Branding
Overview
In June 2020, I was commissioned by the Clemson University Press (CUP) to work on rebranding their new journal, the Journal of Extension (JOE). As CUP's new design intern, the Press asked me to help with the first step in the rebranding process: designing a new logo.
While working on this project, I was also taking a directed study with Dr. John Morgenstern, Director of CUP, on fonts and typesetting. Though the logo concepts were not ultimately chosen by the client, they do mirror some of the concepts and theories I learned under Morgenstern's supervision.
This exhibition documents the JOE logo project. I will go over the design process, in depth, that occurred during this CUP commission.
About the Client
Established in 2000, Clemson University Press (CUP) has expanded in recent years, adding approximately twenty-five books and journal issues per annum to its strong backlist of more than a hundred titles. In 2014, CUP entered into partnership with Liverpool University Press, an award-winning publisher of distinguished scholarship since 1899. Through this strategic international partnership, CUP is a global ambassador for Clemson University (an R1 classified, top-25 public university), distributing increasingly diverse and impactful scholarship worldwide. CUP’s ambitious publishing program continues to highlight the rigorous standard of critical and creative output from Clemson and further distinguishes the University as a center for research and culture. All of CUP’s publications enjoy the highest standards through external review and appraisal by the Editorial Advisory Board. This text was provided by CUP's website.
Exigency
In the summer of 2020, Dr. John Morgenstern, the Director of CUP, reached out to me regarding a potential logo design project. The Journal of Extension (JOE), previously maintained by Ohio University, was transferring distributorship to Clemson University in January 2021. With the journal’s new distributor came the need for a rebrand. The reimagination of the journal started with the logo design.
JOE is a nationally-accredited, open-access journal for Extension research and publication. According to their website, JOE “expands and updates the research and knowledge base for U.S. Extension professionals and other outreach educators to improve their effectiveness and serves as a forum for emerging and contemporary issues affecting U.S. Extension education.”
This project—completed under the supervision of Morgenstern—was preceded by my experience as a freelance graphic designer. Over the past six years, I have designed logos, book covers, and promotional marketing materials for various companies, including CUP in the spring of 2020.
In my role as logo designer, this project provided me with professional experience within the graphic design and extension publishing fields. This journal is situated within natural sciences and agriculture. It is a Journal of Record for the Extension field. With an established presence, my project goal was to make the new logo aesthetically pleasing and rhetorically-situated in the field.
With this project, I hoped to further develop my Adobe Creative Suite skills and streamline my graphic design expertise. By working with CUP, I gained experience in (1) researching and implementing current trends in logo design, (2) building strong client relationships with advanced interpersonal skills, and (3) learning how to take project rejection in a professional manner.
Audience
The JOE logo was directly intended for Morgenstern to review, but there were also other viewer/audience levels:
Primary - CUP Administration (Director of CUP)
Secondary - JOE Advisory Board, JOE Editorial Board
Tertiary - Current and Future Consumers
Constraints
Throughout the design process, I encountered a few constraints, listed below:
All-Remote Completion
Due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the online nature of the journal, the JOE project was completed remotely (via email, phone, and Zoom). This created challenges with consultant-client communication and proper timeline management. Even with an intervention email from Morgenstern, asking for more feedback for me, client communication remained inconsistent and unsolved until the project’s end.
Consultant-Client Miscommunication
Because the project was completely remote, there was consistent miscommunication—or overall lack of communication—via email. Though I was commissioned by CUP, Morgenstern acted as a go-between for my client: the JOE board. No other communication software was used between the board and myself. Morgenstern messaged and called me via phone to communicate any feedback he received, but generally, the primary method of communication was email. To move on in the rebrand process, I had to acquire majority-approval from the board. The board members were scattered around the country so it proved difficult to acquire feedback. With the help of Morgenstern, I received client feedback in intervals. See Timeline Delays for more details.
Timeline Delays
Morgenstern set a project timeline of two months (June 2020 to July 2020). The project began at the beginning of June 2020 and was projected to realize in July 2020. Due to lack of client communication, the project did not end until October 2020. Even with effective scheduling and communication on my end, the project halted until I heard back from my client. Morgenstern pushed for feedback on three separate occasions—once around July, once around August, and once around September. We eventually received it around late-September 2020. After making multiple rounds of revisions, leading the project into October 2020, I was notified of the project’s end. The board decided to go in another direction and hire a professional designer to create their logo for them.
Logo Design
This section details design phases, informed theories, and collaborative work efforts of the logo design process. The deliverable files are included within this exhibition.
A logo is a symbol or design adopted by an organization to visually represent its message. It acts as a stepping stone for the creation of a brand identity. As JOE was in-process of rebranding, a logo design was an organic first step. After the logo’s completion, the journal and website could be rebranded with a consistent color palette, typographical font, etc. The logo is a visual representation of the Journal of Extension and its brand.
