Behind the Rebrand: Ollion

Blake Howard:

Okay, so we'll keep moving. We've got the strategy in place and that's an important part of how we can move forward into the next phase of the work. So getting into the naming work is a challenge and it really is all about setting the right criteria. So obviously we want to express some of the ideas captured in our brand strategy. We also needed the likelihood of trademark protection in most major markets. So that's not a small bullet point in the criteria sheet. That's a very important one and not easy to achieve, but we were up for the challenge. We also, of course, wanted it to be short and sweet and easy to say, easy to spell. We wanted it to be universal in terms of meaning. So we didn't want it to feel overtly American by any means. We wanted it to feel really, really global.

And then perhaps the hardest of all, we wanted the dot-com and as many of you know, the dot-coms are just taken. People are sitting on them, they're not easy to acquire. So often when I have a client say they want a dot-com, I say, "Well, what's your budget? Because we're probably going to have to acquire it." So the dot-com was important. And then maybe another difficult part of this in naming is to get a large group of stakeholders to agree, yes, this is the name, so that shouldn't be overlooked as well. We generated hundreds of names with multiple rounds and we collaborate with a trademark partner that we have just to make sure that anything we present is legally viable. And so lots of back and forth with that trademark partner. We usually have four to six people generating names on our side and actually Lauren and Ute, this is new to you, actually have footage of our team in action trying to think through names, okay?

So this is live footage of going through mission impossible to find the right name. So somehow we did it and we presented in the first round 8 to 10. We had a great discussion. We really narrowed it down to three with two front-runners and then obviously we landed on Ollion and it was this idea of playing off of all in, we're all in on Ollion. We loved the suggestive sound that it made. It had this idea of a collective force being all in, working together, feels really lively, feels nurturing also. We could acquire the dot-com, which is important. And because it's coin fabricated, likelihood for trademark was there. So Lauren, tell us more about the decision between the two final options. How did the group finally land on Ollion?

Lauren Dettloff:

It was an interesting. There were truly fantastic names and I remember when we walked away from that first call where you guys presented seven or nine, we were genuinely delighted. So it was great that we had a good choice ahead of us. And then the two were really tough. Some context I had set early on that I think helped was one, the name is just one piece, it's what we do in terms of delivering on that. And so I was trying to take the high stakes and the emotion out of just the name. That was absolutely important because as Ute said, it was truly the identity for these companies coming together. But trying to set that context and be repetitive that this is just one piece, this is just one piece because I didn't want this to become the fixating point. And so I think that was a healthy lens of how to view this stuff. There was a lot of vested interest, but it wasn't overly vested like I'd maybe seen in the past.

I also think there was an understanding of how... The two names that we were looking at played off of different elements of the personality. Obviously Ollion that we went with really leans into the lively and the nurturing as you have here. And the other one was really leaning more into the audacious and sharp. And there was more distinction obviously between the two, but it was split pretty evenly. And the step that we took that I felt was very important, and this sometimes works and it sometimes doesn't, and this case I think it was very effective, was at this moment was when we brought in fresh perspective, we intentionally sought a few of our next level leaders that hadn't been involved that really have valuable field perspective.

And in that conversation, I, again, intentionally did not give them any context and just presented them the two names first, unaided, anything and just said, "What do you think? Tell me your reaction." And it was really interesting because in those conversations, the other name, their immediate reaction and the context they came back with and the used similar words, again, completely unaided, was not at all what we were going for in the intent. And so that was a very refreshing perspective because even if we had sought fresh perspective at that point, or new people specifically I mean, but had taken the time to go through the strategy and all of that, we didn't want them to think that way. We wanted them to think about it as in the average employee or the average client or the average alliance partner coming in. And so that very clearly to me then leaned heavily towards Ollion. And that was one of the few times me in my role leading this strongly advocated versus attempted to guide.

