Designing Visual Recognition for the Brand

Designing Visual Recognition for the Brand�

Toni-Matti Karjalainen and Dirk Snelders

The present paper examines how companies strategically employ design to create visual recognition of their brands’

core values. To address this question, an explorative in-depth case study was carried out concerning the strategic

design efforts of two companies: Nokia (mobile phones) and Volvo (passenger cars). It was found that these two

companies fostered design philosophies that lay out which approach to design and which design features are ex-

pressive of the core brand values. The communication of value through design was modeled as a process of semantic

transformation. This process specifies how meaning is created by design in a three-way relation among design

features, brand values, and the interpretation by a potential customer. By analyzing the design effort of Nokia and

Volvo with the help of this model, it is shown that control over the process of semantic transformation enabled

managers in both companies to make strategic decisions over the type, strength, and generality of the relation

between design features and brand values. Another result is that the embodiment of brand values in a design can be

strategically organized around lead products. Such products serve as reference points for what the brand stands for

and can be used as such during subsequent new product development (NPD) projects for other products in the brand

portfolio. The design philosophy of Nokia was found to depart from that of Volvo. Nokia had a bigger product

portfolio and served more market segments. It therefore had to apply its design features more flexibly over its

product portfolio, and in many of its designs the relation between design features and brand values was more implicit.

Six key drivers for the differences between the two companies were derived from the data. Two external drivers were

identified that relate to the product category, and four internal drivers were found to stem from the companies’ past

and present brand management strategies. These drivers show that the design of visual recognition for the brand

depends on the particular circumstances of the company and that it is tightly connected to strategic decision making

on branding. These results are relevant for brand, product, and design managers, because they provide two good

examples of companies that have organized their design efforts in such a way that they communicate the core values

of their brands. Other companies can learn from these examples by considering why these two companies acted as

they did and how their communication goals of product design were aligned to those of brand management.

Introduction

Recognition is key in a competitive market. In

a situation of high competition, markets are

often saturated by a constant flow of signs

and messages from numerous brands. As a conse-

quence, the creation and management of recognition

for the brand becomes a major communication ob-

jective. Companies have set out to achieve brand rec-

ognition through various means. Product design is

among these, and it has been put forward as a main

ingredient in fostering a strong visual identity for a

brand (Schmitt and Simonson, 1997; Stompff, 2003)

and in creating brand value (Borja de Mozota, 2004).

There are many examples of companies who have

successfully communicated their brand values

through product design. The Caterpillar brand, for

example, communicates its core brand values of

comfort and performance not only through its adver-

tising, website, and slogan (‘‘Industry leading com-

fort and performance’’) but also in the design of its

products. Caterpillar has ensured that its products

are comfortable to use. Just as Caterpillar shoes have

warm and soft padding on the inside, so the opera-

tor cabins of Caterpillar’s trucks and loaders have

been fitted with soft interiors and come with noise

and dust prevention features. Furthermore, the sturdy

color scheme and logo signal that the products

perform well in tough situations. These design aspects

apply as much to the heavy machines the company

produces as to its shoes, which are targeted at the

consumer market. Thus, Caterpillar’s core brand

values are connected to recognizable and meaningful

aspects of its designs.

�The authors thank Oscar Person, Maria Saaksjarvi, and threeanonymous reviewers for their comments on earlier versions of thispaper.

Address correspondence to: Toni-Matti Karjalainen, IDBM Pro-gram, Helsinki School of Economics, P.O. Box 1210 FI-00101,Helsinki, Finland. Tel.: þ 358 50 357 4047. Email: [email protected].

J PROD INNOV MANAG 2010;27:6–22r 2009 Product Development & Management Association

i:/BWUS/JPIM/696/[email protected]

i:/BWUS/JPIM/696/[email protected]

This paper looks at how companies strategically

aim for visual brand recognition through design. Rec-

ognition is a mode of attention defined by Krippen-

dorff (2005, p. 91) as ‘‘identifying something by its

kind (name) and in view of the use to which it could be

put.’’ Note that this definition is somewhat different

from definitions of recognition used in the past in ad-

vertising or marketing research (e.g., Du Plessis, 1994;

Finn, 1988; Singh, Rothschild, and Churchill, 1988).

In these fields, recognition has often been defined as a

weak (aided) measure of a consumer’s memorization

of an advertising message or a product, and it is typ-

ically juxtaposed to recall a strong (unaided) measure

of this. This implies that in advertising and marketing

research recognition is regarded as a type of declara-

tive knowledge, established by a consumer who states

that a certain advertisement or product has been seen

or noted before. Krippendorff’s definition, used in

this paper, is somewhat broader, in that it describes

recognition as a process of identification (connected

to the work of Biederman and colleagues on visual

recognition of faces; e.g., Biederman, 1987; Biederman

and Ju, 1988) that results from semantic memory

(abling classification of the product) as well as proce-

dural memory (which helps to understand product

usage). In addition, the process of recognition can be

conscious or unconscious, and therefore consumers

can recognize the product and its features without

much awareness of it. Thus, the term recognition here

includes both conscious (declarative) and unconscious

(implicit) knowledge of a product, about both what

the product is and what one can do with it.

Across different industries, scholars have looked at

the role of the visual appearance of products in cre-

ating recognition for the brand. From the viewpoint

of strategic management, design can be used to reflect

corporate and brand values, to develop greater con-

sistency over the product range, and to define the dis-

tinguishing attributes of brands and sub-brands in the

company’s brand portfolio (Kotler and Rath, 1984; Ol-

son, Cooper, and Slater, 1998). However, it is unclear

how companies aim for the recognition of brand value

through the visual design of their products. An impor-

tant starting point for exploring this issue is a series of

case studies by Ravasi and Lojacono (2005) that looked

at how companies organize their strategic design effort.

Their study shows the importance of a design philoso-

phy that establishes a connection among the core capa-

bilities of the company, its strategy, and brand image.

This paper examines how such a design philosophy can

be an instrument in creating visual recognizable designs

that communicate the brand’s core values. The key

question in this paper is the following: How can com-

panies strategically employ design to create visual rec-

ognition of the brand’s core values?

The departure point for our analysis of visual

brand recognition is a model of semantic transforma-

tion, which allows for an in-depth analysis of how

design can communicate the brand message. The ex-

istence and working of the process described in this

model is then demonstrated by two case studies at

Nokia and Volvo. These case studies show how the

core brand values of these two companies are trans-

formed into a visual design language for new products

and how this involves an array of strategic decisions

that are partly made before, and partly during, new

product development (NPD). In addition, this paper

corroborates Ravasi and Lojacono’s (2005) earlier

finding that a design philosophy provides the strate-

gic basis for establishing a coherent visual identity for

the brand. A last contribution is the finding that the

stage of strategic renewal requires a process of se-

mantic transformation that is more sensitive to issues

of brand heritage and that is organized around so-

called lead products. For lead products, the design

effort of the company implies a focus on product fea-

tures that have more explicit and more widely under-

stood references to the core brand values. Such

products serve as internal and external reference points

for what the brand stands for, and they can be used

as such during subsequent NPD projects that receive

less design-strategic attention. Taken together, an

overview is provided of the deployment of a design

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHES

Dr. Toni-Matti Karjalainen holds the degrees of Doctor of Arts

(art and design) from the University of Art and Design Helsinki and

M.Sc. (economics) from the Helsinki School of Economics. He

works as research director of the International Design Business

Management (IDBM) Program at the Helsinki School of Econom-

ics and also has several years’ experience as project manager at the

Business Innovation Technology (BIT) Research Centre at the Hel-

sinki University of Technology. His research on product design,

design semantics, brand management, and new product develop-

ment is conducted in close collaboration with international compa-

nies.

