use
contexts – special interests lie in distinguishing those functions that are typical for the
respective brand. In specific, my attention is focused on functions that have high
semantic relevance. As an example, product functions into practical functions and
product language functions [21]. Alternative, we may talk about communicative
product functions that are presented as a sub-category to interactive functions (as
differentiated from technical product functions), and divided into syntactic and
semantic functions [22]. Fundamentally, identification is a central task of these
semantic functions (see figure 2).

FUNCTION CLASS FUNCTION TYPE Descriptive words

Transform
Technical functions Operative Primary Transforming Transmit
Rotate
(internal product functions)
Communication Regulate
Secondary Interface Convert
Supply
Power
Control
Protection
Connect
Structural Support
Restrain

Protect
Ergonomic Enable
Interactive functions Facilitate
Fit/suit
(hum an-product interaction)
Express
Communicative Semantic Describe
Identify
Exhort

Refer
Connect
Syntactic Unite
Discern
Balance

Figure 2 Categorisation of product functions (source: Warell 2001)

Qualitative descriptions and physical manifestations

It is essential to recognise and define the actual product qualities that may have
high semantic relevance in terms of specific brand associations. Different product
qualities - such as dimensions, features, and characters - are often expressed by
adjectival constructions [23]. We may say that a product looks (or feels) “harmonic”,
“modern”, “safe”, and so forth. In effect, products are often given a character in a
similar manner as human beings. This character refers to a coherent set of
characteristics and attributes that apply to appearance and behaviour alike, cutting
across different functions, situations and value systems [24]. The character provides
an end-user with support for anticipation, interpretation, and interaction. In the brand
context, certain characteristics or attributes (for instance, supported by or embedded in
specific design elements) signal to the user that while this product “seems” to be a
product of that specific brand, it is anticipated to have that certain character. Thus,
finding proper descriptions to support strategic brand identity is important for the
company. Volvo products should evoke associations related to safety, and Nokia
phones should strive values supporting personalisation. Descriptive qualities may be
directly or indirectly manifest in physical manifestations of the product, such as form
elements, colours, materials and surface treating. In terms of product design elements,
it is important to distinguish between those elements that are typical for the brand and
those that are not.

Creating product typologies

It is possible to define various categorisation levels (super-ordinate, basic, and sub-
ordinate levels) according to products’ solution-typical, prototypical and behaviour-
typical qualities [25]. Solution-typical categorisation relates to the form as such,
whereas prototypical and, in specific, behaviour-typical categorisations stem from the
use of products in cultural and social context. A product may be seen as more typical
within a specific category than another one – a chair may look more or less “chair-
like”, or a car more or less “Volvo-like”. Consequently, this stresses the importance of
selecting a proper level for analysis when identifying brand-specific design
references. New product forms create new interpretations of typicality, and the
designer must select which features are needed to influence changes in perception
[26]. It has to be considered what exclusive semantic features should the product
contain that will give it the sub-ordinate-level identity.
In most cases, the analysis of brand-specific design elements focuses deliberately
on sub-ordinate levels that consist of features that actually differentiate competing
products. This level usually regards design elements in connection to culturally and
socially created meanings. The basic level is inappropriate, for example, to the
analysis of Volvo design cues, while it only includes features that are typical to every
car and, thus, do not function as identifying attributes. However, the case could be
somewhat different in other categories, especially in those that are still on the early
phase of their life cycles. Or in those that are otherwise volatile in nature. For
example, in the mobile phones, the prototypical features – thus, the features that a
product should have in order to be included in the category of mobile phones – are
less obvious. Especially in terms of design, there exist a number of alternative
solutions even for “basic” elements, such as displays and buttons. Consequently, the
higher order features can be important brand identifiers for a company such as Nokia,
while it as a powerful player strongly shapes the course of the whole mobile phone
category. Some initially brand-specific (i.e. behaviour-typical) elements can even
become product-specific (i.e. prototypical) elements.

