Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Re: Website online - question on main structure for art / branding / marketing
Hi Marc, * thanks for pointing out the main question in definition of branding Marc Paré schrieb: [...] As I have always seen it (and I believe that, this is what most people's understanding of the word): branding: (Oxford Dictionary) the activity of giving a particular name and image to goods and services so that people will be attracted to them and want to buy them * He sees contemporary branding as ‘service with personality’. * This marketing campaign is the most remarkable branding exercise of all time. = In this sense the word branding is the outcome of the marketing activity that will give a name its popularity and has no relationship in the completion of the logo creation process. However, it seems that there is another definition of the word branding in the world of the craft of logo design. The branding of the logo by which colours and shades are applied to an, as of yet, unfinished logo, as a final step in the creation process. [...] If[...]branding, in the process of completing a logo, occupies a leading role in the completion of the creation of a logo design schedule, in this case is deserves a separate category unto itself but still under the art umbrella. However, if branding is meant as the activity associated with the marketing of different identifying traits of LibO, of which its logo, then branding should occupy a place as a subset of the marketing section. My understanding contains both: Branding is not only logo design and visual design in general, but covers all activities to improve brand recognition and brand awareness in public and inside the community. Despite the Oxford definition I think community awareness with the knowledge and (even more) the feeling of belonging together between the different groups of the community is part of branding activity too. In the most extreme definition branding is the umbrella for marketing, art, user experience and user interface... ... but I don't think that this will be shared by the majority here and in the other teams involved, so I don't want to define a mega category inside the community. Christoph came up with an other idea (offlist, but will present it soon here on the list) I like very much - avoiding the category branding and art at all. So please wait a bit more - it is worthwhile IMHO. Best regards Bernhard -- E-mail to marketing+h...@libreoffice.org for instructions on how to unsubscribe List archives are available at http://www.libreoffice.org/lists/marketing/ All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Re: Website online - question on main structure for art / branding / marketing
Hi all! A very interesting discussion - I wished this one would have started about one year within the OpenOffice.org project. So my personal thoughts ... For reasons of efficiency, I'll refer to the Wikipedia article considering branding [1], although some things are different if a product is shaped by a community. But however, the main thoughts are identical. Am Sonntag, den 07.11.2010, 12:23 +0100 schrieb Bernhard Dippold: In the most extreme definition branding is the umbrella for marketing, art, user experience and user interface... Yes. We start with a plain user - what does he perceive when finally using our software? What is his experience? Having in mind, that most users don't know the community and what Open-Source-Software really is about... He will perceive the functionality (maybe a just works), the issues (g and never use it again). This starts from the initial installation of the software until the (hopefully not) removal. Usually people refer to that being the (overall) User Experience. One part of that is the visual appearance - including logo text, graphics, claims. In the best of all worlds (no issues, just pleasing experience), the visual design exactly matches and emphasizes this positive experience. So the logo and the visuals express the already perceived feelings and emotions. But ... The world isn't that optimal - so the branding does (at least in parts) communicate what the creator(s) of the product had in mind - whether they achieved the goal or not. So creators want to communicate a certain feeling or emotion whether the product will create it or not (usually producers of sweet beverages communicate the social aspect within their promotion activities). However, an example that is more valid for us: A very extreme and progressive branding (new, innovative, cutting edge) will fail for most people - because we (finally) cannot prove that this is correct (no trust after a certain time). At the moment, we can provide something like: versatility, productivity, quality. Another aspect is, that we are a group of individuals and companies who create a software - together. So we also think about our own motivation - and usually want to express that. A famous example is the Ubuntu logo - three people in a circle, warm colors. (By the way, Ubuntu has some very good reading at [2].) Finally, a good branding considers all of these aspects. It shapes how we want to be perceived, but also what we currently stand for. It considers our users and our community. If things are too different, then we have to work on separate brandings for both software and community. This is far more important than a simple logo. But this has to be done without rush ... ... but I don't think that this will be shared by the majority here and in the other teams involved, so I don't want to define a mega category inside the community. At the moment, we make up the initial branding without exact knowledge what all the people here think, without a long-term product roadmap which might have influence. So - to come back to the initial question - we currently work on the Visual brand identity [3] and are assuming some of the issues mentioned before. To make sure that this is correct, we have these discussions on the object (logo, presentations, colors) - although we should discuss about values and visual language. When I initially made up the branding page, I tried to quickly summarize my assumptions [4] based on our discussions / previous experiences within OOo (to be continued). This is now. I'm really looking forward to work with more experienced designers, more knowledge about our project and the software we want to shape to make up the community branding for LibreOffice. In the meantime, thanks for your patience, support and the discussions to - at least - create something that will work for the next release! @ Bernhard: Still thinking about the structuring proposal :-) Cheers, Christoph [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brand [2] http://design.canonical.com/the-toolkit/ubuntu-brand-guidelines/ [3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brand#Visual_brand_identity [4] http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Marketing/Branding#Branding -- E-mail to marketing+h...