Professional Documents
Culture Documents
ABSTRACT
Customers make distinct judgments about a company from its logo design. Extant research is based
multiple picture sorting to investigate which are the most relevant characteristics that customers
utilize to differentiate logos. Ninety-four subjects were asked to classify unknown logos according to
criteria of their choice. Customers clustered logos into: (1) composed of brand icon and/or name, and
(2) colour vs. black logos. We then tested with a lab experiment (N=209) if the logo design
show that logos composed by an icon plus a brand name are perceived significantly more attractive
than brand logos made of one component only. Thus, customers-identified logo characteristics are
relevant and can guide entrepreneurs and managers in designing and selecting logo for novel brands.
Keywords: Logo Design, Logo Typology, Start-up Logos, Corporate Visual Identity, Brand Icon.
1
1 INTRODUCTION
In todays fast-changing world, logos become an essential element that helps enterprises not only to
differentiate their brands from the competition (Melewar and Saunders, 2000) but also to provide
affective bonding with customers before any promotional activity (Henderson and Cote, 1998;
Machado et al, 2015). Recent experimental research shows that customers make clear judgment
about the image of a firm from the logo design (Hynes, 2009, pg. 545). Attractiveness of logos is
important because affect toward the components of visual identity lead to more positive attitudes
toward the company and to higher purchase intention (Jun et al, 2007). Start-up companies, small
and medium enterprises (SMEs) and developers of novel brands should thus consider logo design as
a crucial factor for their success. In fact, according to Machado et al (2015, pg. 79), In low
investment settings, the affect attached to a logo is one of the few cues that differentiate the product
or the company.
Jun et al (2008) demonstrate that affect influences attitude toward the logo and consequently, attitude
toward the company and purchase intention; our study aims at investigating more deeply the design
characteristic of logos that drive affect. Our work builds on Jun et al (2008)s study by investigating
more in depth a subset of their model specifically the relationship between design characteristics of
the logo and affect with the core difference that logo design characteristics are identified by
This study answers Salgado-Montejo et al (2014, pg. 638) call to action: further research is needed
to help operationalize logo design and provide better tools for brand managers when it comes to
choosing, modifying or evaluating the logo of a company or product. From our review of existing
research on logo design, it emerges that most studies focus on a theoretical or a graphic design
expert-based approach (Henderson and Cote, 1998) to derive their research questions. It appears that
scholars have not asked consumers which characteristics of logos they find more salient. By contrast,
we aim to find if customers are able to identify relevant characteristics of brand logo design
other words - according to customers - which are the most relevant design characteristics of
2
(unfamiliar) logos? Are these characteristics relevant in determining affective reactions to novel
brand logos?
We aim to address the identified research gap by introducing a novel method in the context of logos
research namely, multiple picture sorting (Rugg and McGeorge, 2005; Eppler and Ge, 2008). To
preview our findings, customers named most often two logo design characteristics: (1) logos
composed of a brand icon alone, a brand name alone or both, and (2) colour or black logos. In a
second phase we asked a different set of 209 respondents to rate the attractiveness of unfamiliar
logos differing on the two major characterstics identified in the first stage of the study. The
experiment results show that logo design characteristics identified by customers have a significant
impact on logo attractiveness. In particular, brand logos composed by both an icon and a name are
found to be significantly more attractive than logo composed by only an icon or only the brand name.
The main theoretical contribution of this study is to bring to light an important logo design
characteristics that the brand community has until now overlooked: the significant effect of the
combinations of brand logo components (brand logo icon and brand name). In fact, researchers had
focused mainly on studying the shape of logo icons (Henderson and Cote, 1998; Kilic et al, 2011)
such as their roundness (Zhang et al, 2006; Walsh et al, 2011), naturalness and concreteness (Hynes,
2009; Machado et al, 2015) and colour (Hynes, 2009), and separately brand names (Arora et al,
2015) and typeface (Salgado-Montejo et al, 2014). This study also provides a methodological novelty
to the field of brand logo design: the deployment of the picture sorting technique (Rugg and
guidelines for novel brand logo design, which are particularly relevant for entrepreneurs and
managers of start-up companies, SMEs and developers of novel brands in response to the recent
The paper is structured into four main parts. The next section provides a review of relevant literature
and the delineation of the research gap and related research questions. In the third section we
describe the two stages of the research: the multiple sorting study and the experiment. The fourth
section is a discussion of the results. After this, limitations of the study are presented, and
Corporate Visual Identity (CVI; Rode and Vallaster, 2005) is the graphic design at the core of the
firms visual identity and plays a determinant role for companies (Melewar and Saunders, 2000; Van
Den Bosch et al, 2005). CVI not only allows customers to identify and differentiate a brand from
another (MacInnis et al, 1999; Park et al, 2013); it is also an essential tool for conveying associations
between the brand and its essence (Walsh et al, 2010). The word logo refers to the graphic design
that companies use to identify themselves and their products, with or without the firms name (Imber
and Toffler, 2000). According to Kilic et al (2011, p. 585) A logo may include an icon (for example,
Windows) which is defined as a graphic image, illustration or symbol that represents a concept.