Identifying design elements

Some of the tangible attributes that are specific to a brand may be explicitly
defined. For example, the tendency to define a specific the set of corporate colours
has become a crucial activity for every publicly visible company. In terms of
industrial design, interest may be focused on recognising and creating so-called
“traceable”, explicit design elements [27]. These elements may be deduced to basic-
level ordering elements, and can thus be analysed in detail. Nonetheless, interpretation
of design elements are always subject to subjectivity, which means that they need to
have a clear strategic connection to brand identity. In other words, customers must be
provided with relevant “codes” in order to nourish intentional associations. A specific
line or form composition in any car could mean a vast variety of different things, but
in a Volvo car it might be interpreted as an identification of the Volvo brand.
There appear different methods to analyse products and product families in
reactive manner (to find and define brand-specific cues) or in proactive manner (to
create brand-specific design language) [28]. By performing such an analysis, a list of
brand-specific references (and perhaps their relative weights) may be formed. Precise
mappings can also be problematic, while they offer favourable grounds for subjective
interpretations. When searching for brand identity references, it is often reasonable to
adhere to specific “key” elements (and they are usually not many – in Volvo case
there are 4-5 characteristic elements).
The creation of a consistent product language for the brand emphasises the focus
on the entire product portfolio of the brand [29]. The intention of numerous
companies (not of every one though) is to create and maintain harmonious portfolios
including products with notable “family resemblance”. For example, as a result of the
major restructuring of its design language in the early part of the 1990’s, Volvo
introduced few strong design elements (such as the “shoulder line”, characteristic
grill, V-shaped bonnet, and distinctive boot) in the S80 model and later in every new
production car it have introduced afterwards (see figure 3).

V-SHAPED BONNET MASSIVE GRILLE

SHOULDER LINE BACK LIGHT & BOOT

Figure 3. Traceable design elements of Volvo cars

In the case of Volvo, the link of traceable design elements to the brand’s heritage is
clear. Even though the creation of the new design language was characterised by
intuitive reasoning, most of the elements seen in figure 3 have been used in various
forms in several historic Volvo models. Hence, Volvo could be identified as a “brand
reputation specialist” [30]: It is developing and using specific brand traits to support
distinctive identity. The brand has had a distinctive identity since decades – strongly
due to consistent emphasis on strategic brand communication around the themes of
safety and family values (“Swedishness”). Strong and consistent cues are required for
such a (relatively) small market player in order to create and maintain firm
recognition.
Nonetheless, brand-specific design language cannot be wholly or explicitly
reduced to specific (traceable) elements; there also exists non-traceable characteristics
in terms of company’s design culture and brand heritage. The meanings related to
objects often remain tacit and implicit. We may know that in practice this or that item
of clothing ‘looks good’, ‘works well’, or ‘is stylish’. “The same applies to brand-
specific design language. We may be able to agree that a specific product or design
looks “Nokia-like” but can not necessarily state in an explicit manner what makes it
look like that. In the Volvo case, when the first sketch propositions of the upcoming
Volvo design direction were presented to the company’s design manager, he
immediately experienced a “subconscious feeling” telling that this is the design
language Volvo should imply in the future. Thus, these examples, and many others of
similar kind, suggest that semantic transformation is explicable only to a certain
degree. Designers transfer this implicit knowledge of brand-specific design language
to products during the conceptualisation phase. It typically signals (brand) design
heritage and culture, and is gained through experience. It may take a relatively long
time for an individual designer to adopt the brand’s design culture and thus to be able
to fully capture the “idea” behind brand-specific design language [31].

Semantic references of design elements

The relationship between physical design elements and their qualitative
descriptions (and brand identity attributes) may be conceptualised through semantic
analysis. Specific product qualities – say design elements – function as signs that
could be understood, for example, in accordance to the Peircean tradition of semiotics
[32]. Regarding the reference relation, sign may be comprehended as a relation to its
object, such as a specific quality of a brand it represents (e.g. “safety” in the case of
Volvo). Concerning brand identity references, the emphasis is placed on the set of
associations that functions within the triadic relation between the sign
(“representamen” - embedded in the design element), the object (of reference), and
the interpretant. Within this relation, we may talk about iconic, indexical, and
symbolic references (or signs) that are to be traced in product design [33]. This
scheme is illustrated in figure 4.

