Great design is like great art. You know it when you see it. And apparently it does not take long to decide whether you like a design or not. For instance, a couple of years ago, Canadian researchers demonstrated that we make decisions about aesthetic appeal in just one-twentieth of a second of viewing a Web page. (Click here for the BBC news story.) That finding has obvious implications for the design of Web sites, but I think it also has ramifications for brand building in general.
To my mind, the iPod touch, Google’s launch page and Method’s packaging are all examples of great design. But that’s just my opinion. Don’t take my word for it. Click on the links and have a look.
Of course, these three brands are all well known. Therefore it may be impossible for you to get a true first impression or remember how long it took you to form that impression. But if we could go back in time to when you first caught sight of them, I’ll bet it did not take long for you to decide whether you liked them or not.
Steve Jobs would remind us that design is more than the look of something. Great design is the expression of a single-minded understanding of what a brand is about. In a January 2000 interview in Fortune magazine, he said “Design is the fundamental soul of a man-made creation that ends up expressing itself in successive outer layers of the product or service.”
But that expression of “soul,” or the brand concept, must be readily apparent and appealing. The research conducted in Canada (written up in detail here) demonstrated that we make aesthetic decisions in just one-twentieth of a second. For most adults that is too fast for conscious thought. People’s gut reactions determined whether they liked the look of a Web site before their brain could engage its cognitive gears. And importantly, that initial reaction then shaped subsequent cognitive assessment.
Commenting on the article published on websiteoptimization.com, Dr. Gitte Lindgaard, the leader of the research team, said,
The distinction between emotion and cognition, to the extent that we define cognition as “rational thought,” is becoming increasingly blurred. Once I have formed an impression, I will selectively search for information confirming that impression - I want to “prove” to myself that I made a good decision! So, if the first impression is negative, I’ll look out for everything and anything negative. Likewise, if I like what I see right away, I’ll look for positive information to reinforce my impression. So, my “rational thought” is likely to be coloured by my emotional impression.
Now let’s apply that thinking to brands. Will great design positively predispose someone to buy a brand? My unequivocal answer would be yes. And Gerd Gigerenzer would suggest that it would not make much difference even if we did weigh up all the pros and cons. In a New York Times article he stated, “When a person relies on their gut feelings and uses the instinctual rule of thumb, ‘go with your first best feeling and ignore everything else,’ it can permit them to outperform the most complex calculations.”
It seems to me that this “first best feeling” explains a lot about brand building. It helps explain the importance of design, of creative execution, and visibility at the point of purchase. Evoking the right initial response can play a very important role in determining purchase. Looking “good” goes from being “nice to have” to “must have.”
Does that mean that emotion is paramount? No. Once the conscious mind engages with an issue it can overrule gut instincts, “Wow! That’s awesome. But I can’t afford it.”
And does it mean that we can’t measure how people feel about a brand, ad or display? Again no. People know how they feel about something and, with the right questioning, can tell us. What is far more difficult is to separate the contribution of the initial gut reaction from the more reflective, conscious response.
But it is the overall response that matters. People’s ex-post-facto rationalizations are still useful. They provide insight into the things that people believe to be credible justifications for their decisions. And that’s important, because knowing that the brand can provide convincing rational arguments makes it easier for people to go with their gut instincts.
First impressions anyone? How do you feel about my rationalization?
(4 votes, average: 4.25 out of 5)
Loading ...
Email This Post
April 10th, 2009 at 11:56 am
I like this article, but I do not know your first impression, so difficult to judge on rationalization:) I guess it is very interesting to explain situtaions when: - first impression is being changed in the rationalization process (why we do it?) The answer to this question will help us to understand the nature of this first impression - it is also interesting when the first impression is being changed in the course of interaction either with the object such as brand or man. Why our first impression was not confirmed later on Explanation in such cases will help to understand behaviour better (not only consumer ones).
April 12th, 2009 at 11:43 am
Thanks Pawel, good points.
To go back to the points made by Katie in response to the “Research is useless” post it is really important to capture the initial response and then to understand the changes that take place as a result of deliberation or interaction. Which things confirm the initial response and which erode it.