Other logos may consist of a logotype but contain no icon (for example, the cursive Coca-Cola
logo). The logos icon is also referred to as symbol (Salgado-Montejo et al, 2014; Melawar and
Saunders, 2000).
Bloch (1995) and Goldman (2005) suggest that through the positive aesthetical appeal of logos,
brands cannot only provide the pleasure of visual gratification, but might furthermore facilitate the
emotional bond between the customer and the company. When new brands are created, for instance
when a new company is founded, given the absence of brand equity, the logo becomes a crucial
element of the brand strategy to create affect and trust (Machado et al, 2015). For this reason, start-
ups present an interesting and unique setting for brand management and CVI studies (Bresciani and
Eppler, 2010).
Henderson and Cote (1989)s work on logo design set a milestone in the investigation of logos. They
investigated logos icons design and identified - based on literature and graphic designers
recommendations - seven central characteristics that affect consumer responses. These so-called
repetition of elements, proportion and roundness of design. They further investigated the influence
these characteristics have on four logo goals: affect, familiar meaning, correct recognition and false
recognition (which happens when people believe they have seen the logo when actually they have
not). They discovered that logos aiming to have a high degree of recognition should be very natural,
4
very harmonious and moderately elaborate. On the other hand, low-investment logos (that aim at
false recognition and positive affect) should be less natural and very harmonious. High-image logos
(professional look and strong positive image) must be moderately elaborated and natural. With the
aim to test the cross-cultural applicabilitys of these findings, Henderson et al (2003) researched the
effect of visual design in China and Singapore. They found that many of the findings acquired in the
USA (Henderson and Cote, 1998) are applicable for Asia as well. This suggests that some visual
aspects of brand strategies might accomplish companies goals across international borders, and that
consumer responses to design might be rather universal (Pittard et. al, 2007).
Henderson and Cote (1998)s seminal study opened the way to more fine grained studies of logos
icon design, based on the higher-level characteristics they identified. Scholars investigated icon
roundness (Zhang et al, 2006; Walsh et al, 2011), icon proportions (Pittard et al, 2007), icon
naturalness (Hynes, 2009; Machado et al, 2015) and colour (Hynes, 2009) of icon design.
In particular, studies on logo icon roundness found that individual preferences for angular versus
round logo shapes are dependent on self-construal and on culture (Zhang et al, 2006; Walsh et al,
2011). In fact, logos were found to be more angular in individualistic countries (specifically, U.S.,
U.K., and Canada) compared to collectivistic countries (Japan, Hong Kong, and South Korea) where
logos are found to be more rounded (Zhang et al, 2006). Walsh et al (2011) tested redesign of well-
known logos from angular to round icons, and found that consumer responses to the redesign are not
Pittard et al (2007) investigated the effect of the divine proportion (also called golden ratio) across
three different cultures (Australia, Singapore and South Africa). They discovered that there is a
cross-cultural consistent attitude with regard to the divine proportion. Logos with a high degree of
naturalness were most preferred when expressed in the divine proportion. However, for abstract
Hynes (2009) studied the triadic relationship design, colour and evoked meaning by evaluating
logos in combination with companies mission statements. The results showed that consumers make
5
a clear evaluation of the image of the company by judging the logo design, and have a strong opinion
Kilic et al (2011) conducted a comparative study of brand icons in the U.S. and in Japan for
established brands. They found that the U.S. logos contained more pictorial icons, but logos of the
two countries did not differ in their representations of product benefits nor in the conceptual
symbol) of well-known logos (i.e., Coca-Cola), finding that congruent design elements in familiar
Using well-known and unknown logos, Machado et al (2015) tested abstract and figurative (natural)
icon designs. Within the figurative category, adding to Henderson and Cote (1998), they further
distinguished between organic designs (biological objects such as flowers or animals) and cultural
designs (logos depicting manufactured objects or symbols, e.g., cars or writing symbols).
