Know-How Exchange : Research/Metrics

From a client perspective, the answer is all over the lot. Some clients are oblivious to the differences between a good logo and a bad one; if it has nice colors and "looks right" they like it. Other clients err in the opposite direction; they expect the logo to communicate everything the company does and stands for, and all but close the sale for them.

The really smart clients create a tight Creative Brief that explains the situation and competitive landscape, the company's positioning, its communication objective, and its core values. Then it's up to the graphic designer to interpret that Creative Brief visually.

BTW, the really good graphic designers won't touch a project without a tight creative brief. Not having one makes the design process too subjective and arbitrary, and it discounts their own professionalism.

It's good business all around to be clear and explicit about what the client expects (and is paying for) and what the designer is supposed to deliver.

But there are some really good and professional designers, just like there are some flakes. Not so different from clients, eh?

You might want to check out this article about the Creative Brief. It appears on the website of a very successful designer, with years of experience designing for large global brands.

Dear William,

I am a graphic designer and a marketing expert, so I'll address both aspects of your question.

What do clients most want from a logo design?

Most often, they want something to look good on a business card and a letterhead. They also generally think of a logo and of a brand as being interchangeable entities. I've lost count of the number of conversations I've had with people who tell me they want to "brand" themselves or their product and who think that doing it with a logo is all it's going to take.

The concept of offering a visual representation of their company or their core values is sometimes tough to explain and often tougher to sell. I once had a senior executive tell me that an idea I'd come up with didn't exactly shout out the name of his business. About a year later, the same company wound up with a logo featuring the same shape I'd recommended (the work I was going to do for free cost them in excess of $16,000). As one wag quipped at the time: "It seems it's a good idea if you spend a lot of money on it!".

And a need or want of and for a logo is generally based on something they client has seen, or on some hodgepodge of elements they've picked from here and there.

As a designer, one often knows instinctively that a particular mark or shape is right. It's difficult to define, but when it's right, it's just right and no amount of chopping and changing on the part of the client will alter the original purity of whatever the idea is. The trick is to carry that purity through to final sign off.

From a marketing expert's perspective - what clients really need from a logo design is something that's going to create a strong or powerful visual bond. This bond isn't the brand, because the brand is something totally different. But what the logo must be is a vital visual anchor—something that automatically connects the product and the product's benefit with the viewer; something they'll ALWAYS connect with.

A great logo is more than just a mark. Great logos are bridges that span social, ethnic, and economic divides. Great logos bond entire clans, so in essence they become the flag—the team colours if you will—of whatever "nation" or elite sect that the product and its use represents or implies.

Or so it seems to me. I hope this helps.

Gary Bloomer
Wilmington, DE, USA