“safety” O

I (Interpreted
ic dex
In

l
sy on

as safe)
bo
m

a specific
composition of
lines that make
the side look
R
“thicker”

Figure 4 The triadic sign according to the Peircean view and it’s application to the
Volvo case

The reference relation is rarely as straightforward as this. Instead, the relation

between the sign and object of reference may be in most cases illustrated by a bundle
of “semantic strings”, meaning that a specific association (evoked by the reference
relationship) may lead to another association that again leads to another and so forth.
This bares relevance to earlier mentioned non-traceable design elements suggesting
that there seem to appear symbolic references also on intangible level. Perhaps, we
may not have consistent methods to reveal them, for example, because reference
relations may be constructed by strings of signs, and the entanglement of semantic
references is far from the “genuine” relation. Moreover, associations (or
characteristics) are often “coupled”, which may bring new interpretations to initially
simple relation. For example, “big” is often associated with “heavy”. [34]
Regarding tangible design elements and their interpretation, there appear various
reference relations that are rather stable, even universal, as being either inherent to
human nature or culturally established “codes”. For example, rounded forms and
warm colours may suggest that a product has a warm, friendly and protective
character [35]. The strong characteristic shoulders in Volvo cars add a safety
appearance to the cars while making doors and sides look thicker. In fact, when
conceptualising the characteristic lines of Volvo cars, designers have used various
metaphors (such as muscular movements, athletes, and wild cats) as a support to
embody references to dynamism and strength in their cars. Such elements - whose
attribution is “close to the ideal” - are cognitively powerful concepts and relate to
“complete characteristics” [36]. Nonetheless, they are significantly rare in comparison
to “partial characteristics” that have a lesser scope of attribution.
We may consider most brand-specific design elements as being related to partial
characteristics. For example, the framing the display of the mobile phone or the
composition of the buttons (that are apparent in several Nokia models in varied forms)
may not be inherently recognised as reflecting Nokia brand (see figure 5). In
accordance with the view of intentional brand identity communication, symbolic signs
get their strongest meaning predominantly within the target group of the product (or
the brand). Outside the target group they may be arbitrary or even meaningless. Partial
characteristics cannot be used successfully beyond their limited scope and if the scope
is unknown the outcome will generally be uncertain. Some users interpret design
elements as “making sense”, while others may not pay any attention to them. If
consistently strengthened, some elements may approach “complete characterisation”
by becoming so powerful (“brand icons”) that they are comprehensively related to the
brand in question.

Figure 5 Characteristic design elements of Nokia 3310.

MANAGING STRATEGIC DESIGN LANGUAGE

Finally, I discuss some important issues from the management perspective of
product development. These notions reflect the main managerial implications
resulting from my case studies.

The significance of a strategic brand identity

The importance of transmitting a coherent message that reflects the brand’s core
competencies cannot be underestimated. In both case studies, powerful brand identity
and various actions supporting that are strong success factors. The strategic identity
may be utterly explicit and simply aligned, like safety in the case of Volvo, or based
on a more subjective interpretation, like personalisation (and “connecting people”) in
the case of Nokia.
 The basic task of strategic brand identity management is thus to create a valuable
message that is then intentionally transformed to target customers by evoking brand-
specific associations through various means of communication. A basic management
approach involves contemplating product as part of the brand identity system [37].
Preceding the definition of brand identity system, the company should perform a
strategic brand analysis of customers, competitors, and the brand itself. The
significance of brand’s self-analysis (in terms of existing brand image, heritage,
strengths/capabilities, and organization values) is important in a case where the brand
has long and/or strong position in the market.
In my case studies, the inherent (and not only conscious) impact of brand culture,
heritage, and reputation on aligning the strategic identity is clear, though differing
among respective cases. Volvo has an established brand image that has a strong
character and is rather stable. The company cannot neglect the heritage – it offers an
extremely powerful platform to stand. Nokia is also as the market leader of the mobile
phone category an extremely powerful brand. Nonetheless, as the category of mobile
phones is still on its early phases of development, and the brands do not yet have clear
profiles. In fact, Nokia is shaping the whole product category, and innovation (and
thus constant renewal) is required from the brand. In addition, Volvo has a much
narrower product line and scope of activities than Nokia that has to pay much
attention to differentiating the messages of different product categories and thus
stretch the brand’s identity. The importance of a clear core message is, however,
important in Nokia case too. Being consistent in evoking strategic associations is a
serious requirement.