From this review of the literature on logo design it emerges that customers have not been explicitly
asked their opinion regarding which logo design characteristics they find more evident when they are
exposed to new logos. Our study aims at contributing to brand logo research by filling this gap
adopting a novel customer perspective. This approach does not only advance the theoretical
discourse but also provides practitioners with relevant insights regarding customers peceptions on
logos, an aspect which is particularly relevant for start-up companies since the customers perception
of their logo relies exclusively on intrinsic properties of the logo itself (Van Riel and Van Den Ban,
2001).
Building on Jun et al (2008) model, which demonstrates that affects toward the logo influences
attitude toward the company and purchase intention, our study aims at investigating more deeply the
design characteristic of logos (and not only of logo icons) that drive affect.
6
More specifically, we aim to answer the following research questions: What are the main
characteristics that differentiate unknown logos from the customers point of view? Do the main logo
unknown logos?
7
3 EMPIRICAL STUDIES
A two-stage approach is deployed to examine the research questions. We investigate: (1) how
customers classify unknown logos through a multiple sorting technique methodology and (2) if the
classification criteria identified by customers in stage one make a significant difference in customers
perception of logos attractiveness through a lab experiment. The two stages of the research and
3.1.1 Methodology
In order to answer the research question of which are the main characteristics of novel logos
according to customers, a multiple picture sorting technique is deployed (Coxon, 1999; Rugg and
McGeorge, 2005). Since customers find difficult to think about their preferences in abstract terms,
the technique of picture sorting can provide a viable solution to investigate salient criteria in the mind
of consumers. With picture sorting, subjects are asked to order given stimuli (in our case, images of
unknown logos) into groups based on their similarities (as in Eppler and Ge, 2008).
A sample of 30 real but unfamiliar logos are utilized for the first stage of the study. Logos unknown
to the subjects are selected for this research because we aim to assess the effects of logo design alone,
without influences of brand awareness and attitude (as in Henderson and Cote, 1998; Machado et al,
2015). In previous research (i.e., Henderson and Cote, 1998), this was achieved by using unfamiliar
logos of foreign businesses from all over the world. However, this stimuli selection approach
presents some issues, since complete cross-cultural visual transferability cannot be assumed (Zhang
et al, 2006). In fact, cultural influence does not only apply to the interpretation, but also to the
creation process of visual elements (Berlyne, 1971). To overcome this issue, the logos of our study
are real logos of start-up companies of the country where the data is collected (Switzerland). The
choice of start-up companies logos enabled conducting a study using real stimuli, generated within
the same cultural area as the study participants come from, which nevertheless avoid the influence of
8
From a pool of 288 logos of Swiss Start-up companies, with founding year between 2012 and 2015,
30 where randomly selected from a start-up platform. Since the complete sample of 30 logos is too
large for subjects to evaluate, the logos were randomly divided into two groups of 15 logos (List A
and List B). Each subject was exposed to only one list. Moreover, within each list (A and B), logos
were randomly disposed in two different orders. This allowed controlling the influence of the
disposition of the logo on the responses (as in: Pittard et al, 2007), generating in total four different
versions of the questionnaire. Subjects received 15 unfamiliar logos, each presented in the same size
(3x5cm) to control for size effect (Pittard et al, 2007). With this procedure, size effects were
controlled by the use of equal surface area for each logo because, as noted by Pittard et al (2007),
size and central tendency, if not controlled, have a confounding impact on respondent preferences.
Participants were presented with the 15 logos and were asked to group the logos into two or more
categories. Participants were asked to group the logos into two or more categories (indicating which
logos would belong to which group) and provide a name for the classification criteria they chose.
Asking them to group the logos and not only naming the rule provided important information for a
detailed and more accurate analysis of the collected data. Participants were free to group the logos in
as many groups as they wanted because limiting the number of possible groups into which the
participants could have sorted the logos, by using a fixed-sorting technique, has the disadvantage that
This procedure was repeated three times; in other words, each subject had to identify three rules for
categorizing the given logos. This multiple sorting questioning technique was adopted since Coxon
(1999) argued that asking participants to identify only one sorting method generates the problem that
the subjects do not tend to use the most obvious rule for their sorting.
After the sorting exercise subjects were asked control questions regarding: logo recognition (to
eliminate respondents who were already familiar with the logos), previous experience with logo
design and design in general (to avoid an expert-oriented research), and demographic variables
including gender, age, occupation and nationality (to avoid cross-cultural issues).
