How Important is a Logo in Architecture?

[ArchitecturalPRGirl]

I'm curious to hear what you archis have to say about logos. Especially those who work for larger firms. Everyone has one, so...

What do you think it says about you and your work?

Is it that important?

What things do you like and dislike about logos? Specifics? Firms?

This should be fun!

[TheNiche]

I'm curious to hear what you archis have to say about logos. Especially those who work for larger firms. Everyone has one, so...

What do you think it says about you and your work?

Is it that important?

What things do you like and dislike about logos? Specifics? Firms?

This should be fun!

Oftentimes, especially with a small or startup firm, the logo is the only thing about you that a prospective customer knows. A logo can therefore be extremely important. Larger firms can more easily leverage their reputations and depth of capabilities. They also are targeting a wide clientel, so cutting edge marketing might turn off a lot of business. In contrast, a small shop doesn't need a lot of projects at any given time to keep them busy, so they can more easily target niche markets with really avant garde marketing materials and a unique style.

[ArchitecturalPRGirl]

Do you work for a small firm? If you don't mind me asking and you can email me directly without public view if you want, but how old are you? I'd like to get opinions from different age groups.

And thank you for the insight you have given me.

[TheNiche]

Do you work for a small firm? If you don't mind me asking and you can email me directly without public view if you want, but how old are you? I'd like to get opinions from different age groups.

And thank you for the insight you have given me.

I don't work for an architecture firm, but I do work with and network amongst them...most frequently the big ones that dominate the commercial real estate market.

I'm 23/m.

[TexasArchitect]

yup. i think logos are very important. imo that's what captures a person's interest to even look at the firms work. if someone see a cheesy logo they're going to think the firm is a firm w/ no money just starting off or something or yet even worse they'll feel if the firms logo sux then how creative are they in their work....my previous employers logo is fairly simple but i guess it looks sophisticated. i dunno maybe i'm biased against them since i quit over there, lol. i got me another job fairly quick and this firm is medium size and the logo is also fairly simple. i think that's what firms are going for simple yet sophisticated. if i see a logo that has a t-square on it or compass and angles...that looks silly for an arch firm, but i see that all the time for construction firms. hope that helps

age group: i'm 27

I don't work for an architecture firm, but I do work with and network amongst them...most frequently the big ones that dominate the commercial real estate market.

I'm 23/m.

what niche your 23!?!?!?!?!?!

ahhhh man, i feel stupid lol. you have so much knowledge on real estate, foreclosures, etc...time for me to crack out the whip and start reading some books!!

[TheNiche]

i got me another job fairly quick and this firm is medium size and the logo is also fairly simple. i think that's what firms are going for simple yet sophisticated.

Yes.

if i see a logo that has a t-square on it or compass and angles...that looks silly for an arch firm, but i see that all the time for construction firms.

Yes.

what niche your 23!?!?!?!?!?!

ahhhh man, i feel stupid lol. you have so much knowledge on real estate, foreclosures, etc...time for me to crack out the whip and start reading some books!!

Yeah, there's hardly been a time in my working life that I haven't been the youngest person in the room.

[RedScare]

Yeah, there's hardly been a time in my working life that I haven't been the youngest person in the room.

Probably because there are few businesses run by 17 year olds.

But, I could be mistaken.

[ArchitecturalPRGirl]

Probably because there are few businesses run by 17 year olds.

But, I could be mistaken.

Red Scare-Any insight to the topic? Are you and archi?

What do you guys think about symbols on logos like shapes, stars, etc?

[RedScare]

Every architect I know thinks logos are a big deal. But, I don't think logos gain or lose a client...especially since every architect does the same thing. First, it was squares and triangles, then initials. Now, they are into single names. Whatever. Show me your work.

I do agree with Niche, that a solo guy needs all the help he/she can get, so a nice logo can show attention to detail, but overall, the architect's portfolio is far more important than a logo.

Oh, I'm a lawyer, not an architect. In my business, logos can actually do more harm than good. Hokie lawyers are not revered. Of course, we have our own theory...the more names in your firm's title, the better.

[MidtownCoog]

This survey would make more sense if you solicited feedback from architect's customers instead of architects.

[TheNiche]

Probably because there are few businesses run by 17 year olds.

But, I could be mistaken.

Until recently, I've always worked for people as an employee. Even now, my side projects are just side projects. Still--youngest person in the room.

[Highway6]

Kirksey probably has the most recognizable architect firm logo in the city to other archis.. but to non-archis, they probably don't know that eventhough they pass this logo every day ( Their sign at their office is at a very prominent location at the NW corner of 610 and 10 ), they have no idea what Kirksey is.

Besides trade magazines and trade shows, firms don't really advertise that much....

The logo isn't really all that important in that it doesnt get work or clients.... but being professional all around, logo included, keeps clients.

Most firms doing commerical/retail/education/civic will have clean and simple logos with simple geometry.