The importance of product knowledge

How to communicate this identity through design is a major concern. My case
studies suggest that in order to build and nurture a clear identity, the company should
possess a firm body of knowledge of the semantic product functions. Part of this
knowledge may be made explicit but much of it resides in brand’s and its employees’
experience in implicit form.
In terms of knowledge explication, it is important to try to identify the central
attributes and characteristics of the brand’s products. These are product aspects that
the customers supposedly link to the brand. The analysis involves consideration of
product functions, in specific semantic ones, with which the brand’s is expected to be
associated. Furthermore, considering the basic product typologies, it may be useful to
notice whether identification is based on the sub-ordinate level (differentiation) or the
basic level (innovation). In Volvo case, to build product typologies is supposedly a
less complex task than in Nokia case. This is, again, affected by the fact that due to
the industrial development phase, a car manufacturer more likely must settle to
perform mere differentiation. In mobile phones industry, in turn, the role of the global
market leader is to stay on the edge of innovation.
Regarding product design, the analysis of identity domain involves physical design
elements (“design cues”) together with qualitative descriptions of the brand’s “design
language” in terms of brand history and heritage. These elements may be identified
among various ‘stylistic attributes’ such as form elements, joining relationships, detail
treatments, materials, colour treatments, and textures [38].

Traceable design elements / design “bank”

The results of product design analysis may be divided on three main levels. First, if
there appear explicit design elements that are assumed to embody brand-specific
associations and that are consistently used across a number of products, these may
comprise a “design bank” of the brand.
Second, the identity domain of product design may be described by qualitative
(linguistic) descriptions in order to define the “design language” of the brand, in
specific when consistent design cues seem to be missing. There may appear various
physical manifestations of the underlying identity across the product history of the
brand. In order to recognise such characteristics, it should be contemplated through
which “traits” design is connected to the very basics of the brand identity. In specific,
it is important to distinguish temporal characteristics, especially those related to
stylistic trends, from the prevalent ones, as well as the complete characteristics, if they
appear, from partial ones.
Third, brand recognition always involves an implicit aspect. This concerns also
product design, which suggests that the identity domain cannot be entirely reduced to
explicit elements or describing linguistic characteristics. The significance of implicit
experiential knowledge, embedded in brand culture, may vary between different
cases. By working for the brand, an individual designer (or other employee) gains
individual experience of the brand’s identity and appropriate design language. The
implicit recognition may, for example, involve metaphorical associations [39]
The main cases of my research offer two different approaches to managing brand-
specific product design in terms of explicit references. Differences are explained
especially by different business contexts, strategic objectives, variety of product
portfolio, and brand heritage. In the case of Volvo cars, the existence of explicit
design elements is clear. Volvo design cues are used consistently in all the recent
Volvo models to strengthen the recognition.
Hence, regarding Volvo, there appears rather strong correspondence between
strategic brand identity and identity domain, between physical design cues and brand
heritage. In Nokia case, in turn, the lack of as consistent cues is evident. This is due to
the very different business context and market position of the brand. Nokia has
currently an extremely wide product portfolio; it has implemented distinctive
segmentation with distinctive product identities, which leaves lesser room for the use
of consistent design cues. The strategic identity (and competitive associations) of
Nokia is strongly related to personalisation of the phones according to specific needs
of market segments, thus not supporting the use standard elements. Moreover, the
aspect of good usability, in specific in terms of the phone’s use interface, has strongly
contributed to the creation of favourable brand reputation. In addition to supposedly
strong implicit recognition brought by strong commitment to personalisation and
usability, there, however, appear some physical elements that may be characterised as
typical Nokia-elements. However, there are numerous variations of these elements
within the product portfolio.