9
3.1.2 Findings
The final sample consisted of 93 participants. The gender representation was balanced, with 47%
female and 53% male. Most were students (90%). Regarding the nationality of the participants, 69%
were Swiss, 24% were German, 2% Austrian, 2% Italian. Of the total 99 answers collected, six
respondents could not be considered because they claimed to recognize the logos (3 subjects) or they
were not central Europeans (3 subjects) and therefore their answers were not considered for not
biasing the results with cross-cultural differences in classification processes (Nisbett, 2003; Eppler
Responses were summarized using a frequency distribution in order to assess an eventual dominance
of a grouping rule compared to others. Results are displayed in Figure 1: the large majority of
subjects chose brand icon and/or name (85%) and colour versus black & white (83%) as most
relevant rules for classifying logos. These rules were more prominent than all the other clustering
possibilities together; results show that these two criteria are the most salient differences in logo
design, in the eyes of customers. The third most named rule logos with or without outline was
chosen only by 20% of subjects. The order with which the logos where presented did not have an
10
Next, we provide a description of the grouping rules, in order of relevance.
Rule 1 - Icon and/or name: logos were mainly clustered into three groups: brand icon only, brand
Rule 2 Colour or black & white: logos were grouped in coloured logos and black and white logos.
Rule 3 - Outline (with or without): logos were grouped in logos having an outline, frame or coloured
background (e.g., Openployer and Ziano) and logos not having any outline.
Rule 4 - Shape (round or angular): logos were grouped according to their shape. However, the
choice of which logos belonged to which category was not consistent among subjects.
Rule 5 - Capital or lowercase letters: logos were grouped into brand names having only capital
letters, logos having only lowercase letters and logos composed by both.
Rule 6 - Descriptive or abstract: logos were grouped into abstract icons versus descriptive or natural
icon (e.g., icon representing a bird) and/or brand names with abstract names (e.g., Strekin) versus
Rule 7 - Long or short name: logos were grouped into brand names made of a single word versus
Rule 8 - Website as a name (with vs. without): logos were grouped into those embodying the brand
Rule 9 Slogan (with vs. without): logos were grouped into those with a slogan (e.g., Smargetech -
Rule 10 - Modern or old fashioned: logos were grouped into modern versus antique style. Within
this rule, the categorization of which logo is modern versus antique/old fashioned was largely
Rule 11 - Provenance indication: logos were grouped according to the fact that they indicate a
geographical location (e.g. Swiss Block) versus logos without geographic indication.
11
Rule 12 Numbers (with or without): logos were grouped into brand names containing at least one
Rule 13 - Language: logos were grouped based on language: English versus German versus invented
names.
In summary, the first stage of the study brought to light that customers clearly identify two main
The aim of the second stage of this research is to test if the two main characteristics of logo design
identified by subjects in the multiple picture sorting study are actually relevant in determining affect
toward logos.
Based on the findings of the multiple sorting study, the specific hypotheses for the second stage of
H1: Is there a significant difference in the attractiveness of logos composed only by an icon, only by
a name, or both?
H2: Is there a significant difference in the attractiveness of black logos compared to coloured logos?
A lab experiment was set up to test the hypotheses. In particular, a multi-factorial repeated measure
design (Field and Hole, 2013) was deployed, with two independent variables (1) logo typology
The aim was to test if logo design (specifically, icon and/or name as described by subjects in stage
one) and logo colour (specifically, black versus coloured logos), has a significant impact on affect
toward the logo. It should be emphasized that the aim of the experimental study is not to determine
12
which logo icon shape, or which brand name, or logo colour produces higher affect but rather to
generalize on the relevance of the logo design characteristics identified by customers in stage one.
A designer created the logos for a fake company (as in Jun et al, 2008). We build on Jun et al (2008)
model and tested two (instead of one) icon designs, and two (instead of one) brand names, their
combination, and two colours (in addition to black). Testing two levels of the same variable allows to
be more confident in the generalization of the results, since we can disentangle the effect of the
Designing the logos appositely for the experiment, instead of using existing logos, allows to
manipulate the stimuli according to the higher-level design dimensions proposed by Henderson and
Cote (1998) and therefore to be more confident in generalizing on the results. As discussed in the
Theoretical Background section, according to Henderson and Cote (1998) the most relevant icon
Roundness, and Naturalness. Icon 1 is developed to have a low degrees of harmony, elaboration,
parallels, repetition of elements, proportion and a high degree of roundness. On the contrary Icon 2
has high degrees of harmony, elaboration, parallels, repetition of elements, proportion and a low
degree of roundness (see Figure 2 a-b). The dimension of naturalness was avoided since, as denoted
by Hynes (2009, p. 548), the meaning of an image influences the expectation of colour (e.g., an
image depicting the sun is expected to be yellow) and is culturally dependent. Pittard et al (2007, p.
