Should we rebrand?
A rebrand is one of the most significant decisions a company can make. It’s a transformational moment for the business and a career-defining move for those leading the charge.
Yet, rebrands are often undertaken with a low understanding of the potential impact, leading to inefficient processes, poor return-on-investment, and, in some cases, a net-negative result.
Is a Rebrand Ever the Right Decision?
Marketing columnist Mark Ritson recently wrote"When is a good time to rebrand? Never!"
These attention-grabbing headlines aren't technically correct. But they're effective. Why? Because they have the desired result of grabbing the attention of leaders who have one finger hovering nervously over a large, red 'rebrand' button.
What Ritson and others know when it comes to rebranding is that exercising caution is key.
The Power of Rebranding
In some cases, rebranding is a powerful tool to kickstart transformation. Many of the today's best known companies, Google, Amazon, Pepsi and others have rebranded to incredible effect.
Rebranding is a highly visible, valuable way of harnessing the resources required for strategic change.
But rebrands won't mask a toxic organisation or culture. They're not an elixir for falling revenue. They shouldn't ever be used in isolation. They're the start of a process, not an outcome.
And they should never, ever be implemented without thorough, experienced strategic guidance.
What is Rebranding?
A rebrand is a strategic initiative that results in a significant change to a company’s identity. It goes beyond logo and visual identity, often encompassing refinements or changes to many aspects of a business, including name, messaging, positioning and product and service offerings.
Rebrands are typically driven by significant changes in corporate strategy or direction, such as mergers, acquisitions, a shift in target audience, or the need to overcome outdated perceptions. It’s a bold step designed to realign the brand with its business objectives and redefine how it is perceived in the market.
Brand Evolution / Brand Refresh vs Rebranding.
In contrast, a brand evolution (sometimes referred to as a brand refresh) is a more gradual and considered refinement of an existing brand. Instead of starting from scratch, it builds on existing brand equity while modernising elements like design, tone of voice or positioning to stay relevant. Evolving a brand subtly over time is widely recognised and proven to be best practice. It is an approach that builds upon audiences' existing memory structures whilst predicting or adapting to changing audience expectations, technological advancements, market conditions or competitive landscapes without negatively impacting equity.
Brand Expansion vs Rebranding.
A brand expansion is the process of extending and deepening a brand’s identity without altering its core. Unlike a rebrand, which reshapes the brand from the ground up, or a brand evolution, which adapts existing elements, a brand expansion introduces new ways for the existing brand to express itself - particularly in areas where its presence may be underdeveloped.
For example, very few brands have fully considered motion design. Put simply, they are static in a moving world.
We often help our existing clients expand their brand identity by defining their motion identity guidelines and systems. This helps organisations produce stronger content for channels like Meta, YouTube and outdoor advertising at speed and scale. Expanding a brand’s toolkit through motion, sound, spatial design and other sensory elements allows it to show up more powerfully across digital and physical spaces.
In today’s ‘double-win’ world, where it's clear that brand impacts both brand metrics and also performance marketing metrics, developing flexible distinctive assets beyond the logo, colour palette and typography essential. Brand expansion ensures that every touchpoint contributes to distinctiveness, memorability, and competitive advantage.
Brand Process Comparison: Rebranding v Brand Evolution v Brand Expansion
CTA: Should I Rebrand?
Measure Your Rebrand Readiness
Any leader considering a rebrand should undertake an analysis of the brand first. If this is you, we've created a decision-making framework to help you understand your readiness and forecast the potential impact of the work.
Get started
Rebranding and the seven (deadly) scenarios
If brand evolution and brand expansion are best-practice, where does rebranding come in? We've identified seven scenarios where rebranding can be used as a powerful tool to unlock growth.
Scenario 1: You Got It Wrong!
When was the last time you "just Backrubbed it"? Met your dream date on Matchbox? Or watched your favourite show on Cadabra Prime? These companies, now known as Google, Tinder, and Amazon respectively, show that even the most successful organisations can get branding wrong initially.