Since there really is no brand recognition, and since that's not really needed, i think as long as it is professional looking, thats all that matters, and to architecture firms, simple = professional.

..

Firms that just do small interiors or residences (I've tried pulling up a few sites, but they didnt even have logos) prolly break from this.

I can't find the firm I'm looking for, but there is one that specializes in pretty much the new "old victorian' houses that go up in the heights.. and their logo reflects this if I remember correctly.

[RedScare]

Until recently, I've always worked for people as an employee. Even now, my side projects are just side projects. Still--youngest person in the room.

You're 23! Everything you've ever done is recent!

I was the youngest in the courtroom unitl my 30s. So what?

[Highway6]

You're 23! Everything you've ever done is recent!

I was the youngest in the courtroom unitl my 30s. So what?

Must you two have a pissing contest in every thread ?

[TheNiche]

You're 23! Everything you've ever done is recent!

I was the youngest in the courtroom unitl my 30s. So what?

So nothing. I was just correcting an inaccurate assumption you made.

Must you two have a pissing contest in every thread ?

Evidently. I'll always win though because I know where to trespass that I can stand atop a 24-foot high warehouse roof and pee for distance. Gotta be careful about that wind, though.

[gwilson]

There is a saying, "Image is Everything". This applies just as much to business as it does every other aspect of life.

A brand image is likely the first thing a prospective client will see of yours and if it does not engage them, then you just lost some business. Why? Was it because you didn't have the skills to do the job or was it because you lacked a professional image.

In many cases, things like logos, stationary, etc outweigh your clothing when it comes to determining the professionalism of a company (mainly because there has been a rather large shift in the perception of casual dress being unprofessional to casual dress being comfortable so you can do your job). In quite a few cases, I've run in to people who find that the more someone is sporting a three piece suit to a business meeting, the more they are trying to make up for things they lack (be it skill, legitimacy, etc). "You can tell a con-man by how long it took him to put on his suit in the morning" a client said to me once.

Having spent a decade in branding, marketing, strategy and identity design (among other design fields), I can say first hand how the right image (even just the right logo) can make or break a business. There are exceptions, of course.

When it comes to upper echelon types of business, in which architects would fall, it is extremely important to give off that heir of professionalism in every possible way. From the logo, to the template on which you print your plans and how well they are branded, to your website, to your office and stationary. Do not underestimate any of these things.

Different prospects weigh each facet differently, but they are almost always all included in the equation.

Along with my construction business, I also provide market specific design, consulting and strategy services to architects and builders. So I keep up to date with that market as well.

Hope this helps.

[ArchitecturalPRGirl]

Thanks guys for your comments and insight. One last thing though, what do you think about a star in a logo and especially in architecture? Is that modern or old school? Cheesy or does it stand out? Thanks!

[Highway6]

Thanks guys for your comments and insight. One last thing though, what do you think about a star in a logo and especially in architecture? Is that modern or old school? Cheesy or does it stand out? Thanks!

What does a star have to do with architecture ? Thats neither modern nor old school... but I will give ya cheesy.

[TexasArchitect]

Thanks guys for your comments and insight. One last thing though, what do you think about a star in a logo and especially in architecture? Is that modern or old school? Cheesy or does it stand out? Thanks!

a star? what kind of star? asterick type? post an example, we can give u better tips if we see the logo unless it's hush hush. but if it's like a texas star..for an arch firm i think it might look cheesy, but then again it all depens on how it's done......

[ArchitecturalPRGirl]

Well it's controversial so I can't say. To me it's cheesy no matter what kind of star it is or where, but I'm not an architect. I like some of the logos someone posted earlier like Kirksey and HOK. I don't think the star represents anything. Kind of carnie actually. Especially when most firms want to be preceived as modern, even the old school firms who aren't as cutting edge as some of the smaller guys.

Just want to know what you people think out there.

[RedScare]

Having spent a decade in branding, marketing, strategy and identity design (among other design fields), I can say first hand how the right image (even just the right logo) can make or break a business.

I think this is a trifle overstated...at least in non-consumer fields. My opinion, though. I base it on the fact that virtually every architecture firm I know rushes to have the same style of logo...and, they are universally BORING. If a logo made or broke a company, placing the name 'Kirksey' in a red square would have doomed the firm long ago. But, it hasn't.

A poor first impression can be fatal, but I don't think it is based on the logo. There was a time perhaps when logos and names meant more than they do. Nowadays, when everyone has some market tested, name that doesn't mean anything, I believe there is a trend toward understatement standing for quality. Like I said, this is my opinion, but I think the people that need to be impressed, the building owners, look past logos to the work product of the firm.

I may be wrong, though. Maybe people really ARE stupider than I like to think.