246) sustain that a high degree of complexity of the logo design enhances the chance that preference
will be influenced by a series of alternative design variables than those tested. Therefore, caution was
taken in order to minimize complexity to keep the focus on the variables to be tested.
For the coinage of the brand names to be tested, a similar approach was adopted: Name 1 was short
and composed mainly of consonants, as opposed to Name 2, which was longer and rich in vowels
(see Figure 2c-d). For comparability reasons a single typeface (specifically Futura) was chosen for
both names. Typeface was not varied to avoid confounding effects (for an extended discussion on
logo typeface effect see Henderson et al, 2004), especially since the results of stage one of the study
13
showed that logo typeface is not an evident characteristic for customers. As in the case of icons,
abstract names were preferred over meaningful names because these could have generated some
colour expectancies. It should be noted that the study was conducted in 2015, that is, before the
Brexit phenomenon; therefore, this unfortunate similarity of our stimuli with the political issue, did
In addition to testing these two icons and two names independently, four possible combinations were
created for a total of eight different logo design options (see Figure 2e-h).
The test Hypothesis 2, regarding the effect of colour, the logo design options (Fig. 2) are displayed in
black and in two colours with opposite luminosity: blue and orange. The colour blue was chosen as it
is a primary colour and the most used colour in the context of business in western society (Duarte,
2008). Orange represents the complementary colour to blue, according to the colours wheel (Itten,
2010). The tone of orange colour used for the experimental stimuli was the exact opposite of the
primary blue colour, positioned at the opposite pole of the twelve-share chromatic colour wheel
(Itten, 2010). The aim of testing different colours is to determine the effect of colour in general,
versus black logos, rather than testing the effect of a specific colour.
We deployed a within subject experimental design so that all participants rated all logo design
options. The questionnaire design is similar to the one employed by Henderson and Cote (1998).
Subjects were asked to evaluate each logo on a seven-point semantic differential scale, ranging from
unattractive to attractive. With a procedure similar to the one deployed by Machado et al (2015) we
aimed to capture the latent variable of affect toward the different categories of logo design, and not
toward a specific design. Afterwards demographic data and control questions were collected. The
14
first draft of the questionnaire contained 30 questions (8 logo design options in three colours, plus 6
control questions). A pre-test showed that subjects demonstrated fatigue and boredom, and perceived
the questionnaire as too long. Therefore, the questionnaire was shortened by reducing the questions
related to colour orange logos to three logo designs (instead of eight); since the purpose is to test the
effect of colour in general, it is not strictly necessary to test all eight logo design options (brand icon
The questions ware administered online and respondents were recruited on Swiss universities-related
platforms. The final experimental sample consists of 209 subjects, different from the subjects of
stage one of the study. From the original full sample of 223 collected responses, the answers of 14
subjects had to be discarded; one person reported to be colour blinded, three people reported to be
expert in graphic design or to have experience with logo design, and ten people claimed to recognise
one of the logos, even if this is not possible because they were created appositely for this study.
Henderson and Cote (1998) term this phenomenon as false recognition, which occurs when people
believe they have seen the logo when they actually have not. This relatively high level of false
recognition can be interpreted as positive, because it indicates that the stimuli used in the experiment
could indeed represent real brand logos since they were mistaken for such.
The gender representation of the sample was balanced with 48% of females and 52% of males.
Students represented the majority of the occupation of the population (84%) and the median age of
the sample was 23. Most of the participants were Swiss (86%), 8% were German and the remaining
participants were from other Swiss neighbouring countries (Austria, France, Italy and Lichtenstein)
Responses were obtained in the form of a repeated-measure design using a single group of subjects,
hence the data was analysed using a factorial repeated-measure ANOVA. In order to test the
hypotheses, indicators (i.e., logo design options) for the same construct (latent affect toward the
brand logo) were aggregated. Bonferronis tests were conducted to adjust for multiple comparisons
15
(as in Machado et al, 2015) because it is rather conservative test that guarantees control over Type I
error (Field and Hole, 2013). Test of sphericity (Mauchly's W) was non significant for both outcome
Logo design options for the latent variable of affect toward the brand logo were aggregated: the
descriptive statistics are displayed in Table 1. The ANOVA revealed a significant main effect of the
logo typology (icon and/or name) on attractiveness of logos F(2)=47.21, p<.001 which is visualized
in Figure 3.