Often a logo represents an organisation's strategy, positioning or ethos in graphic form. Would the Nokia mark first used in 1865 have supported its emergence as a major player in the '90s mobile market?
Many of the brands who feature perennially on the world’s most valuable brands lists, such as Kantar's BrandZ and Interbrand's Best Global Brands, rebranded at some point.
We took a selection of these firms to understand how many had rebranded, and if so when and why.
Rebrand and brand evolution timeline
Reassuringly a clear pattern begins to emerge, which shows:
- Most startups get it wrong. Blue Ribbon Sports (now Nike), Brad’s Drink (now Pepsi) and the aforementioned Backrub (now Google), Cadabra (now Amazon) and Matchbox (now Tinder) all got it wrong initially. Most organisations on the list rebranded within the first 5-10 years of their existence. It's important to highlight these were not evolutions of the existing brand, but a significant, purposeful and seemingly strategic decision to professionalise and improve their identity.
- After bootstrapping the original brand they then buy-in professional help to create a brand and identity system that will advance their business, and crucially, propel it long into the future.
- Evolution is essential. Following a professional rebrand, the best companies then stick with it. But as the diagram shows they commit to a process of evolution. On average the businesses we looked at invest in evolution every five to ten years. This is an average, not a yardstick to use to forecast when you'll next need to rebrand. On review the majority of evolutions often appear to be responses to changing media or technological advancements that require an identity to be adapted to work in new formats and on new media channels.
In short, changes that are external to an organisation make change to the organisation essential. The best brands act decisively and evolve subtly.
Scenario 2: Your strategy is changing.
Rebranding can be used as a powerful statement and catalyst for change - both internally and externally. If your business strategy has changed significantly; if your brand no longer supports your business' aims; or if your current identity is synonymous with an outdated offering - rebranding is a tool that can be explored.
This was the case with OpenMoney. Originally an investment platform called 'Evestor' the company expanded into a broader financial wellness service. Testing revealed that the old brand identity was too narrowly associated with investment. A rebrand, complete with a new visual identity and brand guidelines, allowed them to connect with a wider target audience.
Some of our clients also have also successfully rebranded by bringing a series of strategic changes together under a single transformation agenda. A rebrand can be a powerful, visible vehicle for transformation.
Scenario 3: The world is changing.
Quiz: Which company, originally Microtel Communications Ltd, became the youngest to join the FTSE 100 in 1996?
If you've attended any of our naming workshops you'll already know the answer.
Click to reveal: Orange.
Today it is one of the world's most powerful brands with a valuation in excess of $20 billion.
In 1993, the mobile phone market looked very different to today. Digital networks were new, prices were high and mobile phones a status symbol, mostly for high-net-worth individuals and business users.
Hutchison Whampoa acquired Microtel and believed people wanted a mobile network that was simple, accessible, and designed for everyone.
Partnering with brand consultancy Wolff Olins, they wrote a clear brief - create a warm, approachable name with a matching colour palette.
At a time when rivals had technical sounding names, often lengthy with the word 'telecomms' in them, the rebrand allowed the business to stand out in the category, steal a march on competitors and spearhead three decades of change.
Scenario 4: You have a perception gap.
Skoda is an exceptional example of perseverance, fortitude, long-term strategic planning meeting sharp, consistent creative execution. It's simply brilliant. But even the marque's most ardent fans must sometimes wonder if the decision to stick with the Skoda brand in the UK was correct. Other companies (Tesla, Toyota, Hyandai, Kia, Dacia to name a few) have all achieved significant and similar market share in significantly less time https://www.am-online.com/data/manufacturer-insight).
Whilst Skoda now enjoys strong brand recognition and the benefits of a consistent global brand name, decades of effort were needed to shed its negative image. If the company or product is strong yet inaccurate negative perceptions persist, a rebrand could signify change and be the first step in helping overcome a perception gap.
Scenario 5: Your identity has become toxic.
We recently worked with a company that faced a brand identity crisis through little fault of their own. Twenty years ago, they abbreviated their name to an acronym, as many companies did (and bizarrely many still do). This was a mistake - acronyms usually make poor names. But little could they know, at the time, of the unintended consequences this would cause.