Dr. Dirk Snelders is associate professor of marketing at the De-

partment of Product Innovation Management at Delft University of

Technology in the Netherlands. His background is psychology, and

his current research interests focus on the role of design in market

research. Dr. Snelders has published earlier on consumer decision

making, consumer perceptions of abstract product attributes, aes-

thetic product judgments, and the role of novelty and surprise in

design.

DESIGNING VISUAL RECOGNITION J PROD INNOV MANAG2010;27:6–22

7

philosophy, and of design itself, for the strategic pur-

pose of creating brand recognition.

These results are relevant for brand, product, and

design managers, because they provide two good ex-

amples of companies that have organized their design

efforts in such a way that they communicate the core

values of their brands. Other companies can learn

from these examples by considering how the commu-

nication goals of product design can be aligned to

those of brand management. Managing the transla-

tion of brand values into the design of a product

requires an understanding of what designers in a team

are doing when they express brand value through

product design. Both in NPD and during stages of

brand strategic renewal, managers can benefit from

the insight that design communicates brand value

in its own way and that the direction of the design

process needs its own targets, checks, and balances.

Intentional Communication through Design

Design is but one of the media through which a com-

pany can communicate its core brand values. Accord-

ing to Aaker (1996), the communication of brand

value should be done in a synchronized way, so that

all communication channels deliver a concerted brand

message to customers. This interactional or holistic per-

spective on brands (for an overview of brand perspec-

tives, see Harkins, Coleman, and Thomas, 1998; Harris

and de Chernatony, 2001; Louro and Cunha, 2001)

implies that product and brand meaning are intertwined

and that together they lead to a powerful mix of asso-

ciations that point to the core brand values. In product

design, the brand message is composed of a number of

product features (hereafter called design features) that

embody the core brand values. Together with the other

communication media, the design features represent the

brand’s identity. If the design features contribute to the

desired communication, other forms, like advertising,

can be used more effectively and efficiently (Mooy and

Robben, 2002).

Kreuzbauer and Malter (2005) stress that the con-

nection between the design features and brand value is

based on more than repeated exposure. Building on

the work of Barsalou (1999), Biedermann (1987), and

Zaltman (1997), these authors argue that brand rec-

ognition is not purely an exercise of semantic classi-

fication based on a set of otherwise arbitrary design

features. Instead, they point to the relevance of the

design features themselves in codetermining the mean-

ing of the brand. Kreuzbauer and Malter speak of

embodied cognition in this respect, by which they

mean that the identification of products as members

of a brand is dependent on visual appearance, which

can carry a set of associations of its own. In this sense,

the design features should be seen as a direct embod-

iment of (interlinked) product and brand associations,

capable of communicating core brand values of their

own accord, and in their own special way.

Product design can thus play an important role as a

persistent and nonarbitrary reminder of the brand’s core

values. In this sense products can be regarded as lan-

guage and their features as ‘‘talking’’ to people (Oppen-

heimer, 2005). All manufactured products can be seen as

stating something through their design, intentionally or

unintentionally, passively or actively (Giard, 1990). The

intentional view of design is that of a strategic activity,

concerned with how things ought to be, and devising

artifacts to attain goals (Simon, 2001). This intentional,

value-based view of design implies that design has a

strategic, goal-oriented character and that, in a business

setting, it should function in coordination with other

strategic intentions of the company.

In a multiple case study among 11 companies that

had recently undergone a process of design-driven

renewal, Ravasi and Lojacono (2005) looked more

closely at the strategic role of design. For these

authors, design has the potential to drive strategic in-

novation on the basis of a design philosophy. Such a

philosophy comprises a stylistic identity (based on

value-based design features) and core design princi-

ples (a coherent set of beliefs and principles about the

company’s approach to design). A design philosophy

is one of the driving forces of strategic renewal in a

company, other forces being the company’s core ca-

pabilities, its competitive scope (as expressed by the

core brand values), and its strategic intent. For Ravasi

and Lojacono (p. 71), it is imperative that the design

philosophy co-evolves with these other forces, ‘‘to

help designers relate their work to broader issues of

competition and market positioning.’’

Semantic Transformation: From Strategic Intentto Value-Based Design Features

The relation between brand strategy and product

design is established through acts of ‘‘semantic trans-

formation’’ (Karjalainen, 2004). Through these acts,

qualitative brand descriptions are transformed into

value-based design features, and these generate the

intended meaning of products. The notion of semantic

8 J PROD INNOV MANAG2010;27:6–22

T.-M. KARJALAINEN AND D. SNELDERS

transformation is derived from design semantics, which

deals with the issue of how meaning is formed and me-

diated by signs that are embodied in products and rec-

ognized by others. In this field there exist a variety of

approaches toward product analysis to help designers

understand how their work becomes meaningful to

others (Krippendorff, 1989, 2005; Mono, 1997; Muller,

2001; Steffen, 2000; Vihma, 1995). With few exceptions

(Warell, 2001), this literature has looked primarily at

the communication between individual designers and

society at large. Here the potential of semantic trans-

formation is explored to function as a model for the

deliberate effort of companies to communicate specific

brand values to customer target groups.

The theory of signs by Peirce (1955) and Peirce

Edition Project (1998) provides a potential entry

point to the semantic analysis of products (Karjalainen,

2004; Vihma, 1995; Warell, 2001; Wickstrom, 2002).

The theory suggests that the process of signification (the

attribution of meaning) is regarded as a triadic rela-

tionship among a Representamen (a perceptible object,

R), an Object (of reference, O), and an Interpretant (the

effect of the sign, I). Meaning is constructed through

this triadic interaction. Applied to design, R can be

regarded as a design feature that functions as a man-

ifestation of the sign through its properties (e.g., form,

shape, color), while O relates to a brand value with

which the design element has a reference relation

(Figure 1). For example, specific design features of

Nike running shoes (R) can be a manifestation of the

dynamic orientation of the Nike brand (O). The context

of interpretation (I) comprises the subjective realm of

the interpreter and the environment in which the inter-

pretation is made. Three dimensions of the semantic

transformation process play a role in this.

Genuine and Stringed References. R–O relations

have a bidirectional nature, which means that design

features create associations that connect the product

with specific brand values, and, at the same time, the

brand values and their historical representations

strongly affect the interpretation of the design fea-

tures. This latter process, from historic brand value to

feature interpretation, can be regarded as an interpre-

tation bias, since it implies that the meaning of design

features will always be affected by expectations set by

the brand. As a consequence, the relation between

design features and brand value is often ‘‘stringed’’;

that is, the associations that the design features evoke

are themselves entangled with additional associations

evoked by the brand. As a group these associations

create a thematic connection between the design

and the brand values. In contrast, a direct ‘‘genuine’’

reference of a design feature would be the first (unbi-

ased) association that a design feature brings to mind

(after Peirce, 1955).

Stringed references are usually culturally formed

and time and context dependent. As such, stringed

references are as much a product of the market as of

the company, and control over them is very difficult.

Still, companies can make use of stringed references

under some circumstances. This is when (parts of)

stringed references are based on ‘‘coupled’’ associa-

tions, which are sets of (often two) associations that

frequently co-occur in products and that have become

predictable and manipulable. Coupling can bring new

interpretations to an initially simple reference relation

(Janlert and Stolterman, 1997). For example, chrome

details in cars or aluminum in mobile phones are

coupled with the association of premium quality.

Through coupling, companies may exert some con-

trol over stringed references, and this may allow them

to communicate brand values through design in more

ingenious, and less direct, ways.

Explicit and Implicit References. Recognition of

the core brand values can be built through both

explicit and implicit visual references (Karjalainen,

2004; see also Crilly, 2005). Explicit references are

embedded in design features that designers implement

with the intention of being immediately perceived and

recognized. These are often features in the product

that have relatively distinct object boundaries (e.g.,

the kidney grille and quad headlights of BMW

cars) or that are repeated over a large portion of the

product (e.g., the variety of concave and convex

‘‘shark’’ surfaces on the body of recent BMW cars).