[ArchitecturalPRGirl]

I think this is a trifle overstated...at least in non-consumer fields. My opinion, though. I base it on the fact that virtually every architecture firm I know rushes to have the same style of logo...and, they are universally BORING. If a logo made or broke a company, placing the name 'Kirksey' in a red square would have doomed the firm long ago. But, it hasn't.

A poor first impression can be fatal, but I don't think it is based on the logo. There was a time perhaps when logos and names meant more than they do. Nowadays, when everyone has some market tested, name that doesn't mean anything, I believe there is a trend toward understatement standing for quality. Like I said, this is my opinion, but I think the people that need to be impressed, the building owners, look past logos to the work product of the firm.

I may be wrong, though. Maybe people really ARE stupider than I like to think.

StupidER????

Don't you mean more stupid?

[RedScare]

stu

[ArchitecturalPRGirl]

stu

[RedScare]

More stupid is the more appropriate choice. People don't really say stupider, except you of course:)

Do you have a source on that? I will submit to your authority on the usage of "stupider" in the public relations realm. In my profession, "stupider" is considered more than appropriate...and we have ample use for the term.

[ArchitecturalPRGirl]

Do you have a source on that? I will submit to your authority on the usage of "stupider" in the public relations realm. In my profession, "stupider" is considered more than appropriate...and we have ample use for the term.

I'm sure you do, being a lawyer. Especially if you are a criminal defense attorney. I almost married one once.

[gwilson]

I think this is a trifle overstated...at least in non-consumer fields. My opinion, though. I base it on the fact that virtually every architecture firm I know rushes to have the same style of logo...and, they are universally BORING. If a logo made or broke a company, placing the name 'Kirksey' in a red square would have doomed the firm long ago. But, it hasn't.

A poor first impression can be fatal, but I don't think it is based on the logo. There was a time perhaps when logos and names meant more than they do. Nowadays, when everyone has some market tested, name that doesn't mean anything, I believe there is a trend toward understatement standing for quality. Like I said, this is my opinion, but I think the people that need to be impressed, the building owners, look past logos to the work product of the firm.

I may be wrong, though. Maybe people really ARE stupider than I like to think.

While I agree with you about the logo trend for most firms being boring, they aren't unprofessional. Hence the reason they are copied so often.

There are those who look past the first glance to see if there is any meat on the bone. But even if they do, the work will have to be even better to make up for an already sour taste in their mouths.

More stupid is the more appropriate choice. People don't really say stupider, except you of course:)

Didn't they teach you that the "sounds right" rule is often wrong is high school grammar class?

[gwilson]

As to the question of a "star" in a logo...

it would depend on the context and usage.

If you wanted to use a star to communicate "Texas" in a typical architectural firm type logo with a twist, you could do something like:

In this context, it wouldn't be too bad.

[John]

As to the question of a "star" in a logo...

it would depend on the context and usage.

If you wanted to use a star to communicate "Texas" in a typical architectural firm type logo with a twist, you could do something like:

In this context, it wouldn't be too bad.

Looks like a falling star. If Typical Architects designs stuff for Hollywood actors, it's a good logo. Otherwise, it looks like a stock graphic chosen for prettiness.

Logos are good for brand recognition. The firm's reputation is what it is, and the logo won't change it.

[editor]

Looks like a falling star. If Typical Architects designs stuff for Hollywood actors, it's a good logo. Otherwise, it looks like a stock graphic chosen for prettiness.

Logos are good for brand recognition. The firm's reputation is what it is, and the logo won't change it.

I think it's important these days to be subtly clever. You need a logo that is obvious and recognizable on one hand, but also has something extra that will "click" with some people. Making synapses fire in a potential client's brain is incredibly powerful. The right logo can do that.

Taking the star example above, you could have a star that is actually all negative space, but former by girders and beams and cranes and little silhouetted workers so that at first glance it looks like construction, but from a distance -- it's a star. Congrats! You've just made a connection with a potential client. You're in their brain and every time they see your logo they'll look for the star on purpose. You can't buy that kind of publicity.

Of course, the best logo in the world is

It's a little like looking up at a building. It's a little corporate. It's a little playful. It has bold colors. It uses the word "corporation" so we don't have to file a bunch of DBA paperwork. It was inspired by the Network 23 logo in Max Headroom, and a tractor trailer in the Japanese version of the PSP game Ridge Racer.

It also allows us to be playful with the divisions:

One company I worked for had the slogan "The noise you can't ignore." It was on everything. Each division of the company had its own logo that went along with that slogan. The PR department had a beating drum. Sales had a barking puppy. News had a trumpet. And the corporate big-wig's office... had a pair of buttcheeks with little noise lines coming out from inbetween them.

Now before you start saying how unprofessional that is, the person who thought that up was the head of the company who turned it from five small-town radio stations into one of the biggest multi-billion-dollar media companies in the nation in under ten years. He truly followed his slogan: The noise you can't ignore. He was a showman and unafraid to take risks, and it showed on his corporate letterhead.