A decade later the UK Police Force began using the same acronym, as a short code for a very serious crime. Meta and other media platforms were tasked with blocking content associated with the acronym, eventually resulting in the brand being unable to use its own name on social media. Anyone searching for the brand received an alarming 'ACRONYM is illegal' warning message.
Social media marketing was central to the success of the business. After exploring all options and carefully assessing the equity inherent in the former identity, a rebrand was the only viable solution.
This isn't an isolated case. And whilst arguments can be made the other way for brands with strong equity (Corona beer for example) a re-brand merits discussion in these extreme, but rare, circumstances.
Scenario 6: Streamlining your brand portfolio.
A UK tourist arriving late at night in Sydney - tired, hungry, and faced with a choice between the golden arches or Hungry Jack’s (the Australian name for Burger King) is likely to opt for the more familiar brand.
A unified global identity makes sense. Every advertising pound is focused on building a single brand rather than being diluted across multiple brands. Today's consumers are global. Who hasn’t spotted a familiar brand in a foreign country, instantly recognised it, and been tempted by the reassurance of knowing exactly what to expect?
Whether we like this global convergence or not, managing one brand is more efficient. But getting there isn't without pain.
When the Opal Fruits-to-Starburst rebrand sparked near outrage in the UK, making the front page of The Times, the marketing team's mouths must have been watering at all the attention.
The storm is usually temporary, it brings the old brand back into sharp focus, and provides money-can't-buy exposure for the new identity. Consumers will understand the decision (and many will even forgive it).
The Marathon-to-Snickers rebrand is similar tale, often met with nostalgia for the original name. But a lesser-told part of the story is its impact. Within a year, Snickers had climbed from fifth to third in UK market share. More importantly, the change allowed Mars to promote the brand to a global audience through sponsorships like Euro ’96 and the World Cup.
The key to getting the decision right? As always, it's about understanding equity.
Scenario 7: Creating a group brand.
We have rebranded holding companies with a portfolio of brands into 'groups' to help make them more attractive to investors, talent and wider stakeholders. As one partner at a Private Equity powerhouse succinctly stated "If a business can't be understood in one-page on a memorandum of sale, it won't stand a chance."
Evolving the narrative and often name in these scenarios is often an essential step in grabbing the attention of, and creating demand for, investment.
Our work with Wonder, KTC Group, and others is testament to this approach. The new identity then serves to attract talent, improves stakeholder and customer relationships. This works especially well when the original organisation has little equity, as is often the case with holding companies.
CTA. Why Measuring Brand Equity Matters
Before making the decision, it’s crucial to quantify the value of your current brand. Our Brand Equity Calculator provides a structured way to assess whether a rebrand is the right move.
Measure your equity now.
Real world examples: EY’s brand transformation
Since rebranding from Ernst & Young in 2014, our client EY has become the UK’s strongest brand and is now valued at £31 billion. Initially met with scepticism, the transformation has proven to be a strategic triumph.
A unifying brand strategy
EY’s rebrand was more than a name change, it was a full-scale transformation.
EY’s rebrand was built on a carefully planned global strategy. When EY introduced its new brand identity the term purpose was in vogue. EY's identity cleverly put purpose at its core, whilst also making the company's values and approach highly visible. The core of the identity was broad enough to work across all languages, territories, formats and services.
Internally, EY chose to introduce the new brand identity using ‘All In’ philosophy, this became a rallying cry for employees and partners. This strong internal backing helped EY navigate the anticipated initial online backlash and the new brand quickly gained traction.
Differentiated identity
An intelligently designed visual identity system played a key role in EY’s rebrand. The new name was introduced alongside a new brand logo, colour palette, typography, and other visual elements to establish a distinctive, repeatable image. The real masterstroke was the introduction of a narrative system that was paired with a new visual asset, the EY frame, which could be used liberally across all communications without being seen as self-satisfied or obnoxious. This distinctive visual asset complemented storytelling, and has been used centrally on almost all communications for over a decade.