Implicit references are based on features not so

readily distinguished in the product but implemented

with the intention of being inherently perceived and

Rdesignfeature

Obrandvalue

Iinterpretationcontext

Figure 1. The R–O–I Framework for the Analysis of Brand Ref-erences in Design


9

recognized without customers being consciously aware

of them. These references are based on design features

that are not easily detected by uninformed customers.

However, when implicit references are applied to a de-

sign, they can still ‘‘make sense,’’ be it more intuitively.

For these references, the recognition process may not be

unlike that for the recognition of a human face, which

has been shown to be based for a large part on uncon-

scious processing and on facial features that people are

not aware of (Rakover and Cahlon, 2001). The so-

called Hofmeister kink of BMW is an example of a

reference that is implicit for most consumers. This small

bend in the rear window in the C-pillar of almost all

BMW saloon cars since the 1960s, named after a former

director of design at BMW, creates the impression that

the back of the car sits precisely on the rear-wheel axis.

Even after detection most people may still not be aware

how important the kink is for their perception of a

powerful, rear-wheel driven car.

Complete and Partial Attribution of Brand Charac-

teristics. Attribution by customers is an important

aspect of the interpretation context. Characteristics

whose attribution is close to universal can be regarded

as so-called complete characteristics (Janlert and

Stolterman, 1997). Certain visual features entail rather

complete attribution. Such features can be inherent ei-

ther to human nature or to culturally established codes.

For example, rounded forms and warm colors can sug-

gest that a product has a ‘‘warm, friendly, and protec-

tive’’ character (ibid., p. 299). Specific shapes and forms

can also entail complete attributions that are category-

specific. For instance, street and off-road motorbikes

can be recognized through specific form elements

(Kreuzbauer and Malter, 2005), and specific packaging

design can express the taste of the dessert it contains

(Smets and Overbeeke, 1995).

Partial characteristics, in turn, have a lesser scope

of attribution. These characteristics cannot be used suc-

cessfully beyond a limited group of customers. Outside

this group, the interpretation of the brand reference will

be uncertain. In other words, partial characteristics in-

volve ‘‘right’’ (in this case, brand-specific) references

among a limited number of customers and are arbitrary

outside this group of subjects.

The Construction of Product Lines and Portfolios

Value-based design features not only exist in single

products: they can also be replicated (with some

changes) over the entire product line, or even over

the entire product portfolio of a brand. However, the

level of consistency that is sought over the product

line or portfolio can differ strongly between brands

and industries and perhaps even between different

parts of the world. Some companies have a high con-

sistency strategy for the design of their products.

Brands such as BMW, Jaguar, Citroen, Apple, Bang

& Olufsen, and Braun have clearly recognizable de-

sign features that are repeated over their product lines

and portfolios. Brands such as Toyota, Nissan, Ford,

Sony, Panasonic, and Samsung have selected a more

flexible strategy with a focus on the design of individ-

ual products.

Some products in the product portfolio may also be

more central to the identity of a brand than others.

Such ‘‘lead products’’ (or ‘‘flagship products’’) strongly

incorporate the core values of the brand (Ealey and

Troyano, 1997). With respect to this, Kapferer (1992)

notes that almost all the major brands have pivotal

products in their portfolio that best transmit the mean-

ing of the brand. One example of such a lead product

is the Volkswagen Golf (or Rabbit in the United

States). The Golf was one of the first hatchback cars

to arrive on the market, and it was an instant and last-

ing success. To date, five Golf generations have gone

through evolutionary changes, but all have held onto a

number of design features that represent German

engineering quality, functional design, and good value

for money.

The example of the Golf shows that products can

become lead products by creating a strong brand

presence on the market, either through a high sales

volume or through the special experience they bring to

customers. A historical role for lead products is to

establish an authentic heritage for the brand. Thus,

the main design challenge from the product line and

portfolio viewpoint is to decide how to employ value-

based design features in the product line-up of the

brand and how to manage this over successive prod-

uct generations. From this perspective, it is concluded

that not all products in the present and historic prod-

uct line and portfolio will contribute to the visual rec-

ognition of brand values in the same way, to the same

extent, or at the same time.

Method

Two topics were identified above concerning the stra-

tegic management of brand recognition through



visual design features: the type of brand references in

design and the organization of these references in prod-

uct portfolios and product lines. To address these top-

ics, an explorative in-depth case study was carried out

concerning the strategic design efforts of two compa-

nies: Nokia (mobile phones) and Volvo (passenger

cars). Three objectives were defined for the case studies:

(1) To describe and illustrate the strategies of Nokia

and Volvo for creating visual brand recognition

through design.

(2) To identify the key drivers behind these strategies

and the case-specific variation in how these drivers

exert their influence.

(3) To identify the implications of these strategies for

the management of brand recognition through

product design.

Case Selection

The selection of the two cases was based on purposive

and theoretical sampling, so that the cases were

deliberately chosen and varied on a theoretically

made distinction (Silverman, 2000). Strong, well-

established brands of durable products with signifi-

cant attention to industrial design were selected. In

particular, the aim was to find companies that regard

product design as a key instrument for creating visual

brand recognition. Nokia was chosen as the first case.

The company had become the global leader in mobile

phones, among other things through heavy emphasis

on product design as a competitive factor. From early

on, Nokia had emphasized design next to technolog-

ical development (Ainamo and Pantzar, 2000). More

importantly, the wealth of meanings attributed to

mobile phones and their connection to the brand

identity of Nokia made the company an appropriate

starting point for our study. Already in the beginning

of the 1990s the Nokia design strategy stated that

Nokia products should be identifiable and global and

should incorporate ‘‘soft’’ design language (Pulkki-

nen, 1997).

Volvo was selected as the second case because the

company had gone through a strategic renewal process

from the early 1990s to the early 2000s, a remarkable

process in which design played a key role. A number of

articles and analyses in the automotive press paid at-

tention to the consistent and meaningful relation be-

tween Volvo’s new design direction and the company’s

brand values and heritage. For example, the S80 model,

introduced in 1998 and the first car to unfold Volvo’s

new design direction, won the European Automotive

Design Award (voted by professional car designers and

design students from 33 countries) in the following year.

The award was justified by a press release stating that

the ‘‘Volvo S80 represents a radical change without

breaking the continuity of Volvo design’’ and that the

design ‘‘has been more successful in synthesizing the

past and the future than any other car in 1998’’ (Volvo

Press Release, 1999).

The design effort of both companies was extensive,

but it was expected that there would be differences in

their approach to product design because they oper-

ated in different industries and held different market

positions. Thus the two cases had great potential to

supplement each other, leading to greater depth and

trustworthiness of the analysis.

Data Sources

To meet the objectives of the study, data were col-

lected from multiple sources between 2002 and 2004.

The complete brand portfolios of cars and mobile

phones were studied as expressions of strategic brand

identity. Material on design concepts created by the

companies was also collected and analyzed, as well as

promotional material such as images of the products,

press releases, annual reports, and Internet pages.

An important objective was to understand why

certain design decisions had been made on the visual

design of the products and product portfolios. An

initial conceptualization of the strategic approach

chosen by the companies was developed after the col-

lection of the secondary data already described. This

conceptualization was then complemented and chal-

lenged in a number of in-depth interviews. Personal

interviews were held with the designers and design

managers of the companies to determine what

was intended with the designs and, consequently,

to achieve an additional level of interpretation. Three

people were interviewed at Nokia (one of them, the

design director, three times) and seven at Volvo

(two of them, the design directors, twice). The inter-

view duration varied between 30 minutes and 2 hours.

The interviews were recorded and transcribed.

