Quick Tip for Designing your Website

Last post I talked about redesigning a logo and used some popular examples on how complicated it can be. Well designing a website is much harder as you need to get the person viewing the website to do something for you. This isn’t a post for building a website but rather for designing one.

Every website has a “purpose role” be it to purchase something or to learn information or even to click on the ads.

When you’re designing a website you must always make sure that every page, every click and all content is driven towards one thing, to get the viewer to achieve your purpose role. If even one of these elements fail then the entire website fails.

Not only that but these elements must also work in a way where it’s seamless, where the viewer doesn’t have to do menial tasks or make too many clicks to get to your purpose. Below is a disturbing image where placement, color, and content go very wrong.

Placement is an incredibly important aspect to any website, where do your images, text, description, prices, links and everything else go? If you don't carefully layout an easy to comprehend website you'll be left with nothing more than a jumbled mess like gates'n'fences (http://www.gatesnfences.com/).

Fling Design (http://flingdesign.com/) is a great example of presenting plenty of information on a single screen. Everything is broken up and separated by subject, images are clean and are not intrusive and the overall style is modern, minimalist while also full of relevant content and you can easily tell what the website is about. 

Content is the basic foundation for all websites but without a clear presentation of that content you could lose your potential visitors. Of course be careful when trying to be bold or exciting, Enritec, a technology company does just that.

Enritec (http://www.enritec.com/) has a…”unique” design to say the least. Everything is extremely high tech, with flashy sounds and is so minimalist it makes Apple websites look cluttered and yet you don’t really understand what it’s about at all.

All of their information is presented in floating cubes that cannot be read until your mouse hovers over them, not to mention the website itself takes a while loading up. It’s great to try a different design method to wow consumers but if they have no idea what’s going on or where to go then what’s the point?

A good website can take you from the home page to your purpose page in 30 seconds or less and the best way to learn about good website design is to just take a look at some bad websites and try to figure out its purpose role and achieve that role in less than 30 seconds. 

Company Makeover – Why Companies Change their Logos

So we all heard by now that Yahoo is set to unveil a new logo this September 4^th. Companies do this all the time for multiple reasons, usually to stay modern or represent a change. Does it change public perception on the company then and now?

I listed a few notable companies that underwent massive logo changes in an effort to revitalize their look and for what reasons why.

Microsoft

Microsoft turned heads in 2012 when they unveiled a fresh new logo, the first in 25 years.

The goal of the new look was to reflect their metro (now known as modern) interface that was going to be their universal design language for all their products (from Windows to phones to even the Xbox).

How did it fare though? Unfortunately for Microsoft Windows 8, Windows Surface and Windows Phone all turned out to be duds with only the Xbox being successful (and the Xbox One announcement garnered a lot of criticism). Now their sleek, clean logo is a reflection upon those failures.

It was a good logo that got across that they are committed to the Modern UI language but now it’s a painful reminder of Microsoft’s shortcomings.

BP Oil

Early in 2001 BP changed their logo followed by a $200 Million marketing campaign to represent their ability to give us something “beyond petroleum”. 

For an oil company choosing bright green and yellow colors in the form of a sunflower was an ingenious way of suggesting they would have a smaller footprint.

Ironically the bright and pretty sunflower has been “tainted” (pun fully intended) with the infamous BP Oil Spill in 2010. The very logo that represented a more eco-friendly company was swiftly attacked by the internet after the spill and the new image of BP is this:

Hundreds of variations of this logo can be found by a quick Google search, there was even a movement in the UK called Rebrand (trash) BP's Logo.

Pepsi-Cola

In 2008 Pespi updated their new logo because…well…no one really knows why.

Unlike Microsoft which laid all their eggs on the Modern Interface and BP which gave the illusion of a smaller carbon footprint, Pepsi spent a whopping 1 million USD on the new logo and millions more (some numbers claiming an upwards of 1 billion) in updating all their products to their new logo.

The design of the new logo was to be asymmetrical for a simple, playful and edgy look all rolled into one but was it really necessary? Especially at that price it seems like a logo update wasn't really needed nor will really have a lasting appeal with customers.

It’s not an image that really has an impactful meaning and the company was in no way a slouch in the previous year’s either, it’s one of those cases where it doesn’t really do anything.

Gap

Pepsi’s logo might have been uninteresting and unnecessary but at least it remained true to form. Gap took an extremely iconic and popular logo and chose uninspired, boring Sans Serif font and put a tiny blue box behind the P.

Why isn’t this logo on stores? That’s because it had a short lifespan. 1 week to be exact.

The logo was so despised and caused such backlash from customers that after 1 week of announcing the change Gap revealed that it cancelled this new logo and decided to stay with the old one.

Not only was it unnecessary (like Pepsi’s) but it actually gave a negative perception of the company, the opposite of what re-branding tries to do.

Conclusion

Logos change all the time, some of them are hardly noticeable (Apple and Google) and others are a complete change (BP). When your re-branding something especially for a large, multi-billion dollar corporation with decades of history and millions of customers a re-branding has to make sense.

If your company is in good health, has good public perception and has no change in management then a radical re-branding of your image can only hurt you in the end. I’m not one to bring up tired and old examples but Coca-Colas “Coke II” re-branding is still being taught in marketing classes today.

So where does that leave Yahoo? All we know is that it will retain its iconic purple font, exclamation point and yodel which is a great start but it remains to be seen what the final design will look like.

Considering the company has been through rough times and has recently acquired a new CEO that plans on shaking things up, a rebranding may be the perfect start to change public perception.