@libreoffice.org for instructions on how to unsubscribe List archives are available at http://www.libreoffice.org/lists/marketing/ All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-marketing] Re: Website online - question on main structure for art / branding / marketing
Le 2010-11-07 09:05, Bernhard Dippold a écrit : If we decide to replace not only the website CMS but also the wiki by Drupal (this really has not been decided - and it doesn't need to at the moment), these questions will become less important I think. This new concept is not my invention, but my impression I got from what I have been reading and hearing. So this concept should be discussed and decided on the website mailing list - it's not at all a marketing only topic. Best regards Bernhard Hi Bernhard: The Drupal team is trying to make an effort to listen/lurk on all mailists in order to collect information/opinions influential in the development of the TDF/LibO Drupal development. I believe that Michael and myself are trying to listen in on the Website mailist as often as we can (myself, I am part of the marketing team). I am sure there would be a way to integrate the Wikis into the Drupal site if this were one of the requests. We can look into this. Marc -- E-mail to marketing+h...@libreoffice.org for instructions on how to unsubscribe List archives are available at http://www.libreoffice.org/lists/marketing/ All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Re: Website online - question on main structure for art / branding / marketing
Greetings All, Excuse the speed of this reply, I'm still typing lefthand only so having to prioritise my online time On Monday 08 Nov 2010 02:54:28 Christoph Noack wrote: Hi all! A very interesting discussion - I wished this one would have started about one year within the OpenOffice.org project. So my personal thoughts ... For reasons of efficiency, I'll refer to the Wikipedia article considering branding [1], although some things are different if a product is shaped by a community. But however, the main thoughts are identical. Am Sonntag, den 07.11.2010, 12:23 +0100 schrieb Bernhard Dippold: In the most extreme definition branding is the umbrella for marketing, art, user experience and user interface... Yes. Agreed, however I would disagree with the extreme. Branding is a new science and has only been with us since the mid eighties or thereabouts. Let's not get wound up in definitions, it is simply enough that everyone in the project is on the same page when considering the organisations Visual, Emotional, Functional and Communication identity. Out of that comes a Brand. [] . the visual design exactly matches and emphasizes this positive experience. So the logo and the visuals express the already perceived feelings and emotions. Exactly, but additionally the above is reflected in textual communications as well. It should be consistent across all channels of communication: Marketing, PR, UI, packaging, website, Press releases. At any point where the project interacts with the world, both internally and externally, the Brand must consistently guide and shape that interaction But ... The world isn't that optimal - so the branding does (at least in parts) communicate what the creator(s) of the product had in mind - whether they achieved the goal or not. So creators want to communicate a certain feeling or emotion whether the product will create it or not (usually producers of sweet beverages communicate the social aspect within their promotion activities). However, an example that is more valid for us: A very extreme and progressive branding (new, innovative, cutting edge) will fail for most people - because we (finally) cannot prove that this is correct (no trust after a certain time). At the moment, we can provide something like: versatility, productivity, quality. Any extreme element in a brand has to have good science behind it but also there has to be an intuitive leap. The most recognisable brands combine the two. I would point to the OOo homepage as an example of that. The concept of Action Statements was extreme but on the other foot was backed by good science even though no-one else had done it before. However it was still guided by the Brand. Another aspect is, that we are a group of individuals and companies who create a software - together. So we also think about our own motivation - and usually want to express that. A famous example is the Ubuntu logo - three people in a circle, warm colors. (By the way, Ubuntu has some very good reading at [2].) Yep, Ubuntu done good, of course their market penetration or User base is miniscule compared to OOo so conceivably, and I don't believe I'm saying this, Bluebirds are more effective than a warm fuzzy embracing brand. ;) and Please!! don't bother rebutting this, it's not going to advance OUR discussion, tongue planted firmly in cheek. :) Finally, a good branding considers all of these aspects. It shapes how we want to be perceived, but also what we currently stand for. It considers our users and our community. If things are too different, then we have to work on separate brandings for both software and community. This is far more