I recognize I didn't have a lot vested per se in the history and the legacy and how we got to this point, but when it came to what was going to resonate in the market and what aligned to our strategy and our personality, this was clear based on that. So that started to drive the conversation more, very quickly, toward this and how we got here. And then part of that too was helping folks understand that if you look at yourself as a well-rounded personality with those four traits that you outlined and some of the other things, that can also then be dialed up later in some of the creative or the copy. And so if we felt we were losing some of the audaciousness or some of the sharpness, that could then come through in some of the visual stuff and some of the copy. So it, again, was a surprisingly painless, I think, process that zeroed down from the two to the one, fortunately, fortunately.

Blake Howard:

Ute, what about for you? How were you processing this decision? Why did you think that this name Ollion would work internally?

Ute Braasch:

So first of all, I must have flip-flopped about three times in the course of the conversation between the two options we had. Because every time somebody would give a recommended... I was really torn and what Lauren was saying, I think the positioning about this being one of many elements of who we are and our proposition was a really important piece. The other piece for me was actually a big element in this conversation was the process was very hierarchical. So the CEOs had a point of view, but that was as important as everybody else's point of view, so it wasn't discussed. Sometimes you get these dynamics where you've got one or two people, they have an opinion and then everybody toes the line whether they like it or not. We really had an extremely constructive conversation around how the different options that we have and how they're achieving our ultimate objectives.

And we kept going back to what is it that we are trying to do? Who are we trying to be? Really back to first principles. So having that really clearly articulated vision and mission and plan of who we want to be, that was really very, very important in this entire process because we otherwise would've always got ourselves tangled up in the lack of clarity and we had clarity in terms of where we wanted to land. So that was really, really important.

Blake Howard:

Yeah, a lot of times I think when the decision-making process is really difficult on a name or any other subjective decision, it becomes a conflict over that particular decision, the name or whatnot. But it's usually a lack of clarity on the mission or identity for the organization. That's what you're really arguing about for this or against that, and the name just ends up being the specific tangible thing that everyone's reacting to. So I think that a big part of, even though this was a new entity, that vision and some of the purpose that set the foundation for all of this, I think, was so important.

Visual and Verbal Identity

So we've got a name and then we get into the visual and verbal side of the identity. So the name sets the stage for the story, and then these components start to really bring it to life where you can think about what else do we need to say or do to envision this brand going to market. So first we start to think about those personality attributes, lively, sharp, nurturing, audacious, and how do we visualize them? So we go through a pretty collaborative process and we get feedback, reactions from the NewCo team at the time, or the Ollion team, and we also talk about what's the right color strategy. So we explored various paths that we could take for color. We looked at other inspiration maybe around symbols, type, photography treatments, graphic elements.

We also started to think about brand voice. What are the right pillars that we can put on paper that can define how we should consistently show up from a verbal perspective? We started to try on some of those verbals via headlines so we could get reactions, prototypes and different language. We even looked at a starter boilerplate, hey, here's a good introductory paragraph. We also worked on a manifesto a little bit at this point, trying to just really understand the story, what words were going to work, which words weren't going to work.

And we had lots of good feedback, good collaborative discussion, and then we started to propose direction. So we call this concepts, and this is where we explored four different symbols and they all were around this idea of unifying or business shaping. They all were global symbols. It was about unifying a force for good. We also wanted them to feel really human so we're showing different ways graphic elements could house imagery, where messaging could start to show up. And we propose these four directions, and once again, it was pretty straightforward in terms of the decision making. And I want to share a brand essence video or what we call a sizzle reel that we put together that shows you the final work.

Lauren Dettloff:

I will never not love that video.

Blake Howard:

Yes, the typewriter song, we love it. Yeah, so that gives you a good sense of where we landed. I'll hit just a few high notes. You can always look at our case study or more of ollion.com if you want to see more of this in action, but we loved the big, bold custom word mark. We loved the name so much, the repetition of the o's. It was hard to not just create unique letter forms that were really distinct and that would allow us to scale it and make it really big. Of course, we also thought more about that shorthand symbol that you saw at the beginning of that animation of the two o's coming together that clearly have this idea of partnership, collaboration, unification.