Semantic transformation and the design process

Hence, in order to enable consistent and (to a certain degree) controllable brand
communication, the strategic identity must be thoroughly analysed and clearly
defined. Furthermore, strong knowledge and strategic vision of the semantic product
functions and the use of traceable elements contributes to successful brand building.
Eventually, the actual process of transforming strategic identity into physical design is
critical. As was learnt in cases, good design – brand-specific – cannot be achieved
only by employing explicit knowledge. Much of the knowledge is implicit and
realised during the design process both in subjective (designers’ personal
interpretation) and collective (teamwork) manner. In specific, the conceptualisation
phase during which the actual forms take shape is of particular interest.
Figure 6 illustrates the critical phases of design language formation within the
Volvo design process. The development of a new model usually starts with a business
concept plan that is a description of the planned product in the form of qualitative
images. Various concept studies are then created during the “incubation” period
during which images develop into concrete manifestations. Feasible concepts then
develop into an actual business project that is illustrated in the lower part of the
figure.

- 4-6 - 2-4 0
years years years

incubation period product development

business
concept advanced design phase business project
plan

images concept studies

business project
design process
CONCEPTUALISATION DESIGN REFINEMENT
sketches
computer models
1:1 models

selection preliminary accepted frozen

production
design design design

1-2 years 1-1,5 years

Figure 6 Volvo design process

The Nokia process is in principle similar, but the respective phases are shorter due
to significantly different industry and market dynamics. Moreover, the role of the
incubation period is more replaced by the focus of conceptualisation activities on the
beginning of the actual product development process. Nonetheless, the importance of
design conceptualisation in creating design language that supports strategic brand
identity is stressed in both cases. Finally, I summarise the most crucial aspects of
conceptualisation from the perspective of creating brand-specific design.

Experiential knowledge
The importance of experiential knowledge in the process of semantic
transformation should not be underestimated. Materialisation of ideas during the
conceptualisation phase, and especially the incubation period, is more likely to take
the direction of strategic brand identity, if the brand identity is embedded in the design
culture of the company. In particular, this draws attention to the internalisation of
brand-specific design knowledge and culture that, from the perspective of an
individual designer, takes time. In my case studies, I heard several stories of young
designers that had just entered the company and could not yet design high-quality
products from the brand identity perspective (even though there would be no
problems with the technical quality of their design). The recognition of such a
phenomenon already signals the strong design culture of the studied brands. From the
management perspective, it is thus crucial to consider means that would help, not only
in getting the best out of the designers within specific processes, but also in
strengthening the brand-specific design culture on the long-term basis.

Brand’s design philosophy

Although much of the brand’s design culture is fundamentally located on the
implicit level, an explicit articulating of the basic brand ethos and their relation to
product design may help in strengthening the culture and providing newcomers with
an easier entry to the company. In some cases such a description may include
descriptions of feasible design qualities (or even brand-specific design elements), but
it may also be useful when written on a more conceptual level. For instance, Volvo
has a specific design philosophy brochure describing the origins and basic concepts of
Volvo’s design approach (most of them stemming from Volvo’s brand heritage). A
notable detail in this brochure is the total absence of Volvo’s own product images.
The philosophy is written particularly for various interest groups working with Volvo
design to describe the position and central role of product design in maintaining
strong brand recognition.

Collaboration in product development

It is indeed necessary to recognise the significance of design as a strategic medium.
Both in Volvo and in Nokia case design has been considered an organic part of the
brands’ strategic development. Within the product development, it is crucial to
recognise and define the tasks belonging to industrial designers’ repertoire. In both
Volvo and Nokia case designers’ role in the product development process were rather
clear and collaboration with engineering smoothly arranged.

