I have worked with many different aspects of branding for a very long time now. And no matter the model, I have found it challenging to use existing theories and vocabulary in my everlasting wish to give my clients kick-ass advice on how to move forward towards “building a strong brand”.
Because companies do not make branding decisions in isolation. They make business decisions. They change pricing. Launch products. Restructure offers. Enter markets. Hire people. Change sales processes. Improve customer experience. Rewrite websites…
And every one of those decisions says something about the company.
After my last entrepreneurial endeavour, I had the privilege to take a sabbatical and think about what I wanted to do next. My tipping point came when I gave myself permission to deep dive into one of my true work passions: semiotics.
Briefly, semiotics is the study of how signs create meaning — and, in branding, how everything a business says, shows and does is interpreted by people and gradually builds a position in their minds.
The second work passion of mine is psychology. So if semiotics explains the how, psychology gives us the why.
Why people understand. Why people trust. Why people remember. Why people buy.
So I set out to research whether the how could help explain the why.
It may have been a dark January day outside, but inside the lamp of diligence shone brightly. With the help of AI, I started digging through research from multiple disciplines looking for answers.
Did I find what I was looking for? No.
I found something better.
I found a way of understanding how the signals surrounding a company accumulate into meaning. And when I reverse engineered that, I found a way of understanding what position those signals are actually creating. Which changed how I think about the idea of a “strong brand”.
I no longer think strong or weak is particularly useful. I think a company can be sending a coherent signal. Or its signals can interfere with one another, cancel each other out or accumulate into noise.
The simplest explanation I can give you is this: everything about a brand comes down to signals, signal coherence and a meaningful position. But let’s not get ahead of ourselves. Let’s ease into it.
First of all, everything about your brand is about your business.
Your brand isn’t something you build through marketing alone. It is how the market perceives you through every interaction it has with you.
Yes, your visual brand is important. Shapes, forms, colours, images, fonts, logos and graphics all send signals that are easily read by potential clients.
And that is only the surface.
The tonality you use through your website, social media, newsletters, offers, customer support, sales pitches and even how you answer the phone sends signals too.
Did it get more complex? Absolutely.
Are we done? Not even close.
Because how you guide prospective clients on your website sends signals. The steps in your sales process add signals. How your offers are structured and priced sends signals.
Business decisions that nobody thinks of as “branding” are constantly influencing what the company means from the outside.
Most companies have an intended position. They work intentionally towards that position. But that’s not always where their accumulated signals are actually placing them.
So if everything you do creates a signal, what does it all add up to?
For the sake of simplicity, let’s look at a few things that can happen when signals meet.
The first one is what we aim for: signal coherence.
It appears when what the company says, shows and does reinforces the same underlying meaning.
A.k.a. everything that is done in the company, for the company, by the company is in phase with the company.
(That was maybe more cleverly put than clear, but I know you got that.)
The second one is signal interference.
Signals don’t necessarily just sit next to each other. They affect each other.
Premium + eccentricity, for example, does not necessarily mean premium + eccentricity to the person interpreting it. Together, those signals might create artistic authority. Connoisseurship. Fashion. Pretension. Something that wasn’t really present in either signal on its own.
So interference isn’t necessarily bad. It can strengthen the meaning of a company. It can shift it. Or it can create an interpretation nobody intended.
It depends on what the signals do to each other — and what else is going on around them.
The third one is signal cancellation.
A distinctive point of view that would make your company stand out is being pulled back (balanced, some may say) with so many reassurances that it loses the intended edge.
Cancellation reduces the net force of meaning.
Not confusion, but neutrality. (And that can sometimes be just as bad.)
The last one is signal noise.
There are just so many things going on at once, well thought-through things, no doubt — but not supporting each other — that no clear pattern really emerges.
Individually, they may all make sense. Together, they don’t. Too much information. Too little meaning. Noise.
Quick recap: Everything a company does creates signals. Those signals accumulate, interact and create meaning. Sometimes they reinforce each other. Sometimes they weaken each other. Sometimes they cancel each other out. And sometimes their combination creates something that wasn’t there before.
That is what it all adds up to.
Read the Signs looks at what a company says, shows and does — and what it all adds up to.