The German company Deutsche Telekom has – ever since its foundation – been an example of a good corporate and strategic branding approach. In addition, they implemented their well-known sound branding since the end of the 90s (Oswald & Schmidt 2014:4), making them one of the pioneers of consistent sound branding. Nowadays Telekom’s sound logo is understood as keystone for their brand identity and is defined as subsets out of design, behavior and communication (Oswald & Schmidt 2014:3).
Although sound logos are costly branding elements, their creation and design depends on intuition rather than objective parameters (Kastner 2007:130pp.; Krishnan et al. 2012; Kloppenburg & Herzer 2009). Telekom’s composition uses the structural musical elements of a triad melody, modes (C-major), notes (tonic note and the third scale degree), tempo (110 beats per minute), instrumentalization (piano) and optional ambience to represent positive magnitude (e.g. sympathy, flexibility, and openness), innovation (e.g. better communication), international impact (e.g. global communicator), technical competence (e.g. presence and reliability), social responsibility (e.g. considering multiple generations as costumers) and sound quality (e.g. conciseness and instrumentalization) (Oswald & Schmidt 2014:4). These parameters may seem objective from a strategic controlling perspective, but to create a socio-cultural resonating arrangement they remain a subjective framework. Early critics claim the design of sound logos should warrant a more objective approach by using principles of designing advertising/branding stimuli for branding effectiveness (Colley 1961; Schwartz 1969). Nevertheless, the combination of only two of those structural musical elements results in a complex interaction and is difficult to control and interpret (Kellaris & Kent 1991). The measurements process is usually conducted experimentally in laboratory environments, in which short sonic stimuli are controlled and modified to detect reaction patterns. Bode (2009) criticizes this approach by stating that sound stimuli are being perceived depending on their contextuality, thus claiming the laboratory alters the natural participants’ responses[1].
Especially socio-cultural differences are obstacles in contextuality a global-acting company like Telekom needs to overcome. Cultural differences through cultural resonance and culture-driven interpretations of sonic stimuli can generate different meaning throughout cultures. Dr. Holger Schulze, professor for musicology from the University of Copenhagen, claims that the impact of sonic branding on different cultures needs to be considered in the early concept phase (Steiner 2014:212).
Larsen (2002:136) and Lehnerer (1987:75) both argue that visual and sonic stimuli used in company’s logos should be complementary to each other and without hierarchy. Telekom has used the – rather objective –cross-sensory mapping, which combines visual and acoustic cues to create a sound logo similar to the existing visual frameworks. The result is a semiotic stimulus, which achieves and strengthens better brand recognition and recall.
📷
Figure 3: Notation of the Deutsche Telekom’s Sound Logo (Kilian 2009:40)[2]
Sound branding needs to be maintained and constantly developed further (Steiner 2014:73). The very distinctive functional sound of an Internet modem connecting through the one telephone cable might not be a “vessel for associations” at all for younger generations. Aware of “wear-out effects” the Telekom defined in their conception changeable parameters for the sound logo. The modes can range from G-major to F#-major, thus making the notes d4 to a#5 accessible. The tempo can be set in the range of 80-125bmp and the instrumentalization can be anything polyphone to remain the musical tension of the triad. Any ambience can be added to the sound logo and thereby implement it nicely in existing sounds. But the melody of the sound logo can’t be altered. Any attempt would harm the value of brand recognition (Oswald & Schmidt 2014:8).
The case of the Telekom highlighted that a constant usage of a short sound logo over couple of decades is possible, making sound branding a significant element in creating positive brand value.
But sound branding, which doesn’t support the brand identity or is suffering from “wear-out-effects” and over usages of certain acoustic stimuli, can also have a negative brand equity effect. The acoustic cue can refer or create associations to competitors, irritate and annoy the consumer or push him/her towards a negative-perceived forced behavioral change with acoustic reactance (Ballhausen & Tallau 2008:54). Walter Werzowa, who composed the sound logo for the chip-company Intel (“intel-bong”) in 1994, claims that sound branding only works if it is unique and used moderately (Steiner 2014:83), or rather shaped to be received unconscious (Steiner 2014:85). Although Groves (2011:110) also talks about the benefits of constantly changing music in advertisement, he points out the difficulties of changing sound logos. A sound logo needs to be an association to the brand and should proportionally get more recognizable within time, thus making it more significant for brand awareness.
[1] The laboratory is better suited for functional settings like setting the frequency of the sound as complex as necessary but as easy as possible, due to the many different channels and possible low-quality output devices (telephone).
[2] The distinctive melody of the sound logo comes from a sequence of three (root) C-major notes followed by a (third) E-major and another (root) C-major note. The “T” of Telekom here visualizes the interval of a third.
コメント