The interview schedule was adapted to the Nokia

and Volvo cases and slightly modified from one

interview to another to take the different positions

and context of the interviewees into account. The

topics that were covered dealt with the creation of


11

brand-specific design (e.g., What were Nokia- and

Volvo-specific design features? How consistently were

these features used over products in the portfolio?),

the semantic transformation process (e.g., How did

the work proceed from the verbal brief to the design

elements? How free was a designer to use his or her

creativity?), the design process (e.g., a description of

the decisive points, the manager’s role in the process),

and product examples.

Data Analysis

The analysis of the products through images and 3D

objects was conducted first. This was done by identi-

fying the design features companies were using across

their product portfolios. The visual search was then

supported by textual data from interviews and sec-

ondary sources. The analysis of this textual material

involved a number of steps. The key thematic issues

and their relations that emerged from the literature

were conceptualized. Textual data, interview tran-

scriptions, and other text material were then coded

and organized on the basis of the conceptual frame-

work. Data organization and coding were completed

manually as a way of disaggregating the data, break-

ing it down into manageable segments, and identify-

ing these segments (Schwandt, 1997). The practices of

categorization (coding interviews into specified cate-

gories of phenomena), condensation (of the expressed

meanings into shorter formulations), and ad hoc ap-

proaches (eclectic meaning creation with no standard

method) were used in the data organization process

(Kvale, 1996). Then, data were expanded, trans-

formed, and reconceptualized through various itera-

tion rounds to create more diversity in the analysis,

which is especially important in descriptive studies

(Coffey and Atkinson, 1996).

Organization and interpretation of the data re-

sulted in initial summaries of the Nokia and Volvo

cases that were then sent to the designers and design

managers of the companies for further comment. This

allowed for a further test and validation of the anal-

ysis, and it enabled a deeper interpretation of the data.

A comparison between the two cases resulted in the

identification of a number of internal and external

factors that serve as key drivers behind the different

design philosophies of the two companies as well as

differences in the way the companies set out to create

visual brand recognition through design.

Based on the analysis, a description was made of

the strategic use of design references at Nokia and

Volvo to create visual brand recognition. A summary

of these case descriptions is presented in the following

section. Next, the key drivers behind the visual design

strategies of both Nokia and Volvo are summarized,

as well as the case-specific variation in these drivers.

Finally, some implications for the design for visual

recognition are discussed, referring to the themes

identified in the introduction.

Case Descriptions

During the latter part of the 1990s there was a sig-

nificant shift in the mobile phone industry from tech-

nology to design as the main area for differentiation.

Nokia as market leader was at the forefront of this

trend. The thematic focus of the Nokia case was on

this development in the industry and on Nokia’s lead-

ing position in design from the late 1990s to the period

of data collection in 2002–2004.

Compared with the mobile phone industry, the car

industry is relatively mature, and visual recognition

has long been a strategic goal for most manufacturers.

Design plays a fundamental role in the consumer

assessment of cars and car brands. Volvo, in addition

to being an established but relatively small brand on

the global market, had given design a central compet-

itive role along with a recently completed process of

strategic renewal. The renewal, called ‘‘Revolvolut-

ion,’’ was initiated in the design of the Environmental

Concept Car (ECC), presented at the Paris Motor

Show in 1992, and was finally unveiled in the launch

of the S80 model in 1998. Subsequent production

models (V70, S60, XC90, S40 and V50, launched

by the end of the data collection period) consistently

followed the design philosophy that had been set by

the ECC and S80.

Based on a visual analysis of the brand portfolios,

and, through the interviews and secondary source

material, it was evident that both Nokia and Volvo

used product design intensively, intentionally, and in-

strumentally to create and maintain the desired visual

recognition for their brands. However, it also became

clear that, during the time of the data collection,

Nokia and Volvo had fundamentally different ap-

proaches to their design and portfolio strategies. The

difference particularly concerned the degree of con-

sistency within the product portfolio. As suggested

in Figure 2, Volvo had adopted a consistent strategy

in launching products, and its designs also contained a

number of explicit brand references. Nokia, on the



other hand, was managing the designs of the products

in its portfolio more flexibly and was also nurturing

more implicit brand references in its products. It must

be added that there was still some organization in the

portfolio of Nokia. The company nurtured a variety of

product lines, within which more consistent and explicit

references were used. However, from the perspective of

the total brand portfolio, the use of design was flexible,

and brand references seemed more implicit.

The Nokia Design Philosophy

The key strategic intent of Nokia, as analyzed here,

concerned the creation of personalized products for a

wide range of market segments. As market leader, the

company felt that every customer should find an

interesting and appealing product in its wide product

family. However, for all phones usability was the

number one priority; ease of use was regarded as a

core Nokia value.

These brand values also guided the design philos-

ophy. Personalization and usability formed the core

principles of Nokia design. Every new Nokia product

was intended to incorporate characteristics such as

comfort, balance, and pleasure of use. Nokia also

wanted its phones to be perceived as friendly, devel-

oped on the basis of a human approach to technology.

This was regularly mentioned in Nokia’s promotional

material in the late 1990s and was considered impor-

tant at a time when mobile phones were still regarded

as a professional device for doing serious business.

Making the products more approachable for a wider

range of customers was a strategic goal for Nokia.

Personalization was a design principle that led to a

careful consideration of the design features (shapes,

materials, colors, and details) that each product

should have. The ability to create personalized prod-

ucts and take various user preferences into account

was based on the effective market intelligence system

that Nokia had created, resulting from the customer-

driven approach adopted by the company. The

knowledge about customer segmentation that resided

within the company formed a core capability. Nokia

introduced specifically designed products (and com-

plete product lines) for different market segments well

before its main competitors. Moreover, the company

had gained a competitive advantage by way of its de-

sign excellence. Already in the mid 1990s, when the

industry as a whole was still mainly technology

driven, product design was considered a core strate-

gic factor at Nokia.

Nokia’s value-based approach to design became

more important in the late 1990s, when a variety of

line- and product-specific designs was introduced. The

consistency of a product portfolio with varying designs

was managed through subtle references, and some of

these were even held to function at a subconscious level.

Nokia designers claimed that their products, even those

with very different designs, were recognized as Nokia

products, because they incorporated specific design fea-

tures in a more subtle, ‘‘qualitative’’ way.

Nokia Design Features and Portfolio Flexibility

Until the early 2000s Nokia had nurtured a set of design

features that were applied consistently over the product

portfolio (Figure 3). The Y and U shapes were charac-

teristic design themes, forming the typical Nokia sil-

houette and the curved frame around the display. The

composition of the keypad and function buttons was an

additional feature for which Nokia became known. The

3310, also due to its huge sales volumes, became

the strongest representative of this design approach in

Nokia’s history. Many of these design features (al-

though executed differently and constantly evolving)

are still apparent in recent Nokia models, and they still

constitute a substantial part of Nokia brand recogni-

tion, as was noticed in a number of student workshops

organized recently by one of the authors.

At the time of the study, Nokia had radically ex-

panded its product portfolio. The portfolio consisted

of various product lines, each with its specific target

segment and each with a different interpretation of

Nokia’s general design philosophy. A basic phone

(e.g., the 3310) had to differ visibly from a fashion

phone and a premium phone. Nokia’s product port-

folio as a whole had few consistently applied design

features, and at the time of the study the versatility of

the portfolio was increasing rapidly. The product

explicit implicit

flexible

consistent

brand references

product portfolio

VOLVO

NOKIA

Figure 2. Comparison of the Design Approaches Used by Volvoand Nokia


13

portfolio had expanded drastically, and many new

product lines were emerging, based on Nokia’s inten-

sive market segmentation effort. There were still many

lead products that nurtured the classic Nokia design

features, but new product lines with their own stylistic

identity were introduced as well, both as high-volume

models and models intended for niche markets.

Despite the visual flexibility over the entire product

category, there were a number of recurring attributes

across Nokia design. Usability was achieved by putting

special emphasis on the development of a user interface

that became standard in most Nokia phones. The func-

tionality and layout of the keypad was also designed to

increase usability, and it stayed recognizable over most

product lines. There was also an attempt to maintain

an impression of friendliness for all phones in the port-

folio. Curved lines were preferred over straight lines.