Specifically, contrasts (analysed with Bonferroni adjustments for multiple comparisons, and shown
in Table 2) revealed that logos composed only by an icon are perceived as significantly more
attractive than brand logos composed only by a name (p<.001). In addition, brand logo composed by
a name plus an icon (together) are perceived as more attractive than logos composed by only a name
Table 2. Significance testing of logo attractiveness for brand icon and name
Contrasts Mean
Difference Std. Error Sig.a
Name - Icon -.206* .079 .028
**
Icon - Icon and name -.408 .064 .000
**
Name - Icon and name -.614 .069 .000
Based on estimated marginal means
16
Figure 3. The main effect of logo typology on logo attractiveness
The descriptive statistics (means and standard deviation) for all 19 logo design options (for black,
blue and orange colour) are offered in the Appendix (Table B).
The same statistical procedure was employed to test the effect of colour. We will first present the
comparison and colour black and blue since these colours ware tested for all logo design options, and
The descriptive statistics for the effect of black and blue logos are reported in Table 3. The ANOVA
indicates a significant main effects of colour on the attractiveness of the logos: F(1)=175.95, p<.001
with logos in black colour being perceived as significantly more attractive compared to blue logos.
design option in black and in blue colour. We present the results in groups of three logo design
options with the aim to facilitate the comparison process. The graphs help to see the two main
findings described above: The attractiveness of black and blue logo design options follow parallel
tracks, with blue logos always being perceived as less attractive compared to the same logo design in
black colour. Secondly, for all four quadrants we see that the combination of the brand name and
brand icon is always perceived as more attractive than the brand name or brand icon alone.
We also tested the effect of a second colour, namely orange, and be able to discern the effect of a
specific colour (i.e., blue) from the general effect of coloured logos. We tested the colour orange only
for a subset of logo design options for the reasons explained in the study design section: one brand
icon, one brand name and their combination (specifically: the logotype Uromia, the squared icon
The descriptive statistics are provided in Table 4. The results of the factorial repeated-measure
ANOVA showed that there was also in this case a significant main effect of the colour level on the
18
attractiveness of logos: F(2)=81.08, p<.001. In particular, contrast (Table 5, Figure 5) show that
black logos have a significantly higher attractiveness than orange logos (p<.001) and orange logos
have a significantly higher attractiveness of blue logos (p<.001). A detailed discussion of the
Table 4. Descriptive statistics of logo colour (black, blue and orange) attractiveness
Mean
19
Figure 5. The main effect of logo colour (black, blue and orange) on logo attractiveness
20
4 DISCUSSION
This study makes two main contributions to theory and to practice. Firstly, it finds that customers
describe and differentiate unknown logos according to two main logo characteristics: the
composition brand logo elements (brand icon only, brand name only or both) and logo colour (black
or coloured). Secondly, it verifies that these two logo characteristics are relevant for determining
logos attractiveness. In particular, we find that unknown logos composed of a brand icon plus a brand
name are perceived as more attractive compared to logos composed by a brand icon or by a brand
name alone. We also found that black logos are perceived as significantly more attractive compared
to coloured logos. Elaboration on the implications of these findings continues in the paragraphs
below.
The major novelty of this study is the customer-based approach: in contrast to existing studies which
are based on theories or experts opinion, we asked subjects to identify which logo characteristics
they found most relevant. We then tested their relevance and, according to the experimental results,
logos composed of both an icon and a name are perceived as significantly more attractive compared
to logo composed only by an icon or only by a name, before any branding effort is made. This
customer-based perspective allowed us to uncover an important gap in current literature: most studies
focused on investigating separately icon design or brand names (Arora et al, 2015), but rarely their
combination.
These findings add to logo and brand strategy (Henderson and Cote, 1998) by identifying original
and significant logo design characteristics for novel brands. While most brand logo researchers have
which logo design characteristics which are most evident to them. Findings are surprising with
respect to extant literature: the large majority of customers distinguish logos based on two key
21
characteristics: brand logo elements (icon, name or both) and brand logo colour. While the effect of
logo colour has been previously investigated (Kilic et al, 2011), the attractiveness of logo design
elements (brand icon and brand name) combinations for new brands had been rarely considered by
the academic community. We were able to reveal this important gap in the literature through a novel
methodology in the realm of brand logos, namely the multiple visual sorting technique (Coxon, 1999;
With a lab experiment, we tested the relevance of the major customer-identified logo design
characteristics and demonstrated that they both have a significant impact on logo attractiveness.
