incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Graham Lauder>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL] Initiate a Contest for Branding of 4.0
Date Sat, 27 Oct 2012 05:04:52 GMT
On Friday 26 Oct 2012 10:41:04 Dave Fisher wrote:
> Sent from my iPhone
> On Oct 26, 2012, at 9:59 AM, Graham Lauder <> wrote:
> > On Friday 26 Oct 2012 11:04:46 Rob Weir wrote:
> >> On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 4:36 AM, Graham Lauder <>

> >>> The launch of 4.0 is a unique opportunity in the life of AOO both
> >>> now
> >>> and
> >>> far into the future.
> >>> 
> >>> The branding needs to position us in the market place, be
> >>> distinctive
> >>> and
> >>> unique and makes a statement about the product.
> >>> 
> >>> The creation of this requires a skillset that we do not have an over
> >>> abundance of in the project.
> >>> 
> >>> The proposal therefore is to initiate a contest to create this new
> >>> branding, this would have multiple benefits in terms of community
> >>> outreach, marketing and raising brand awareness.
> >>> 
> >>> The contest would be source of the eventual branding of AOO 4.0
> >> 
> >> +1
> >> 
> >> The devil is in the details, but I think a contest can be a great way
> >> of getting many ideas, but also promoting AOO 4.0.  It makes it "an
> >> event".
> >> 
> >> I think Dave mentioned that another Apache project had a logo contest
> >> and received a large number of entries.
> > 
> > Which is why we go with "Branding", it's much broader than just a
> > graphic
> > logo.  there's color pallet, overall style, message, tenor,
> > presentation.
> > Those who just present a logo in isolation will be filtered early. 
> > Those that have a grasp of the full depth of the brand but without the
> > whole package will show early which is why we go back to the responders
> > for more detail later on. Initial  proposals will to show understanding
> > of the task first up.

> For Apache Flex there were over 50 submissions of varying quality, style and
> presentation including a video. Everything was handled on the dev list.
> There was an understanding that branding would be involved. There were two
> rounds of voting and the community and the PPMC were in close agreement.
> The PPMC chose the community's second choice, but it was a very close
> second.

Firstly, I like the Flex logo, however I don't see it as whole branding 

second, they have a small, specific, knowledgeable target market.

Third and once again I'll get shot at for making the statement, AOO is a 
consumer product that counts it's users in the hundreds of millions which 
makes things a little different.  Flex's logo is a personal thing that 
reflects the community that develop it, there is no requirement for the brand  
to excite new users.  Flex's best branding attribute is how well it does what 
it's designed to do.  There is little subjective in the reasoning for a 
developer to use a particular SDK and a Visual Brand Element is unlikely to 
make a huge difference to expanding the user base.  It can however engender a 
feeling of community and that is great.  Certainly there will be an element of 
that in AOO's branding.  However, in the consumer space there is a strong 
corelation between Brand Visualisation and the way the consumer feels about a 
product.  Good branding engenders loyalty,  encourages users to give-it-a-try 
and raises the dissatisfaction threshold.

We know that it does the job it sets out to do.  When I do change management 
jobs and training and I demonstrate what OOo can do people go wow and are 
always impressed, especially when I concentrate on the things that the 
opposition can't do.  However our opposition has a higher threshold before 
people get dissatisfied as evidenced by the number of support calls to OOo 
that are basically problems caused by inadequacies in the other product not 
with OOo.  

Good branding and a bunch of other things surrounding the project will 
mitigate that by building trust.  

The people in this community are not our customers or at least are a small 
subset of, it is the wider customer base or future customers that will (and 
should) guide us as to the best branding policies.

Community votes don't work in a consumer product, votes are too subjective.  
The community needs to be completely objective and divorce itself from likes 
or dislikes and consider only the feelings of the market,  the market will 
provide the subjective bit.

> The licensing required was made clear and the submissions were gathered on
> the podling site.
> For this contest we should be very clear  about the contexts that
> submissions should show. Site, splash screen, tshirt, etc.

All that is a given, however your headings are far too simplistic those are 
just items.  This branding will colour the whole look and feel of the product 
and will steer everything from stationery, webpresence to future icons to the 
way we communicate with our users and potential users.

There are two overriding considerations:
Building Brand trust and 
Building Brand recognition

This proposal is to "Initiate", there is a lot of work to do and discussions 
to be had before the final RFP is released, please join in. 


> Regards,
> Dave

> >>> The process would be:
> >>> 
> >>> Formulate a RFP with contest details and guidelines (these would
> >>> include the product name and a reasonable outline of our target
> >>> markets), timeframe, methodologies of presentation and breadth of
> >>> branding elements.
> >>> 
> >>> Perhaps sound out some sponsors for a prize
> >>> 
> >>> Filter responses for eligibility according to the initial criteria
> >>> 
> >>> Filter responses for global appropriateness
> >>> 
> >>> Filter responses for target market relevance
> >> 
> >> It will be important that this filtering is done in a way that
> >> everyone sees as fair.  Who judges "global appropriateness", for
> >> example?
> >> 
> >> One way might be to appoint a judging panel.
> > 
> > Indeed, although "judging" is probably not the best description, I just
> > can't think of a better one.  The initial filtering is done on purely
> > objective criteria laid out in the RFP.  Global appropriateness is a
> > minefield I agree, but hopefully we have a broad enough cultural
> > awareness on our L10n list to help us avoid any clumsy gaffs.
> > 
> >>> Communicate with the creators of this first shortlist to get them to
> >>> sell
> >>> their idea
> >>> 
> >>> Shortlist to a dozen or less based on function (ie usability across
> >>> multiple media)
> >> 
> >> For maximum impact we could have blog post and social media campaign
> >> to promote the short list of logos and drive traffic to the survey.
> > 
> > +1 good plan, as Ian was saying initial target will be Design Colleges
> > and oither such educational institutions.  Any others that may be
> > interested could be reached by community contact.  The initial contact
> > will ideally be concentrated, so we publicise that the RFP will be
> > available on a  specific date and the submissions will close on another
> > date.  Otherwise it will drag on.
> > 
> > Experience shows however that logos will continue to come long past the
> > closing as people seem to think that their new version is greater than
> > anything that has come before and that the whole process will be dumped
> > just so we can bathe in the light at the feet of the new Michaelangelo!
> >  :)
> > 
> > Cheers
> > GL
> > 
> >>> Create a survey to gauge general public impressions/feelings with
> >>> regard to certain branding criteria: Uniqueness, Impact, Impression
> >>> and Representation.
> >>> 
> >>> Reduce and Repeat.
> >>> 
> >>> If no clear "winner" emerges then PMC becomes the tiebreaker
> >>> 
> >>> Lazy consensus 5 days seeing as how the weekend is nearly upon us
> >>> 
> >>> Cheers
> >>> GL

View raw message