Although the U-shaped curve around the display (as

with the 3310) was no longer standard, upward ‘‘smil-

ing’’ curves were still used in most models for the line-

up of keys in the keypad. The classical human-like Y

shape silhouette was replaced in some models by other

silhouettes, but these also stuck to curved, natural

lines, which retained the value of high usability by fit-

ting comfortably in the hand. However, the U and Y

shapes did not die out, and even to date some lead

products in the portfolio show an evolutionary inter-

pretation of these classical Nokia shapes.

The Volvo Design Philosophy

In the design philosophy of Volvo the design of visual

recognition for the brand was considered on a long-

term basis. The new Volvo design philosophy was

closely connected to the strategic intent of Revolvolut-

ion, as well as Volvo’s core brand values and core ca-

pabilities. The intention of the strategic renewal was to

shake up the Volvo brand image. The brand was losing

customers, and a fresher appearance was needed to ap-

peal to a younger clientele. However, it was important

to preserve the strong heritage and brand recognition

Volvo had achieved with earlier models. Volvo had be-

come known as the number one safety brand in the

automotive industry, based on its year-long emphasis

and research and development (R&D) spending on

safety. Moreover, the Scandinavian heritage was con-

sidered an inherent part of the Volvo brand, offering a

vital basis for differentiating Volvo from its competi-

tors. In addition to these established values of the Volvo

brand, new values were introduced that underlined the

renewal. A more dynamic approach was needed to give

the brand a more emotive character and to lift it up to

unambiguous premium status.

The strategic intent, the core capabilities, and the

new brand values were expressed in the Volvo design

philosophy. As the most central Volvo value, safety was

always put first. The Scandinavian design approach was

interpreted as a combination of functionality and sim-

plicity with beauty and elegance. Furthermore, new

Volvo design features had to provide the cars with a

dynamic appearance that promised premium quality,

which should lead to more affective recognition.

Volvo Design Features and Portfolio Consistency

Within the new design philosophy, Volvo defined a

number of explicit design features. These specific fea-

tures included the characteristic front with the soft

Figure 3. The Evolution of the Early Nokia Design Features in the Late 1990s



nose and the diagonal Volvo logo, the V-shaped

bonnet, the strong ‘‘shoulder’’ line, the rear with its

distinctively carved backlight, the third side window,

and the flowing line from roof to boot lid (Figure 4).

The same features were used for all models introduced

between 1998 and 2004, although the execution varied

from model to model.

The design philosophy that lies at the basis of these

new models was guided by concerns for safety, Scan-

dinavian design, and a more dynamic image for the

brand. To start with the first, Volvo wanted to create

a stronger safety impression in the overall visual ap-

pearance of the car. The strong shoulders, for in-

stance, made the sides look more solid and thicker,

thereby appearing safer. Active safety showed most

clearly in the interior design, specifically in the control

devices and instrument panel that reduced unneces-

sary information and potential distractions to the

driver to a minimum. The clean, simple controls and

instrument panel also accentuated the Scandinavian

approach to design. A detail in the interior was the

‘‘floating centre stack,’’ the innovative instrument

panel first introduced in the S40 and then in all sub-

sequent Volvo models. Top-range versions of this

panel were made from Scandinavian oak and Volvo

designers commonly described it as ‘‘a piece of Scan-

dinavian furniture.’’ In addition, the exterior’s new

muscular look, its V-shaped bonnet, and the flowing

roof line created a strong impression of movement,

and a number of other design features and details

were carefully designed to enhance the emotional and

premium appearance of the cars.

Volvo’s new design features were also explicitly pro-

moted to the public to reinforce their recognition. The

company aimed for complete attribution of the design

features. The reason for this is that Volvo wanted not

only to make its values recognizable for its target au-

dience but also to help its target audience to be recog-

nized by others as adhering to the Volvo values.

Another aim of this communication was to show

the relation between the new design philosophy and

Volvo’s design heritage. The new design features of

Volvo differed radically from the previous generation

of Volvo cars. During the previous two decades Volvo

had become known for its functional, robust, and static

‘‘box’’ design. Except for the grille and front lights, the

new design features were not used during the box

period. However, many of the new features, such as

the V-shaped bonnet and strong shoulder line, referred

back to historical Volvo models from before the box era

(e.g., the famous PV 444/544 and P120 ‘‘Amazon’’

models from the 1940s and 1950s). Volvo made this

link explicit in its promotions and releases to the auto-

motive press. It was crucial for them that consumers

would regard the new design, with softer edges and a

dynamic appearance, as plausible for Volvo.

Key Drivers behind the Design Philosophies

of Volvo and Nokia

When investigating why Nokia and Volvo chose their

respective design philosophies, six principal drivers

were derived from the data (Figure 5). These drivers

Figure 4. Volvo Design Features Represented in the S60 Model


15

are set to explain differences in the design philoso-

phies between the two companies, based on which

they had created visual brand recognition through the

design of their products. Two external drivers were

identified that relate to the product category (life-cycle

stage and renewal cycle) and four internal drivers

stemming from the companies’ past and present brand

management strategies (brand position, portfolio

width, brand heritage, and design history).

Life-Cycle Stage of Product Category

The product category in which the brand operates

creates specific requirements for the management of a

visual identity. In particular, the phase of the industry

life cycle was found to affect the overall approach to

design and the construction of the product portfolio.

The growth of the mobile phone market was very high

at the time of the study. As a consequence, more

product lines and more phone models started to

emerge, differing widely in visual appearance. The

car market, in turn, was mature and contained models

and product lines that faced direct competition from

other companies. Car manufacturers and their brands

had established positions in the marketplace. Compe-

tition was characteristically based on differentiation

between the brands, based on the explicit and consis-

tent use of design features.

Renewal Cycle of Product Models

The life cycle of a single product was another driver

that caused differences in the design philosophy. A

typical Nokia model stayed on the market for 1 to 2

years, whereas a Volvo model was designed to last

from 5 to 10 years (with minor modifications). There-

fore, car design features had a long life span, while

those for mobile phones followed short-term market

trends. This meant that a consistent strategy was not a

feasible option for Nokia and that design innovation

was regarded as a core competence of the company.

At the time of the study, mobile phone designs

followed on from each other in quick succession.

Each new model that came onto the market quickly

made its predecessor appear outdated. Thus, Nokia

was experiencing constant revolutions in design, as

new innovative designs were introduced in different

categories at an increasing pace. The whole mobile

phone industry changed radically every few years. In

contrast, Volvo’s approach to the design of new mod-

els was characterized by slow evolution. Design rev-

olutions occurred rarely. There had been only five

major renewals in the 80-year history of Volvo cars.

Brand Position

The position of the company in the market affected its

design philosophy. Nokia had reached the position of

market leader and had been one of the key companies

in establishing the mobile phone industry. World mar-

ket domination was achieved during the end of the

1990s through a series of highly successful products.

Nokia had also been one of the first companies to

develop new markets with the help of conspicuously

distinctive products. As a dominant market player,

Nokia was in a position to steer developments in the

mobile phone market. This meant that Nokia was

able to set new standards on the market and was more

likely to take the lead in trying out new directions for

mobile devices and their design features. The position

of Volvo was that of a relatively small company in a

mature and saturated market. Whereas Nokia covered

mature

growing

long

short

nichesmall,

well-definedtarget group

leaderbroad target

group

narrow

wide

long,defined

short,undefined

solid,periodic

styles

versatile,constantevolution

flexibleNOKIA

VOLVOconsistent

life-cyclestage

renewalcycle

brandposition

portfoliowidth

brandheritage

producthistory

Figure 5. The Key Drivers behind Nokia and Volvo Strategies



a wide spectrum of mobile phone segments, Volvo was

forced to find a specific niche to gain a sufficient level

of differentiation. As a result, the design philosophy of

Nokia was more flexibly and implicitly translated to

design features, while that of Volvo could be applied

more consistently and explicitly.