important than a simple logo. But this has to be done without rush ... Agreed At the moment, we make up the initial branding without exact knowledge what all the people here think, without a long-term product roadmap which might have influence. So - to come back to the initial question - we currently work on the Visual brand identity [3] and are assuming some of the issues mentioned before. To make sure that this is correct, we have these discussions on the object (logo, presentations, colors) - although we should discuss about values and visual language. When I initially made up the branding page, I tried to quickly summarize my assumptions [4] based on our discussions / previous experiences within OOo (to be continued). This is now. I'm really looking forward to work with more experienced designers, more knowledge about our project and the software we want to shape to make up the community branding for LibreOffice. In the meantime, thanks for your patience, support and the discussions to - at least - create something that will work for the next release! I would like to suggest another brand, LibreO , domains are parked and we could brand this one differently. Go for a funky branding and
[libreoffice-marketing] Re: Website online - question on main structure for art / branding / marketing
Le 2010-11-05 21:32, Marc Paré a écrit : Ok, I'll throw my hat in the ring. I would say that branding belongs under marketing. I have always thought that we were here to advertise and make sure of the visibility of the LibO branding. As to what defines branding is a subject of debate, but not usually of art. It is normally defined by the community and from the community there may be, from time to time, elements that may be sent back to the art members for redesign. Marc I've reread notes from several threads and now am a little confused as to the definition of the word branding. It looks like the understanding of branding may have different implications from the point of view of drafting a logo and the layman's definition of branding. As I have always seen it (and I believe that, this is what most people's understanding of the word): branding: (Oxford Dictionary) the activity of giving a particular name and image to goods and services so that people will be attracted to them and want to buy them * He sees contemporary branding as ‘service with personality’. * This marketing campaign is the most remarkable branding exercise of all time. = In this sense the word branding is the outcome of the marketing activity that will give a name its popularity and has no relationship in the completion of the logo creation process. However, it seems that there is another definition of the word branding in the world of the craft of logo design. The branding of the logo by which colours and shades are applied to an, as of yet, unfinished logo, as a final step in the creation process. Herein lies the problem with categorizing our understanding of the word branding, two divergent definitions. We should therefore take a closer look at the word branding and determine between both of our groups, designers and marketers, as to which side of the fence sits the word. If branding is commonly known in the design professions as a final step in the completion of a logo design schedule, in this case it could only be categorized as a subset of an art project. On the other hand, if branding, in the process of completing a logo, occupies a leading role in the completion of the creation of a logo design schedule, in this case is deserves a separate category unto itself but still under the art umbrella. However, if branding is meant as the activity associated with the marketing of different identifying traits of LibO, of which its logo, then branding should occupy a place as a subset of the marketing section. We, therefore, need to agree on the definition of the word branding before giving it its category placement. Marc -- E-mail to marketing+h...@libreoffice.org for instructions on how to unsubscribe List archives are available at http://www.libreoffice.org/lists/marketing/ All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-marketing] Re: Website online - question on main structure for art / branding / marketing
Le 2010-11-05 21:00, Graham Lauder a écrit : On Saturday 06 Nov 2010 01:16:08 Graham Lauder wrote: On Friday 05 Nov 2010 11:44:55 Bernhard Dippold wrote: Hi all, for the ones of you not subscribed to the website mailing list: the LibreOffice website is online and can be filled with content. As the author / publisher privileges can be bound to subsites, I want to discuss the main structure of the marketing related website. Main area will be http://marketing.libreoffice.org, I think. But I'm not really sure for artwork and branding material and definitions. There might be three or four possible areas I would like to think that we have sufficient numbers in the art project to warrant art.libreoffice.org. Certainly with a CMS, contribution will be so much easier, I think that in itself will grow the art community and the activity. Branding I see as part of the Art project that happens to intersect with marketing. Branding discussion will occur on the marketing list, branding elements will be best displayed on the art subsite IMHO. cheers GL Upon further consideration I'm of the opinion that branding should come uder Marketing because branding is not only images, it's also about policy. cheers GL Ok, I'll throw my hat in the ring. I would say that branding belongs under marketing. I have always thought that we were here to advertise and make sure of the visibility of the LibO branding. As to what defines branding is a subject of debate, but not usually of art. It is normally defined by the community and from the community there may be, from time to time, elements that may be sent back to the art members for redesign. Marc -- E-mail to marketing+h...@libreoffice.org for instructions on how to unsubscribe List archives are available at http://www.libreoffice.org/lists/marketing/ All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