Importance of manager
Nevertheless, the orchestra needs a talented and visionary manager who can both
justify the strategic significance of design to other parties and get the best creative
power out of the design staff. In the Volvo case, the radical refinement of the brand’s
design language was initiated and facilitated by the former design director Peter
Horbury who now leads the design of the Premier Automotive Group of the Ford
Motor Company. At Nokia too, visionary persons such as the Group’s design manager
Frank Nuovo and the area design managers have important roles in keeping the design
culture strong. The manager’s role in both cases is stressed in particular in guiding the
design into direction that both supports strategic brand identity and includes a
sufficient level of innovation. The importance of the design manager as the person
always having the final word is the strongest in situations where critical choices have
to be made (for instance, when selecting a concept for further development out of a
number of competing proposals). However, my both case studies also illustrate the
nature of design as a true teamwork activity: The design manager’s role is not to be an
autocratic leader but a supporting person who takes care that everybody in the design
team possesses sufficient knowledge and is aware of the brand’s strategic identity.
The process of semantic transformation is fundamentally the result of collective acting
(employment of the explicit and implicit design knowledge).

Strategic view into future

Finally, the importance of testing the limits of product category by continuous
innovations is high particularly in the mobile phone industry. In the Volvo case, being
up-to-date was also one of the major imperatives for the refinement of design
language, but it was crucial for the company not to distort the strong recognition and
position that history has created for the brand. Although continuous renewal is a
crucial issue, the company should have a firm long-term strategy in order to maintain
consistent brand identity. First of all, this concerns developing relevant competitive
associations that truly support both the current position and perception of the brand on
the market and the future development. Secondly, it then depends on the case and the
selected strategy whether brand identity is managed through consistent use of clear
design cues (like in the case of Volvo) or by stretching the strategic design language
to its very limits and relying merely on the implicit brand recognition (Nokia).