Width and Structure of the Product Portfolio

In general, the number of models on the market at a

given time drives decisions regarding consistency.

Consistency becomes untenable with many models

in the portfolio (resulting, for instance, from serving

many market segments), and a more flexible applica-

tion of a design philosophy is needed in this case. In

the case of Nokia, some consistency was sought

within different stylistic identities (represented, e.g.,

by the basic, classic, premium, and fashion product

lines). These product lines had their own visual defi-

nition. For instance, the design of the Nokia 3310 was

heavily influenced by the requirements Nokia had de-

fined for its basic line, in terms of visual appearance

and the use of materials. However, the 3310 was a lead

product for Nokia, and as such its design still had a

strong impact on the visual recognition of the entire

brand. For such lead products (usually mass-selling

models), the design requirements for the product line

were stringently applied, but Nokia allowed more ex-

perimentation in design for nonleading products.

If the brand portfolio contains only a few models

then the importance and significance of a single product

becomes much greater. In such a situation, every new

model can have a great impact on brand recognition,

and design decisions will have far-reaching implications

for brand identity. This was the situation in the Volvo

case. The messages that each new design carried were

carefully considered, because every new car model was

a considerable investment for the company and impor-

tant in terms of brand identity and business success. For

Volvo, each new model can be considered a lead prod-

uct, and therefore, each model carried design features

that it shared with other models in the portfolio.

Brand Heritage

The prevailing image and reputation of the brand on

the market affects the formation of recognition. As

already noted, this situation is typical for companies

in mature industries. A strong heritage and early-es-

tablished identity form an effective basis for brand

recognition. At Nokia, brand heritage did not play

such an important role. The company was established

as early as 1865, but the Nokia brand remained

virtually unknown outside Finland. The old Nokia

had been a totally different company from the current

Nokia. Its history restarted almost from scratch

around 1990, following the company’s structural

change from a diverse business portfolio to a strong

focus on telecommunication. Since that time Nokia

had become one of the strongest brands in the world,

and its core values were also widely recognized. New

products had to be sufficiently congruent with this

recent heritage to avoid conflicting messages. How-

ever, a strong sentiment existed at Nokia at the time

of the study that it was making history for itself, and

its experimentation with new designs may be seen as

an expression of that.

Volvo used its heritage intensively in its communi-

cations. The main values that were tied to its heritage

were safety and its Scandinavian origin. The safety

perception stemmed from the accumulated reputation

that Volvo had gained through its history of techno-

logical and functional innovation in active and passive

safety standards. The Scandinavian character was

present on a more implicit level. It was not easy to

indicate precisely which elements in the history of

Volvo’s design made the brand characteristically

Scandinavian. Still, in the design philosophy both

values were listed as departure points for new designs.

Product History

For both Nokia and Volvo, past models influenced cur-

rent design features. However, there was a difference in

the explicitness and singularity in the way the compa-

nies’ product histories were treated in the current design

philosophies. Nokia had a short product history due to

the young age of the mobile phone industry. Further-

more, Nokia carried several product lines, each with its

own stylistic identity and own history. This made it

difficult to show a clear path of historical examples.

However, the design features used in the very early No-

kia products, even if for a short time and for very small

markets, were still regarded as Nokia cues. These fea-

tures were not neglected in the current portfolio.

The new Volvo design approach made explicit ref-

erences to past models. This was important because

the strategic renewal of Volvo implied a major change

in design compared with the previous Volvo genera-

tion. This required the company to communicate that


17

the new design philosophy was connected to Volvo

designs from a more distant past.

Overall, past products have a decisive influence

on product design for a surprisingly long time. One of

the greatest challenges for design is to find the right

balance between familiarity and novelty. Companies

seek the familiar in their own product history, starting

from the very first product of the brand. It is felt that

references in the design to past products can have a

considerable impact on the future recognition of the

brand. Thus, if new companies establish their brand by

accident rather than by design, they may have to rein-

vent or ‘‘clean up’’ the brand later on (Cagan and

Vogel, 2002).

Strategic Design for Visual Recognition

The case-specific variation in how the drivers exert their

influence indicates that the requirements for designing

visual recognition are industry-, product- and com-

pany-dependent. Therefore, the generic strategic guide-

lines that are given here should be regarded as

sensitizing issues for further research and for practitio-

ners who may consider them against the background of

their experience, expertise, and knowledge of portfolio

management and strategic product design.

Semantic Transformation

Once a strategic approach has been chosen regarding

the use of design features in the portfolio, the major

issue becomes how these features should represent the

core brand values. Nokia and Volvo had defined a

set of core values that functioned as a basis for the

development of their design features. As the case

descriptions illustrate, both Nokia and Volvo had

used design features that made sense given the brand

values of the company. For instance, specific curves of

Nokia phones may be interpreted as a friendly smile,

which supports the brand values of personalization

and a human approach. Volvo’s ‘‘shoulder’’ feature,

in turn, refers to the value of safety by its intended

interpretation as solid and protective (Figure 6). Of

course, both companies ensured that the key design

features of products evoked the desired associations

among target users. Knowledge concerning different

user groups, as well as social and cultural contexts

of interpretation, is another prerequisite for effective

design. User tests and customer clinics are the means

through which this kind of knowledge can be created,

as practiced by both Nokia and Volvo.

In the Nokia and Volvo cases, designers used fea-

tures to represent the brand values of safety, dyn-

amism, and personalization, and these were intended

to be understood by most consumers in the same way,

leading to complete attribution. Volvo used a consis-

tent set of design features over its portfolio, and it

considered all its models lead products, in the sense of

being the best example for the brand at the moment

of market introduction. Nokia, on the other hand,

designed models for various product lines that each

had its own stylistic identity and a continuous flow of

new models. As a consequence, the explicit references

in its products tended to have partial attribution,

because they were tied to a specific market segment,

and their aim was to differentiate the product within

the brand, against Nokia phones in other product

lines. In trying to maintain recognition for the overall

Nokia brand the models also carried more implicit

references to differentiate the brand from other

mobile phone brands, so these had to have complete

attribution. Thus, all Nokia phones, even those from

highly distinct product lines, still shared some features

that would be recognized by most people as expressive

of Nokia values.

Taking the two cases together, a tentative conclu-

sion is that lead products and nonlead products

(as variations of the lead products) can be defined

RVolvoshoulder

Osafety

Iinterpretedas solid RNokia

curve

Opersonalization,human approach

Iinterpreted asfriendlysmile

Figure 6. The R–O–I Framework Applied to Volvo and Nokia Cases



by the type of brand reference that is made and the

type of attribution that takes place (Figure 7). Lead

products serve to differentiate the brand from other

brands in the market. As a result, they will have ex-

plicit references with complete attribution. Later vari-

ations of these lead products will consist of a mix of

explicit references with partial attribution (serving

further differentiation within the brand) and addi-

tional, more implicit references with complete attri-

bution (serving between-brand differentiation).

Visual Consistency of Product Portfolios

A number of guidelines for strategic decisions con-

cerning the visual consistency of the brand portfolio

can be derived from the key drivers. If the brand op-

erates in a mature product category, characterized by

established solutions for the technology-user interface

and a stable brand image, greater consistency over the

portfolio may be preferred. Consistency in the port-

folio may also be beneficial when the renewal cycle of

products and product lines is long. In addition, the

consistent use of explicit design features over the port-

folio is likely to be more appropriate for niche brands

(and possibly also for new brands) that focus on a

limited number of market segments. If the brand has a

strong heritage and, in particular, if the brand has

already nurtured a recognizable design identity

throughout earlier product generations, there may

be a greater need for consistency in the brand port-

folio and also a greater potential to create consistency

by referring to iconic designs from the brand’s past.