Design Phases
The logo went through the following design phases: (1) Research, (2) Sketch, (3) Iterate, and (4) Refine.
Research
In June 2020, I met with Morgenstern to discuss the JOE logo project. At the time, JOE’s logo was outdated and looked similar to something you might see in Microsoft Word’s WordArt.
After discussing project goals and client values, Morgenstern recommended I research other journal logos. He also suggested I look at other agricultural and Extension publishing logos, word associations, etc. Being unfamiliar with Extension publishing, I spent a lot of time exploring different websites and journals from the field.
Sketch
This phase occurred in conjunction with the Research phase. While I was researching on my own, Morgenstern reached out to JOE and they sent back a few sample logos they liked.
Since JOE is based in Extension, I chose to use a green color in most of the graphics. The first design sketches were literal. They weren’t abstract like the references, but I thought they clearly stated JOE’s values. I used Adobe Illustrator’s Shape and Pen tools to create the graphics and tried to integrate the graphic and textual elements together.
Iterate
I met with Morgenstern again later in September. He had finally received feedback from the board members. They didn’t like the literal interpretations of their values. The JOE board asked for something more abstract, referencing the PLOS logo again.
These designs only went to Morgenstern. I started with different graphics, trying to abstractly represent the word “extension.” Then, I took a variety of serif and sans serif font choices and combined those with the graphics. Morgenstern said it was a start, but we weren’t quite ready to send it to the board again. These logos were too static, too much like other professional logos, or too animal-esque.
I looked back at the SSP and PLOS logos and compared them with my second round of logos. Morgenstern was right. My logos were static. There was a certain movement in the PLOS logo that I wasn’t getting with my designs. I felt the movement was a bit too difficult, so I started over again.
The term that kept coming to mind was “abstract.” I grabbed some online references of wheat and DNA strands to push the literal into the abstract.
The above PDF shows the design process and thinking that went into the drafts on the right hand side of the page. My ideas went from abstract concepts and graphics to playing with fonts and typefaces. I then combined the ideas and started manipulating and abstracting the typefaces.
Using Adobe Illustrator’s Clipping Mask function, I grabbed sections of the letters or the DNA strands and pulled them out to look like pixilation. This pixilation or disintegration was another abstract thought for the word “extension.”
In mid-October, Morgenstern and I met to discuss my refined ideas.
Morgenstern liked the ideas here, but thought I could do more. He recommended I (1) refine the abstract color-blocked “E,” (2) play more with the linework from the wheat, and (3) make the pixels the main graphic. In refining the color-blocked “E,” I added the “JO” part of JOE and angled the letters, making room for the full name to be spelled out in each letter. With the wheat linework, I zoomed in on the middle of the wheat shape, took the curved lines and clipped them into a box shape, and aligned a sans serif font to the side of it. For the third option, I grabbed a block of pixels, enlarged them, and aligned them next to a sans serif font, similar to what I did with the wheat.
Along with those designs, I created three others. In the first alternative design, I abstracted the word “JOE” with a circular shape. I cut the black and white letters apart, realigned the top of the “J” with the “E,” and clipped the letters into the circle. In the second alternative, I played off of the SSP logo that the JOE board liked so much. I changed the shape of outer rims and also applied a CMYK color palette. Staying away from greens and blues limited my color choices. In the third alternative, I played off of the lettering from my first refined logos. I wanted this logo to be shaped and futuristic somewhat, but also abstractly reference “extension” with the separation of the letters.
Informed Theories
This project was informed by many theories, as mentioned above, but there were two theories that informed this project both during and after the project refinement phase. The main theory came from Lupton’s Thinking with Type. In the Logotypes and Branding section, Lupton defines a logotype as “us[ing] typography or lettering to depict the name or initials of an organization in a memorable way...a logotype uses words and letters to create a distinctive visual image” (68). Looking at the samples provided, I focused on the Hubner project, which incorporated building-like shapes as an H. Similarly, my later iterations focused on the typeface of JOE; whereas, the earlier concepts were informed by my previous experience in graphic logo design. Instead of utilizing imagery, I should have focused more on typography.
After working on the logo and receiving the rejection, I began to look at other resources to better understand where my design failed. McWade’s Before & After: How to Design Cool Stuff came up in my research. In the Projects section, McWade details how to set a text-only logotype (pp. 172-180). Because I was overly focused on the graphic aspect of this project, I overlooked the typeface and font elements. Looking back to the original meeting notes, I noted that JOE wanted something primarily text-based. Graphics were optional and seemed not-preferred. McWade’s theory is that “a good logo is bold, clear, and attractive, and it conveys an appropriate sense of the company” (172). The key is to work with the text itself and follow the natural letter shapes. In my JOE logos, I focused too much on the significance behind the text and not enough on the literal text itself. I worked with expansion, varying color, and other design techniques, but lost the project scope along the way. If I had done more research into text-only logotypes, I may have found McWade’s theory sooner and had a more successful client project with JOE.