And then probably the biggest thing here, and there was a comment that popped up in the chat that's relevant to this. We did push the color palette, so you see pretty unique color combinations, and we approached it from a black plus some unique color combinations perspective. And I do think it's helpful for visual systems to consider trend, but to also not rely on it so heavily. So let's say in five years these colors just look like wallpaper from the 80s. Well, you should be able to evolve your visual system around that. So it's black plus some of these trend colors that create unique color combinations. We're not over indexing our equity investment in terms of recognition with these colors. It's black plus these trend colors. So we felt like there was an opportunity, however, to really push unique color combinations because we didn't see that in the market.

So you can see some of that start to come to life in some of these mock-ups and some of the voice as well as here, you can see that manifesto on the right that we wrote. You can see additional color combinations, language, you can see the prototype of the website and how different collateral could be created. And then I'll end here in terms of just showing where we landed. I want to maybe go over to Ute first here. So we looked at four conceptual directions. We chose this one, we revised it. What about this direction felt right to you, gave you confidence, got you excited?

Ute Braasch:

Well, I think the most important piece for me, it was so different. It was so different to anything anybody in the industry did. It was so different to all the legacy baggage that our employees were carrying around with them because they're all grieving their old brands. Many of them had been there employee number seven in these startups, and they really cared and were very emotionally engaged with the brands that they grew up with. So this was such a fresh start. It was just lipstick on a pig. It was a completely different audacious approach that people were like, "Wow."

And when I first saw that, that was the reaction I had. It was like, "Wow, this is nothing that I would've expected." I'm a sucker for fun, so I love the type fun anyway, but just the whole color combination, some of the really cheeky language that was used, nobody in the industry would've ever dared to put that out, and it really sets us apart and really makes us look different. The reactions that we got in the marketplace from talent pool were just phenomenal. But yeah, it was an immediate reaction when I saw this. I'm like, "Okay, nobody else is doing this. This is going to set us apart." And this is exactly the response we got from our employees. So that was awesome.

Blake Howard:

Yeah, I love that. A lot of times we will push for doing something radical in terms of visuals or verbals, and it's hard for clients because their mindset is not let's do something wildly different. The mindset is I want to feel comfortable with what I see and I want to feel comfortable with what we're going to go to market with because my job could be on the line or my reputation could be on the line. So the mindset is more about being comfortable and familiar, which anything that you're visually familiar with is just going to be the mainstream. It's usually not necessarily defined as super different. So the nature of being different is that it's not familiar. So that's a hard transition sometimes. And we certainly had some dialogue as a larger brand team reviewing these directions and from the Ollion side of like, is it too retro? Is it too modern? Are the color palettes too different? Lauren, how did you guide that, navigate those feelings, those reactions, and then ultimately how did you feel confident about the overall direction yourself?

Lauren Dettloff:

Yeah, I think a lot of what Ute said, what I intentionally did at this point was broaden circle. I don't think I always showed the name per se. I think we found ways to show the color palette and some of the mock-ups without actually showing the name, because the name, we kept pretty close to the vest even internally up until three or four weeks prior to external launch. But it was that same test. I just wanted the gut reaction and seeing the excitement, the smiles, the energy was the clincher. I think the bit that was actually more concerning to me was can we then deliver on this fully in reality? So with some of the copy treatments, for example, they were intentionally very audacious and very sharp and putting these premises out there about working alongside our clients and we're all about progress over process, and there was all these really bold statements.

And so it was then an interesting conversation of, again, here's what that entails, then operationally. If we say we're all about progress versus process, how does that actually play out in a client engagement? Are we delivering on that or is that going to be a jarring disconnect? When we talk about we work alongside our clients to uplift and we're generous in our knowledge and some of the language around that, are we actually doing that? So it actually prompted some really thoughtful conversations internally around are we delivering on this commitment? We're teeing up because this stuff is fantastic. It's going to get the attention we want. We don't want to have that disconnect down the road. So it was a really interesting example where brand was challenging us to make sure the business strategy and how we were operating was actually meeting that in a necessary way. And thankfully, not to go into that here, but thankfully a lot of that stuff we were able to make sure was crisped up, but that was the really interesting element here with some of the boldness.

Blake Howard:

Yeah, I think that's important. Being able to deliver on what we're saying from a marketing communications perspective, it's got to be authentic, it's got to be delivered upon, and everyone within the organization has to agree, yeah, we can do that. That is who we are. So I love that.