On a more general level there may exist two diver-

gent strategies with respect to the maintenance of

visual recognition of products in a brand portfolio.

Companies can aim to build coherent product port-

folios where each product has a number of explicit

design features, or they can create individual identities

for different products in the portfolio. In the latter

case, brand recognition is managed by the creation of

lead products in separate product lines that each have

their own stylistic identity and their own explicit design

features. Each lead product then represents a variation

of what the brand stands for, and it is through this

variation that the brand identity is defined.

As stated before, the repeated use of design features

over different models can enhance their recognition.

Customers have to learn the design features to be

able to identify new products as belonging to a certain

brand and expressing its values, and repeated expo-

sure to the design features is critical in this. But rep-

etition can also incite boredom and reduced attention

for the brand values that are expressed through its

design. Therefore, managing the equation of renewal

and consistency in employing design features may be

crucial for sustaining the visual recognition of the

brand. This implies that there is also a need for ‘‘out-

of-the-box’’ thinking and innovative concept creation

through which the freshness and topicality of the vi-

sual appearance is ensured. The Volvo concept cars

highlighted such thinking. Besides being consistent in

visual appearance by incorporating the Volvo design

features, they explored the possibilities for renewal and

further development of the visual identity of Volvo

through a number of concept studies. In the car indus-

try, concept studies represent an established practice of

presenting design innovations and preparing the public

for changes in the future. As such they are crucial in-

struments for brand management (Karjalainen, 2006).

Managing Strategic Renewal and the NPD Process

The unity of intent and consistency of action are

thought to be starting points for the successful

management of design (Ravasi and Lojacono, 2005).

The specific challenge within NPD is to maintain

these qualities in a design process that has many par-

ties influencing decisions on the visual appearance of

products. If the core brand values are understood,

agreed upon and internalized by all involved parties, it

becomes easier to employ design for the creation of

visual brand recognition. At Nokia, design managers

played an important part in this since they were

required to translate the general brand values of the

implicit explicit

partial

complete

brand references

attribution

Lead products(between-branddifferentiation)

Variations oflead productsfor between-

branddifferentiation

Variations oflead products

for within-branddifferentiation

Figure 7. A Tentative Design Strategy for Lead Products and

Their Variations


19

company to a design philosophy with many adapta-

tions for the various market segments it served. They

also had to promote this philosophy to all parties

involved and to organize the implementation of this

philosophy into actual product designs. In the Volvo

case, where the market was more uniform, the process

was less formalized. Here the current director of de-

sign acted as the main catalyst in the renewal of Vol-

vo’s design philosophy, pushing it away from what

the company was used to. By paying special attention

to lead products, concept studies, and iconic designs

from the brand’s past, the design manager created

anchor points that best expressed the core brand val-

ues and that inspired all parties involved in the NPD

process. Stories similar to the Volvo case can be found

in other companies such as BMW (Bangle, 2001).

Finally, what characterized both the Nokia and

Volvo cases was the central role that design had been

given in the company strategy. Design was not merely

regarded as answering to the requirements of other

functions. Instead, designers themselves contributed

to the design philosophy through the design features

they created. In this sense, a design philosophy is al-

ways a project under construction and never a closed

booklet with a set of examples of design features that

designers can copy and paste. As already suggested

by Ravasi and Lojacono (2005), it is important that

design is acknowledged as a driving force in itself,

contributing to strategic renewal of the brand and

corporation, driving brand repositioning and inspir-

ing strategy formulation.

Conclusion

This paper presents two cases of companies that have

strategically employed design to create visual recog-

nition for their brand values. In both cases it was

found that companies took a deliberate and planned

effort to translate the core brand values of the com-

pany to a design philosophy. This philosophy speci-

fied a number of design principles and design features

to be used in the design of the company’s products.

Both companies were found to express their core

brand values through design features, based on a pro-

cess of semantic transformation. Control over this

process enabled managers in both companies to make

strategic decisions over the type (genuine, stringed),

strength (explicit, implicit), and generality (complete,

partial) of the relation between design features and

brand values.

The influence of the design philosophy over the

design of products was found to vary over the com-

pany’s product portfolio. The influence was most

complete for the company’s lead products, which in-

corporated the design features specified in the philos-

ophy to the fullest and thus served as reference points

for what the brand stands for. The design of these lead

products received most attention from design manag-

ers, and they served as examples for later NPD pro-

jects in the company. In this way, the influence of the

design philosophy was felt throughout the company’s

product portfolio.

A between-company analysis of design and brand

portfolio management led to the identification of a

number of factors that drive a company’s strategy for

establishing visual recognition for the brand. The ex-

istence of these drivers implies that there is no simple

recipe for creating visual recognition of the brand.

Instead, the design effort of the two companies for the

creation of visual recognition was based on a contin-

uous renewal of the connection between brand value

and design features. This renewal can sometimes be

revolutionary and highly consistent and sometimes

evolutionary and multifaceted, depending on the type

of company and the market it is serving.

The insights resulting from this analysis can be

used as a basis for further research on the strategic

role that design can play in innovation processes and

NPD. New studies could, for instance, look at com-

panies that do not have such a strong focus on design

as a strategic instrument as Nokia and Volvo. Both

companies originate from the Nordic countries, where

a strong focus of design in industry has a long and

established tradition. Thus, it would be good to con-

sider cases from other regions where a company focus

on design has been lacking or where the role of design

in industry has a different tradition. Additional stud-

ies could also delve more deeply into the precise na-

ture of some of the drivers of design philosophies

discussed here. For example, the driver brand position

describes the relative size of the company in the mar-

ket, which has implications for its leadership in setting

market standards but also for its organizational com-

plexity. These two aspects of brand position could not

be disentangled in the present study: Compared with

Volvo, Nokia was more of a standard setter as well as

a more complex organization. As a result, the effect of

these two factors on the design philosophies of the

companies could be described only in combination

under the more abstract notion of brand position. The

drivers may also be interrelated. For example, the im-



portance of brand heritage seemed typical for com-

panies in mature industries. A better understanding of

such relations may lead to a prioritized and more

structured view of the drivers of design philosophies.

Given the limited number of cases in this study, these

issues have not been addressed here.

The focus in this study on the company intended

effects of design on visual recognition has led to three

limitations. First, this study has looked at the inten-

tions of companies to create visual recognition,

whereas, ultimately, recognition of the brand is cre-

ated in the market. The focus in this study has been on

the company, and the assumption has been that the

companies had extensive market data on the basis of

which they formulated their design philosophies.

However, it would be interesting to further explore

the relation between the symbolic meanings that com-

panies bestow on their products through design, and

the meaning that the market attributes to products,

based on the same design. Second, the study looked

only at the visual qualities of design and by doing so

disregarded the other senses. The visual may be dom-

inant in customer recognition, but information from

the other senses (e.g., auditory, tactile, olfactory) may

also play an important role. For example, the atten-

tion Nokia paid to its characteristic ring tone led it to

produce one of the first friendly, nontechnical-sound-

ing ring tones, and as such it is a good example of

Nokia’s human approach to technology. This sug-

gests that semantic transformation of brand values

into design features into brand values might be ex-

tended to other modes of perception. Third, the in-

tended communication of brand value through design

has been studied only with the goal of recognition in

mind. Other goals for design, such as exploration of

and reliance on the product (Krippendorff, 2005)

have been left aside. For example, BMW’s position

as the ultimate driving machine is underscored by its

cars, whose road-handling qualities can be explored

extensively. Such exploration of the product can be

another goal of design through which brand values

can be communicated. A complication arises here,

because it becomes difficult to disentangle the sym-

bolic qualities of design (that communicate brand

value) from the functional qualities (that deliver the

benefits related to the brand value). However, for ex-

actly that reason the communicative role of design at

the stages of exploration and reliance is worth further

investigation.

