Throughout the evolution of mankind, brands have gradually moved away from a seemingly simple approach to communication. From its beginnings around 2,700 BCE, the practice of branding has evolved to increasingly intellectual levels. Simple became complicated; complicated became simple again. Ultimately, simplicity should be the most effective way … but is it still sufficient in today’s market?

To give some perspective

To be clear, I am not saying anything new or creative, but looking at it from a “synthetic” perspective to express my thoughts reflected by the industry. There is a common finish line that all brands would like to cross. They are putting in an extreme amount of energy, and the race is on to get the best results, with first prize being brand awareness. This is good motivation for brands to think outside the box—or at least, it should be. Somehow, brands always fall into the syndrome of “fitting in” or trying to make things so complicated that they lose all direction and, unfortunately, often their primary identity.

This can affect brands in bad or good ways. Bad, because they lose their time and some budget. Good, because it gives them some data to learn from and work on. Either way, this dynamic needs to be balanced to ensure brand longevity. To get to this existential point, you have to ask how brands work together with the pillars of strategy, visual impact, and consumer connection. How these pillars are connected as well as how vague and far apart they are matters. The closer and clearer they are, the more potential can be extracted and positioned for long-term success.

Gaining the space needed for growth

Securing a strong market share, standing out, and staying visible should be a good recipe that leads brands to a fruitful future, but is it? It becomes somehow a more difficult puzzle to solve—how to project three pillars in a clear and understandable way. Regardless of how good the idea, push, ideology, and optimism are, brands need to survive in this crowded market and consume as little budget as possible.

Let me fast-forward to this year to understand how overwhelming the situation is for most brands. It’s estimated that we see up to 10,000 ads a day, and probably more by now. Our subconscious is filled with all sorts of information, and the question is, how much more can we gather and store while positioning that information as valuable and valid? It’s clear that the influence of the subconscious is enormous and how these facts, overloaded with parameters, influence consumers. Most likely, consumers are gradually becoming immune to brands’ messages due to their high defense mechanisms.

A good and healthy knowledge of how to apply the theory?

To follow the current market status and changes in consumer mentality, brands still need to provide stability in their existential core to keep a good and firm position in the market with high esteem and survive. Everything happens for a reason. After years of study and analysis, advertisers have invested billions to better understand consumers. They understand how the message trumps rationalization and immediately triggers the limbic system, creating the need for attention. While this is useful basic information for all marketers and advertisers, brands need to understand and support these facts and use them as a starting point, or their esteem will become so low that it will jeopardize their survival in the marketplace.

What’s next for young brands?

The last decade has seen the emergence of brand movements that change mentalities and create subcultural groups. They implement the idea that the obvious has become obsolete. They imply, change, and question everything to such an extent that almost all the old-school rules of branding no longer apply. Brands are bolder than ever, speaking loudly and without guilt. They’re trying harder than before to express their individual identity and leave their footprint in the industry, on the market, and in the minds of customers.

But do the youngest brands know the evolution of the established brands—the history they need? Or do they just follow their own mindset, movements, and segmentation, not realizing that sometimes they need to fail, adapt, and be reborn to succeed, as some of the old-fashioned brands have done? Is that a recipe? Of course, every brand wants to succeed immediately, but as life teaches us, nothing grows easily on the first try. In the areas where knowledge and awareness are high, we come to a point where there is space to walk on the edge, not to be the imitator, and even more, to continue on this path by applying exponential growth and erasing the fear of being “boring” and “obsolete.”

Fail for growth

Many will object, saying there is no room to fail, but let us explore this idea: Isn’t failure a good thing, as we tend to say when we “fall forward”? I’m not in favor of spending budgets and going into the mindset of failure, obviously, but I am interested in how to use given data, interpret it through observation, and make the necessary adjustments to produce a more provocative outcome. Let’s say, to become the brand with a capital “B” and huge market noise.

To conclude my thoughts, it’s a messy world for emerging and established brands. If we take every opportunity for better positioning and are more reactive and progressive, we’ll see massive brand shifts and changes in positioning. That is the advantage we’re all looking for.

Jakob Trpin studies how brands make an impact by working with B2B and B2C clients and major international brands. He gained experience at top European and worldwide studios and agencies, excelling in advertising, branding, consulting, and design. He is the founder and Creative Director of Yesyesandtwo.