Collaborative Efforts
The logo was designed by myself. Morgenstern collaborated with me on feedback and in client meetings. I also received feedback from the JOE board; however, due to the overall lack of communication, their efforts were not seen by me as collaborative.
Competencies
This project examines the following MAWRM competencies, which align with and demonstrate an understanding of writing, rhetoric, and media:
Visual communication theories
Research and design methods
Professional communication practices
Technological and media production literacies
Skills
Collaboration
Interpersonal communication
Email writing
Zoom meeting
Review and feedback
Content Creation
Logo design
Graphic identity
Software
Adobe Photoshop
Adobe Illustrator
Google Suite
Zoom
Other Soft Skills
Creativity and innovation
Attention to detail
Understanding of commercial environment
Deadline-oriented
Reflection
Reflecting back on this project, there are a few areas that I’d like to discuss: (1) Project Strengths, (2) Different Outcomes, (3) My Weaknesses, and (4) My Strengths.
Project Strengths
Though my logo design was not chosen by the JOE board, I felt the project overall was still successful. I gained more professional experience working with a client in my intended fields. It was my first time with a design being rejected, so that was also a valuable learning experience. It may not be defined as a professional success, but it was a personal success for me. I divided up the project in phases, compiled research materials, and ultimately gained more knowledge about consultant-client interactions.
This project, though it did not come to fruition, did open a few other client project doors for me. For instance, Morgenstern liked my first round of logos so much that he recommended we use one of them for Clemson’s new Extension Publishing program. I refined one of my original JOE logos for the program and gained experience in developing an entire logo kit.
Different Outcomes
As far as the outcomes I’d change, I’d press for more client feedback. When I received feedback, it was often in vague terms like “we want something abstract.” When I would come up with a new set of designs, the board would take extended time to send me feedback. I understood the logo was not their priority at the time, but even with brief feedback, I could work on a new set of designs or refinements to progress the project. It felt like a waiting game.
Ultimately, I wouldn’t want to change the board’s decision. Even in the refined phases, I was still iterating and sketching. My mock-ups weren’t developed enough. They were still really ideas at that point. I had just developed the “abstract” designs they were looking for, but by that time, they had already decided to go with another design. If I had focused back on McWade’s theory with logotypes and really looked at the pattern of text itself, I may have designed something more on-scope with what JOE asked for.
My Weaknesses
As mentioned previously, my main weaknesses resulted from a lack in my own personal direction (and later, specific direction from the client). JOE gave me initial direction in the first meeting, but I focused on incorporating graphics instead of re-designing the text. Because I had previous experience with graphics-based logos, I thought I could convince the board to use something graphics-based. I was more confident with graphics than fonts. Regardless of my confidence levels, I should have followed my client’s direction and not pushed back against them. I didn’t do this explicitly. I just showed them graphics-based logos with the font-based logos.
My project ideas varied a lot, causing me to experience a scope creep. Ultimately, Morgenstern redirected me to the font idea and I provided more pattern-based logos like McWade suggests. I’ve learned to follow the client’s direction, ask more questions, push for feedback, and accept rejection when it comes.
My Strengths
Most of these reflection sections go hand-in-hand with one another. I gained a lot of knowledge in client interaction, font-based logos, and taking rejection—all of which will help me in my professional career, in some way or another. I strengthened my design skills and fostered more experience with Adobe Illustrator. I understand the anatomy of letters now, including how each letter is part of an overall pattern. That pattern alone can be used to create clear logo designs. Graphics are not a necessary part of design. Though my past experiences were in graphics-based design, I now have professional experience in font-based design.
If a client commissioned me for another font-based logo, I feel more equipped to handle it now than I did previously. This is, in part, due to my experience with this project, but it’s also influenced heavily by Morgenstern’s supervision and teaching.
References
Books
The Evolution of Type: A Graphic Guide to 100 Landmark Typefaces, Tony Sedon
Thinking with Type: A Critical Guide for Designers, Writers, Editors, & Students, Ellen Lupton
Why Fonts Matter, Sarah Hyndman
Articles
“The Design Funnel: A Manifesto for Meaningful Design,” Stephen Hay, www.webdesignblog.gr/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/ManifestoForMeaningfulDesign.pdf
Websites
Journal of Extension, tigerprints.clemson.edu/joe/
Note: The original JOE website is no longer available for reference.
What is a Logo?, www.tailorbrands.com/logo-maker/what-is-a-logo
