Same design, same response? Investigating natural designs in international logos

Abstract

Purpose

This paper aims to investigate the commonalities and asymmetries between consumer responses to different types of natural designs across countries.

Design/methodology/approach

Data were gathered through a survey in three European countries ranking differently in what concerns Hofstede’s (1981) uncertainty avoidance dimension (UAD). Respondents can vary strongly in the way they interpret and use rating scales, exhibiting a variety of response styles. In the analysis of consumers’ preferences for logo design, this article apply constrained dual scaling (CDS) to account for response styles in categorical data.

Findings

Results demonstrate the broad appeal of natural logo designs, suggesting that design preferences are similar within countries with different cultural orientations. However, findings indicate that cultural dimensions influence how consumers respond to different types of natural logo designs. Indeed, the positive effects of organic designs are even more salient in countries with higher UAD. Thus, when managers prepare to launch their brands in countries that exhibit more discomfort with uncertainty, they should consider incorporating organic visual identity elements into their logos to achieve the maximum positive affect.

Originality/value

Companies invest extensive time, research and money in generating, promoting and modifying their logos. This paper provides important implications for international brand managers aiming to build a consistent and favorable brand image. From a methodological perspective, the results come from the analysis of clean data – that is, data after applying CDS, which increases the validity of the cross-country comparison.

Citation

Torres, A., César Machado, J., Vacas de Carvalho, L., van de Velden, M. and Costa, P. (2019), "Same design, same response? Investigating natural designs in international logos", Journal of Product & Brand Management, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 317-329. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBM-10-2017-1632