I'm going to stop sharing and then I would love to keep discussing and maybe just start first with Lauren, understanding all of the decisions that had to be made along the way, approving brand strategy, approving final name choice, approving logo, visual identity, core messaging, bits and pieces of the brand voice. How would you say all of that really came together? Do you have an organizing principle or idea of how those decisions were made? How did you smooth that process out?

Lauren Dettloff:

So I would say a couple things. This idea of design thinking was really helpful. And again, coming from a consulting firm that was maybe a little bit more intuitive, but not totally, but I think adherence to that type of process where you were really making sure you were aligned on the problem and then playing that out that way. I think we were also the core team, myself and some of the key folks were incredibly assertive at driving pace and not being afraid to do so. What I found effective is with something like this, you have to keep this front and center. It's very easy for something like this to get parked in a silo as a special project or a brand initiative, and we did not want that to happen. This was too significant.

And so almost consciously making it a part of every meeting, every conversation, I would make sure there was something in our executive team meetings we were talking about as it relates to brand, you really wanted this to be top of mind because it kept it moving versus shoving it to the side. I think those are really some key things. The other thing that was very tactical, but again, was really effective was recognizing where you need to just bring in someone who has that insane attention to detail project management experience. And we were lacking that, somebody was transitioning into a new role. And so we made the choice to bring in someone from the outside who could work alongside me and the team to just keep this moving with the most insane attention to detail, project management, interconnectivity. Otherwise, I think that would've been incredibly risky. So that was a very intentional choice that we made to invest in that, and it was well worth it in spades.

Launch

Blake Howard:

Okay, so, Ute, question for you. Thinking about these decisions are made, you're starting to launch it, roll it out, how did you integrate more of this into the brand building process or how did you continue the momentum that we had as a brand team?

Ute Braasch:

So we had an internal launch before we went external, and that was also happening around the same time as we actually officially transacted our merger. So a lot of the conversations we've had prior to this, we had not even officially merged a company, so that was additional complexity we needed to navigate. And so we spent quite a lot of effort in really getting people excited about the brand internally before we were going to market. It was a bit risky because stuff will leak out and people are going to be excited to talk about it, but I think it was absolutely the right path. So we spent time talking about our employee value proposition and then that led into our new brand launch. We then trained people and then we took that external. So we really spent quite a lot of time and resources making sure that our employees would've had some time to really immerse themselves in the new brand, in the language, in the visual and emotionally process it too, because it was a goodbye to the brands that they knew and they loved.

And suddenly it was like, "Okay, now we're one firm." And Mark and Lauren, you probably can add to that as well, but the conversation changed overnight when we suddenly were one brand. So it used to be, oh, the second watch person over here or the after-tip person over there. It was a very, very different conversation when we were all Ollion. And so that catalyst really played out really well in investing that time up front to make sure that our employees have had the chance to get up to speed and really understand what we want to be and how we want to look and feel. That really made a difference in the launch as well.

Lauren Dettloff:

And some of the internal stuff in particular, I can't underestimate, we put more focus on this. So even for the launch and the reveal of the brand and the strategy, we did that in a special elevated way. We went to a studio in Singapore just because it was easier and recorded stuff on a stage, and it was this grander elevated experience. We really wanted the employees to feel, wow, this is special, this is different. This is going to be a different standard going forward. We then did in-region, in-person brand experience boot camps, we called them, and this is something I had done in the past, and this isn't just about here's the brand, here's the tagline, here's the visual. That was a piece of it. It was more around here's the expectation and the premise we're teeing up in the market. How do you put this in your own words?

And so something as simple as your new elevator pitch. We would do role playing. And again, it wasn't just on the brand, it was on the story. If someone says, "Well, what do you mean when you say you come alongside your clients and deliver?" We would test that out and get people comfortable with their own storytelling and their own examples. And then that even played into then more tactical things to then empower them to participate in the brand activation itself. So we did a series of social media primers and boot camps and office hours around here's some things you can do, here's how you can update your LinkedIn and here's exactly how to do that. Here's the campaign we'll be activating and here's how you can opt in to participate. So it was very hands-on and spoon-fed, but so critical, I think, in any change initiative like this, not just because we happen to be merging as well, but truly, truly getting it in people's bodies, in their words and ready to tell that story and know how to tell the story.