Previous studies, by contrast, focused on investigating more fine grained icon design characteristics,
such as roundness (Zhang et al, 2006; Walsh et al, 2011), naturalness (Hynes, 2009) and the related
concept of concreteness (Machado et al, 2015). Our research builds on the Corporate Visual Identity
model of Jun, Cho and Kwon (2008) and extends it by testing multiple brand elements options and
their combinations (two brand icons, two brand name and four combinations). The novelty of our
work is also to be found in the specific focus on new logos development, in contrast with existing
research, which concentrates on logos of well-known companies (e.g., Salgado-Montejo et al, 2014)
Our study also reveals that customers consider important a number of secondary logo design
characteristics (in addition to colour and logo design elements discussed above): logos with or
without an outline, logos with round versus angular shapes, logos composed of capital or lowercase
letters, and abstract versus descriptive logos (see Fig. 1). These findings indicate that there are logo
design characteristics important to the customers which have not yet been investigated by the
academic community, such as the effect of 1) logo outline and 2) logotype with capital or lowercase
letters. These results provide important directions for future research: interested researchers could
investigate if and how these logo design characteristics influence affect toward the logo.
22
4.3 Practical contribution
The attractiveness of logos is important because affect toward the components of visual identity is
proved to lead to more positive company attitudes and purchase intention (Jun et al, 2007, pg.
382). With this study, we provide a simple and effective guideline for entrepreneurs, managers and
logo designers to increase the attractiveness of new logos: develop logos composed of both an icon
and the brand name. According to our study, this easy-to-implement recommendation will make
customers perceive the new logo as more attractive and this will increase the positive attitude toward
the brand before any advertising or branding effort is made. This finding calls into question current
logo design practices since a large number of logos are composed only by wordmarks (Wheeler,
2003; Jun et al, 2008) with the company name (without an icon).
A second important brand design element to consider for increasing brand logo attractiveness is the
logo colour: the results of our study seems to indicate that black logos are perceived as more
attractive compared to blue and orange logos. As there is evidence that colour preferences are
culturally dependent (Jun et al, 2008; Kilic, 2011) and industry-specific (Hynes, 2009), the advice for
logo designers is to test the effect of logo colours with the specific target audience.
In contrast with the majority of brand management studies that focus on well-established brands, we
concentrated on providing useful guideline for developing novel brand logos. This can be particularly
23
5. CONCLUSIONS
Our research proposed a new approach to investigate novel logo design by adopting a customer-
based perspective. The findings of the multiple picture sorting study provide direction for future
research: the present study tested the relevance of the two most named logo design characteristics
emerged. Yet, the secondary logo design characteristics identified by the customers still call for
investigation, in particular the effect of logo outline and of the capital versus lowercase letters of
Moreover, future experimental studies could test more design options for each identified logo design
characteristic. For instance, in our study we employed three colours: in order to gain a more
comprehensive understanding of this variable, additional tonalities of colour and colour combinations
(Madden, 2000; Hynes, 2009) should be tested. With the same rationale, more brand name typefaces
Since most participants were students, the generalizability of the results is limited to younger
consumers. Further testing is needed to confirm that these findings are transferrable to other age
groups. A related question is the cultural transferability of the results: The choice of limiting the
sample to a cultural area (Switzerland and neighbouring countries) has the advantage of avoiding the
confounding effects of culture. As a tradeoff, the results are not necessarily generalizable to a
worldwide audience since aesthetic preferences are partially dependent on culture (Zhang et al, 2006;
Jun et al, 2008; Kilic, 2011). Future research should replicate the study in diverse cultural context
such as Asia or North America (as in: Henderson et al, 2003) to identify if and how cross-cultural
In conclusion, this study introduced a novel technique to investigate logo design preferences and
uncovered two relevant logo design characteristics that can significantly increase the attractiveness of
new logos. The authors hope that this work will help to inspire future research addressing this topic
with the aim to support entrepreneurs and SMEs develop attractive brands.