Consistency and ad campaigns
Whilst the frame helped reinforce consistency across all manner of marketing materials, it was important to grow recognition of this through global, omni-channel campaigns. This approach is still used more than ten years on. Recent campaigns like ‘Transformations’ are ensuring EY's brand image and distinctive assets remain consistent, whilst cleverly pushing the identity forwards, ensuring EY remains relevant with existing and potential customers.
Global Strategic Branding Agency Support
A transformation of this scale requires expertise, and partnering with a global roster of strategic and creative specialist branding agencies helped EY ensure a seamless rollout. Our role has focussed mainly on EMEIA Financial Services, EY's largest division. From crafting a compelling brand narrative to executing high-impact creative campaigns, strategic guidance played a crucial role in making EY’s rebrand a success.
Measuring Rebranding Success
EY’s transformation demonstrates that a well-executed rebranding process delivers measurable impact.
Tracking Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) such as brand value, brand sentiment and internal engagement has been central to rebranding efforts.
With a brand now valued at £31 billion, EY’s story demonstrates the impact of a brilliantly conceived, crisply-executed, and highly successful rebrand.
Measuring the impact of a rebrand
Trying to calculate the Return on Investment (ROI) for many the companies on the world's most valuable brands lists is near impossible. But it's clear that the ROI for the likes of Disney, Nike and Google would be off-the-charts. It's clear that rebranding to 'correct' a flawed identity brings enormous value. And most importantly, that value grows over time and endures. One strategic decision can lead to decades of value creation.
But to purely measure equity or brand valuation is missing the point. A successful rebrand has far-reaching organisational benefits, from long-term strategic focus, to aligned leadership, improved talent attraction and retention, favourable stakeholder relationships, strengthened relationships with existing customers, greater resilience with more loyal customers, and increased company valuations and / or share price.
What does a rebrand cost?
The costs of rebranding can't be calculated accurately without thorough assessment. As a business ages and grows, the investment required multiplies significantly. Changing the perceptions about a well-known brand with a large, established audience is hard. The physical cost of updating products, digital products, advertising, packaging, signage, print, and all manner of materials should be calculated too.
As the relevance of an identity declines, almost cruelly the costs of change increase. This is shown on the oversimplified diagram below.
The brand impact v costs inverse relationship
Therefore nudging an identity forwards, creating subtle change that allows old to temporarily live in harmony alongside new, is key.
But the evidence above also shows that a well-executed rebranding strategy could achieve similar outcomes if paired with a bold, properly resourced marketing strategy that communicates the change.
Final Word
Any organisation can take lessons from the world’s most valuable brands. And one reassuring trend is that they, just like many companies at startup stage, made poor early branding decisions. This is understandable and borderline forgivable. Whilst a business is finding its feet, investment in products, service offerings and testing takes priority (although a stronger brand would undoubtedly help an organisation at this stage).
But as organisations scale, the costs of not rebranding mount.
Sometimes an initial identity is technically poor. Sometimes it lacks distinctiveness. Sometimes as a company grows its exposure to rivals increases, putting it at greater risk of infringing the IP of other brands. Sometimes it is difficult to protect as it lacks distinctive character. Sometimes, like Backrub, it's just plain bad.
As many successful companies mature they undergo a rebrand to establish a professional brand identity that propels business growth.
Our rebrand of Twenty5Twenty to LADBible Group (started in a bedroom and floated at £360m) or AgentSoftware.net to Street.com (now widely regarded as the UK real estate industry's leading CRM) are examples of founders bootstrapping and refining their visual identity later to great effect.
Key Takeaways
- Rebranding is a strategic tool, not a quick fix, and should align with a company' vision, strategy and broader business objectives.
- Most successful brands have rebranded early in their journey to correct weak 'startup' identities.
- Internal and external forces demand brand adaptation, ensuring continued relevance and differentiation.
- Brand evolution or expansion is necessary to remain relevant in changing markets.
- A well-executed rebrand should drive long-term value, including financial growth, market leadership, and improved stakeholder relationships.
- Rebranding is just the beginning. Growing a brand requires sustained effort and strategic execution.