Blake Howard:

Yeah. And a lot of what I hear you saying also, Lauren, is you're just making time to make it important. You weren't just saying, "Here's the new logo, here's the new name, let's go. Everyone go out and start selling. Start serving the clients." You made time for it. And that suggests and signals to the company that brand is important and that you want to be an authentic brand, you want to live it out. And so I think that is tremendous. So I want to get to some questions. There's been a few that have jumped into the chat and then you can also drop them directly in the Q&A. So I have one more question, but this is my primer, hey, if you have a question, go ahead and throw it in the chat or throw it into the Q&A. So for both of you, just reflecting back on this project, what advice would you give to someone who's about to go through something similar? Maybe it's an evolutionary rebrand and maybe it's completely revolutionary, like this one was. Just what tips would you give to them, what advice?

Lauren Dettloff:

So besides hiring Matchstic, no, truly though, the team truly did an exceptional job. I think a couple things. I think one, it's an opportunity to give your people a chance to shine and stretch. With something like this, nobody on the team had undergone anything remotely close to this, and so I think it would've been very tempting to attempt to do it in a silo or bring in several contractors that know how to do this stuff and just like, "We'll take care of it." But that was a choice we did not make. It was an opportunity to bring people along, and so there were folks on the team that took on massive parts of this that really had to stretch and shine, and that was a huge, huge challenge. But it was exciting for them having to go through something like this now just propels them in terms of their own career and development.

And so being patient as the leader, or trying to be patient, recognizing we were doing a fast pace, but making that investment in them, I think, is really key. It also just helps with buy-in and making it real. If the people that are going to be delivering on this long-term are the ones driving the special project, I think that was really effective. I think trying to show the work and bring people alongside throughout the process, that doesn't mean we were sharing all of this out for broad democratization across the company, but finding ways to bring people along, show the work, broaden the circle. This wasn't just intentionally a group of marketers or leaders. We had broader people, representation, finance, legal, really just making sure that this was going to be bought into down the road and just effective from the beginning. So I would say those are two principles. Give people a chance to shine and stretch even if they've not done something like this and show your work and bring alongside. But Ute, what would you say?

Ute Braasch:

Yeah, I think you covered a lot of the key points already. I would add, and this came out early in the conversation already as well, invest the time up front to make sure that your leadership is aligned. As you said, if you do not have that, the brand or any topic for that matter, is going to trigger or is going to be like... It causes conflict when the issue is actually not the brand, but the issue is the lack of alignment up front. And so that time that we spent, and literally... I only joined the firm a year ago myself. One of the reasons I joined was because they had invested so much time and effort even before I joined in making sure that we do have alignment and we do have clarity on what we're trying to achieve as a combined business, and that just made everything so much easier. That is really, really important.

Another thing, the point Lauren made in terms of the diversity and the inclusion of perspectives and bringing people in from really different parts of the business. We had some really creative people there. It was a lot of fun actually in the process as well, but it is a real cut across the organization in terms of the people that opined on the process. That was fantastic as well. So we didn't just forget about certain things. Then last but not least, this is a global brand. We haven't really spoken about this yet. As a global brand, it needs to resonate globally. It needs to be pronounceable globally, and it's not just a trademark thing. It actually cannot have any weird connotations, and it's so difficult to do that. Just making sure that, again, you bring people into the conversation who will look at this from those angles. Just in the local market, is anybody going to be able to pronounce this? Those are some things that I think we got right that really made it easier when we got to the point of rollout.

Q&A:

"Thinking of type, form, language, color, how do you overcome clients maybe wanting to Frankenstein multiple concepts together because maybe a certain element from one resonates and something from another?"

Blake Howard:

I've heard a saying, a horse designed by committee is a camel. So same thing there. We tend to really listen to all the feedback and do our best to pull the things that are resonating and then go through it and see what is consistent and coherent and what is not, and we make recommendations. So if Lauren's saying she loves the icon style from concept number four, Ute saying she likes the type from number two, we will do our best to see if they work and if they don't, we come back and we say, "Hey, we don't think that actually works for X, Y and Z reasons."