24
REFERENCES
Arora, S., Kalro, A. D., & Sharma, D. (2015). A comprehensive framework of brand name
Bennett, P. D. (1995). Dictionary of Marketing Terms. (American Marketing Association, Ed.) (2nd
Bloch, P. H. (1995). Seeking the Ideal Form: Product Design and Consumer Response. Journal of
Bresciani, S., and Eppler, M. J. (2010). Brand new ventures? Insights on start-ups branding
Brexendorf, T. O., Kernstock, J., and Powell, S. M. (2014). Future challenges and opportunities in
Coxon, A. M. (1999). Sorting Data Collection and Analysis. In M. S. Lewis-Beck (Ed.), Sage
University Series in Quantitative Application in the Social Science (p. 98). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Duarte, N. (2008). Slide:ology: The art and science of creating great presentations. Sebastopol, CA:
O'Reilly Media.
Eppler, M.J. and Ge J. (2008) Communicating with Diagrams: How Intuitive and Cross-cultural are
Goldman, A. (2005). The aesthetic. In B. Gaut and D. McIver Lopes (Eds.), The Routledge
Companion to Aesthetics (2nd ed., pp. 255266). London and New York.
Henderson, P. W., and Cote, J. A. (1998). Guidelines for Selecting or Modifying Logos. Journal of
Henderson, P. W., Cote, J. A., Leong, S. M., and Schmitt, B. (2003). Building strong brands in Asia:
Selecting the visual components of image to maximize brand strength. International Journal of
Henderson, P. W., Giese, J. L., and Cote, J. A. (2004). Impression management using typeface
Hynes, N. (2009). Colour and meaning in corporate logos: An empirical study. Journal of Brand
Imber, J., and Toffler, B.-A. (2000). Dictionary of Marketing Terms. (B. E. Series, Ed.) (3rd ed.).
Itten, J. (2010). Arte del colore. (6th ed.). Milano: Saggiatore, Ed.
Jun, J. W., Cho, C. H., and Kwon, H. J. (2008). The role of affect and cognition in consumer
evaluations of corporate visual identity: Perspectives from the United States and Korea. Journal
Kilic, O., Miller, D. W., and Vollmers, S. M. (2011). A comparative study of American and Japanese
Machado, J. C. (2012). Brand mergers: examining consumers responses to name and logo design.
26
Machado, J. C., de Carvalho, L. V., Torres, A., and Costa, P. (2015). Brand logo design: examining
consumer response to naturalness. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 24(1), 7887.
MacInnis, D. J., Shapiro, S., and Mani, G. (1999). Enhancing Brand Awareness Through Brand
Melewar, T. C., and Saunders, J. (2000). Global corporate visual identity systems: using an extended
Park, C. W., Eisingerich, A. B., Pol, G., and Park, J. W. (2013). The role of brand logos in firm
Pittard, N., Ewing, M., and Jevons, C. (2007). Aesthetic theory and logo design: examining
consumer response to proportion across cultures. International Marketing Review, 24(4), 457
473.
Rode, V., and Vallaster, C. (2005). Corporate Branding for Start-ups: The Crucial Role of
Rugg, G., and McGeorge, P. (2005). The sorting techniques: a tutorial paper on card sorts, picture
Salgado-Montejo, A., Velasco, C., Olier, J. S., Alvarado, J., and Spence, C. (2014). Love for logos:
Evaluating the congruency between brand symbols and typefaces and their relation to emotional
Van Den Bosch, A. L. M. (2006). Managing Corporate Visual Identity: Exploring the Differences
Between Manufacturing and Service, and Profit-Making and Nonprofit Organizations. Journal
Van Den Bosch, A. L. M., De Jong, M. D. T., and Elving, W. J. L. (2005). How corporate visual
27
Van Riel, C. B. M., and Van Den Ban, A. (2001). The added value of corporate logos - An empirical
Walsh, M. F., Winterich, K. P., and Mittal, V. (2010). Do logo redesigns help or hurt your brand?
The role of brand commitment. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 19(2), 7684.
Walsh, M. F., Winterich, K. P., and Mittal, V. (2011). How re-designing angular logos to be rounded
shapes brand attitude: consumer brand commitment and self-construal. Journal of Consumer
Wheeler, A. (2003). Designing brand identity. John Wiley & Sons, Inc..
Zhang, Y., Feick, L., and Price, L. J. (2006). The impact of self-construal on aesthetic preference for
angular versus rounded shapes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32(6), 794805.
28
Appendix
Table A. List of companies utilized as stimuli for the multiple sorting technique questionnaire
List A: List B:
Strekin Beekeeper
Ziano Glycemicon
Flyability Qloudlab
Mediahead MOGS
Offertube Carpasus
SmargeTech Grydl
29
Table B. Descriptive Statistics for all logo design options
30