REFERENCES

[1] Kathman, Jerry (2002). Brand Identity Development in the New Economy. Design
Issues, Vol 18, No 1. 24-35.
[2] Louro, Maria João & & Cunha, Paulo Vieira (2001). Brand Management
Paradigms. Journal of Marketing management, 17. 849-875.
[3] Aaker, David A. (1996). Building Strong Brands. The Free Press, New York.
Kapferer, Jean-Noël (1992). Strategic brand management – New approaches to
creating and evaluating brand identity. The Free Press, New York.
[4] Conradi, Tomas (2001). Build Brands on Competitive Associations. Differ Practice
Paper (available through www.brandchannel.com/papers, referred 23.10.2002).
[5] Aaker: Building Strong Brands
[6] Kapferer: Strategic brand management
[7] See e.g. the volumes of Design Management Journal
[8] Schmitt, Berndt & Simonson, Alex (1997). Marketing Aesthetics: The Strategic
Management of Brands, Identity and Image. The Free Press, New York.
[9] Montague, Monty (1999). Integrating the Product + Brand Experience. Design
Management Journal. Vol 10 No 2. 17-36.
[10] See e.g.: The Special Issue on Product Semantics. Design Issues. No 2, Vol 5.
(1989). Steffen, Dagmar (2000). Design als Produktsprache. Der “Offenbacher
Ansatz” in Theorie und Praxis. Verlag Form GmbH., Frankfurt an Main. Vihma,
Susann (1995). Products as Representations. University of Art and Design Helsinki
UIAH, Helsinki.
[11] Steffen: Design als Produktsprache. Warell, Anders (2001). Design syntactics: A
Functional Approach to Visual Product Form. Chalmers University of Technology,
Gothenburg. Muller, Wim (2001). Order and Meaning in Design. Lemma Publishers,
Utrecht.
[12] This type of case selection may be described as “theoretical sampling”, described
in: Silverman, David (2000). Doing Qualitative Research. SAGE Publications,
London.
[13] My data collection and analysis is encouraged particularly by: Coffey, Amanda
& Atkinson, Paul (1996). Making Sense of Qualitative Data. SAGE Publications,
Thousand Oaks. Kvale, Steinar (1996). InterViews: An Introduction to Qualitative
Research Interviewing. SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks. Mason, Jennifer (1996).
Qualitative Researching. SAGE Publications, London. Silverman (ibid.)
[14] Cornelissen, Joep & Harris, Phil (2001). The Corporate Identity Metaphor:
Perspectives, Problems and Prospects. Journal of Marketing Management, 17/2001.
49-71.
[15] See also: Baker, Michael J. & Balmer, John M.T. (1997). Visual identity:
trappings or substance. European Journal of Marketing, 31 (5/6). 366-382. Bernstein,
David (1984). Company Image and Reality. Holt Rinehart and Winston Ltd.
Markkanen, Tuula-Riitta. 1998. Corporate Identity: A Process of Strategic
Interpretation in an MNC. Helsinki: Helsinki School of Economics and Business
Administration / HeSe Print.
[16] Gagliardi, Mario (2002). Alchemy of cultures: From adaptation to transcendence
in design and branding. Design Management Journal, Vol 12 No 4. 32-39.
[17] Grinyer, Clive (2002). Design differentiation for global companies: Value
exporters and value collectors. Design Management Journal, Vol 12 No 4. 10-14.
[18] Referring to the influential view of symbolic interactionism created by Herbert
Blumer: see Blumer, Herbert (1998). Symbolic Interactionism – Perspective and
Method. University of California Press, Berkeley.
[19] Grinyer: Design differentiation for global companies
[20] Cagliardi: Alchemy of cultures
[21] Gros, Jochen (1983). Gründlagen einer Theorie der Produktsprache. Einführung,
Heft 1. Hochschule für Gestaltung am Main. See also Steffen (ibid.).
[22] Warell: Design syntactics: A Functional Approach to Visual Product Form
[23] Krippendorf, Klaus (1989). On the Essential Contexts of Artifacts or on the
Proposition that ”Design is Making Sense (of Things). Design Issues, Vol V No 2. 9-
39.)
[24] Janlert, Lars-Erik & Stolterman, Erik (1997). The character of things. Design
Studies, 18. 297-314.
[25] Muller: Order and Meaning in Design
[26] Althavankar, Uday A. (1989). Categorization… Natural Language and Design.
Design Issues, Vol V No 2. 100-111.
[27] More discussion on traceable & non-traceable elements in: Karjalainen, Toni-
Matti (2002a). Semantic construction of brand's design DNA: Managing brand
identity through product design references. Conference proceedings of the 11th
Academic Forum of Design Management Research and Education, Boston MA, June
10-12 2002. Karjalainen, Toni-Matti (2002b). On semantic transformation: Product
design elements as brand manifestations. Proceedings of the "Common Ground"
International Design Conference, London, September 5-8 2002.
[28] Analysis methods presented e.g. in Warell: Design syntactics: A Functional
Approach to Visual Product Form
[29] I have used the notion of “brand’s design DNA” as a metaphor to describe
brand’s design language in Karjalainen: Semantic construction of brand's design DNA
Warell (Design syntactics: A Functional Approach to Visual Product Form), in turn,
calls a specific set of semantic and syntactic design elements as “design format” of a
company.
[30] van Gelder, Sicco (2002). General strategies for global brand. Brand Meta.
(available through www.brandchannel.com/papers, referred 23.10.02).
[31] In my interviews at Volvo and Nokia, it was assumed that an “average” adoption
time varies from one to two years.
[32] Peirce, Charles S (1998). The Essential Peirce: Selected Philosophical Writings,
Volume 2 (1893-1913). Edited by the Peirce Edition Project. Indiana University
Press, Bloomington IN.
[33] Vihma: Products as Representations
[34] Janlert & Stolterman: The character of things
[35] ibid.
[36] ibid.
[37] Aaker: Building Strong Brands
[38] Chen, Kuohsiang & Owen, Charles L. (1997). Form language and style
description. Design studies, 18. 249-274.
[39] See e.g.: Karjalainen, Toni-Matti (2001). When is a car like a drink? Metaphor as
a means to distilling brand and product identity. Design Management Journal, 12 (1).
66-71.