It should be noted that these conclusions run some-

what counter to the idea of ‘‘design DNA’’ that prac-

titioners in many companies are talking about. The

analogy with DNA suggests that the visual identity of

companies and their brands is inherited and develops

as a matter of course, and it implies that change in the

visual identity comes slowly and over many genera-

tions. The relationship between design and brand

identity that has been found here is one that can be

planned, has to be internalized, and is open to radical

change. The notion of design DNA may also point to

design as an inner strength of the company that keeps

it fit for the market. It was found that design can

sometimes be such a driver, but it is also driven itself

by a host of internal and external factors. It is thus

recommended that design becomes a less primal and

more self-reflective strategic force in a company,

working together with corporate, technological, and

commercial strategic forces.

References

Aaker, D.A. (1996). Building Strong Brands. New York: Free Press.

Ainamo, A. and Pantzar, M. (2000). Design for the Information So-ciety: What Can We Learn from the Nokia Experience. DesignJournal 3(2):15–26.

Bangle, C. (2001). The Ultimate Creativity Machine: How BMWTurns Art into Profit. Harvard Business Review 79(1):47–55.

Barsalou, L.W. (1999). Perceptual Symbol Systems. Behavioral andBrain Sciences 22(4):577–609.

Biederman, I. (1987). Recognition-by-Components: A Theory ofHuman Image Understanding. Psychological Review 94(2):115–47.

Biederman, I. and Ju, G. (1988). Surface versus Edge-Based Determi-nants of Visual Recognition. Cognitive Psychology 20:38–64.

Borja deMozota, B. (2004).DesignManagement: Using Design to BuildBrand Value. New York: Allworth Press.

Cagan, J. and Vogel, C.M. (2002). Creating Breakthrough Products:Innovation from Product Planning to Program Approval. UpperSaddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Coffey, A. and Atkinson, P. (1996). Making Sense of Qualitative Data.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Crilly, N. (2005). Product Aesthetics: Representing Designer Intent andConsumer Response. Ph.D. diss., Cambridge University, Cam-bridge, UK.

Du Plessis, E. (1994). Recognition versus Recall. Journal of AdvertisingResearch 34(3):75–91.

Ealey, L. and Troyano, L. (1997). Cars as Commodities. AutomotiveIndustries 177(3):77–81 (March).

Finn, A. (1988). Print Ad Recognition Readership Scores: an Infor-mation Processing Perspective. Journal of Marketing Research25:168–77.

Giard, J. (1990). Product Semantics and Communication—Matchingthe Meaning to the Signal. In: Semantic Visions in Design, ed.S. Vihma. Helsinki: University of Art and Design Helsinki, b1–b7.

Harkins, J., Coleman, O.W., and Thomas, G. (1998). Commentarieson the State of the Art in Consulting. Design Management Journal9(3):35–40.

Harris, F. and de Chernatony, L. (2001). Corporate Branding andCorporate Brand Performance. European Journal of Marketing35(3–4):441–56.


21

Janlert, L.-E. and Stolterman, E. (1997). The Character of Things.Design Studies 18(3):297–314.

Kapferer, J.N. (1992). Strategic Brand Management: New Approachesto Creating and Evaluating Brand Equity. New York: Free Press.

Karjalainen, T.-M. (2004). Semantic Transformation in Design—Com-municating Strategic Brand Identity through Product Design Refer-ences. Helsinki: University of Art and Design Helsinki.

Karjalainen, T.-M. (2006). Strategic Concepts in the Automotive In-dustry. In: Product Concept Design—A Review of the ConceptualDesign of Products in Industry, ed. T. Keinonen, and R. Takala.New York: Springer Verlag, 133–55.

Kotler, P. and Rath, G.A. (1984). Design: a Powerful but NeglectedStrategic Tool. Journal of Business Strategy 5(2):16–21.

Kreuzbauer, R. and Malter, A.J. (2005). Embodied Cognition and NewProduct Design: Changing Product Form to Influence Brand Catego-rization. Journal of Product Innovation Management 22:165–76.

Krippendorff, K. (1989). On the Essential Contexts of Artifacts or onthe Proposition that ‘‘Design Is Making Sense (of Things)’’. DesignIssues 5(2):9–39.

Krippendorff, K. (2005). The Semantic Turn: A New Foundation forDesign. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.

Kvale, S. (1996). InterViews: An Introduction to Qualitative ResearchInterviewing. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Louro, M.J. and Cunha, P.V. (2001). Brand Management Paradigms.Journal of Marketing Management 17(7–8):849–75.

Mono, R. (1997). Design for Product Understanding: The Aesthetics ofDesign from a Semiotic Approach. Stockholm: Liber.

Mooy, S.C. and Robben, H.S.J. (2002). Managing Consumers’ Prod-uct Evaluations through Direct Product Experience. Journal ofProduct & Brand Management 11(7):432–46.

Muller, W. (2001). Order and Meaning in Design. Utrecht: LemmaPublishers.

Olson, E.M., Cooper, R., and Slater, S.F. (1998). Design Strategy andCompetitive Advantage. Business Horizons 41(2):55–61.

Oppenheimer, A. (2005). Products Talking to People—ConversationCloses the Gap between Products and Consumers. Journal of Prod-uct Innovation Management 22:82–91.

Peirce, C.S. (selected and edited with an introduction by J. Buchler) (1955).Philosophical Writings of Peirce. New York: Dover Publications.

Peirce Edition Project (Ed.) (1998). The Essential Peirce: SelectedPhilosophical Writings, Volume 2 (1893–1913). Bloomington: In-diana University Press.

Pulkkinen, M. (1997). The Breakthrough of Nokia Mobile Phones. Hel-sinki: Helsinki School of Economics and Business Administration.

Rakover, S.S. and Cahlon, B. (2001). Face Recognition: Cognitive andComputational Processes. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Ravasi, D. and Lojacono, G. (2005). Managing Design and Designersfor Strategic Renewal. Long Range Planning 38:51–77.

Schmitt, B. and Simonson, A. (1997). Marketing Aesthetics: The Stra-tegic Management of Brands, Identity and Image. New York: FreePress.

Schwandt, T.A. (1997). Qualitative Inquiry: A Dictionary of Terms.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Singh, S.N., Rothschild, M.L., and Churchill, G.A. Jr. (1988). Recog-nition versus Recall as Measures of Television Commercial For-getting. Journal of Marketing Research 25:72–80.

Silverman, D. (2000). Doing Qualitative Research. London: SagePublications.

Simon, H.A. (2001). The Sciences of the Artificial, (3d ed.). Cambridge,MA: MIT Press.

Smets, G.J.F. and Overbeeke, C.J. (1995). Expressing Tastes in Pack-ages. Design Studies 16:349–65.

Steffen, D. (2000). Design als Produktsprache Der ‘‘OffenbacherAnsatz’’ in Theorie und Praxis. Frankfurt (Main): Verlag Form.

Stompff, G. (2003). The Forgotten Bond: Brand Identity and ProductDesign. Design Management Journal 14(1):26–32.

Vihma, S. (1995). Products as Representations. Helsinki: University ofArt and Design Helsinki.

Volvo Press Release (1999).March 9: Volvo Wins European AutomotiveDesign Award. Goteborg: Volvo Car Corporation.

Warell, A. (2001). Design Syntactics: A Functional Approach to VisualProduct Form. Gothenburg: Chalmers University of Technology.

Wickstrom, L. (2002). Produktens budskap—Metoder for vardeingav produktens semantiska funktioner ur ett anvandarperspektiv.Gothenburg: Chalmers University of Technology.

Zaltman, G. (1997). Rethinking Marketing Research: Putting PeopleBack In. Journal of Marketing Research 24(4):424–37.



This document is a scanned copy of a printed document. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy.

Users should refer to the original published version of the material.

Documents

Designing Visual Recognition for the Brand