And we try to make it pretty objective, not just like, "Oh, we don't think it looks good." We try to say, "Hey, actually these little legs on the type, those are serifs and the way that they come together, they don't actually match the style of these icons and you can see that next to each other. So we would recommend doing X, Y, and Z." And so for us it's a process of learning, of trying, exploring, but then coming back and making a recommendation.

Lauren Dettloff:

I think what you guys did really effectively in particular was when we did provide feedback, and this is a great question because we absolutely did that, we were like, "Well, we like this, but we don't really like the logo, but we like the colors." What we tried to do on our side was we challenged ourselves of why we were responding. So it was more just like the why not the what, because then they could take the why and spin it. But I think, Blake, what you guys did so effectively was anytime we did give a tactical example, for example, could we see this, you guys just didn't take that... You would always come back with something that was better and obviously very well-thought-out and more on what we were trying to achieve than what we had come to you with. And I really appreciated that. It just showed that you guys weren't afraid to challenge us, but more importantly, it was better. You guys are the experts. Anything you're going to come back with is better. So that was really effective.

Ute Braasch:

Yeah, I would add to that, I think the one thing that you guys did well, which I think a lot of the folks on the call can take away is you weren't afraid to have a point of view. And when you thought we were stupid, and there was a point where I think you guys had a very, very, very strong reaction to something we were asking for, you made it very clear that that was a stupid idea, and it literally got us to pause and go, "Oh, well, these guys have been pretty good so far. If they're so passionate about this, maybe we should be listening." And oftentimes when you work with vendors, they don't do that. They try to keep the client happy and they will just respond to whatever the client wants to. And when felt that we crossed the line and didn't do anything smart, you just said that, so you were really partnering with us. That was really helpful.

Blake Howard:

Yeah, I love hearing that. And I think it's worth noting too, we didn't start with that. We didn't lead with that. You have to earn the right to challenge. You have to earn the right to push back, and that means that we really need to understand the vision, the mission, the culture, the dynamics, the strategy, everything, and then we have a point of view. So I think it's worth noting you don't necessarily start as a challenger in a partnership dynamic.

"How do you measure success in terms of ROI?"

Lauren Dettloff:

So internally, it was after each of those moments we did, whether it was the boot camps or the launch webcast or the social media stuff, there was always a ask of measurement, simple survey stuff around understanding engagement. Do you feel more confident? There was that very good, I think, measure, and that was really helpful. And all of those metrics were exactly on par or more with what we would've sought. Externally, candidly, I don't know that we nailed... And this was a little bit odd and unusual and uncomfortable for me, and I'm more of on the commercial side than brand, but I had done some brand stuff, a lot of the typical measurement that we look at for brand, increase in share of voice or some of the quality of message pull through, we couldn't really do in this case because it was the sheer reality of all these companies coming together. So anything previous state wasn't really valid.

We also, for a company our size, we, of course, didn't have the budget or the resourcing to go as big on some of the levers that one would typically do with brands. So for example, we were pretty light on paid media. We tried to do what we could, but it was a lighter investment than anything I had ever dealt with for a campaign, let alone brand. And so we didn't even have a lot of the metrics around typical paid. We did look at things like around social reach and engagement and click throughs just to see if things were resonating. We focused a lot on the website because that was such a new channel for the company. How are people navigating around? How long were they staying on the page? But I would definitely welcome for those that have gone through stuff like this, some things that you have found effective. This had several such unusual factors. It was viewed successful in the end, believe me. But some of the very specific metrics, I was like, "Oh, I can't report on some of the ones I normally do," which was unusual.

Blake Howard:

Yeah, I think some of the most successful bits that I've seen, Lauren, from you all are when you launched it internally and then you did the survey with your team. Hey, how confident are you in this now? Do you think this will resonate with our clients? There were very specific questions in there that showed people understood the story, they were excited about it, they felt like it was signaling the right things. And I haven't really seen anyone do that before, and I thought that was really smart and successful given the importance of culture at Ollion, given the importance of the employee value proposition. It was just such a smart way to try to measure success from your employee's perspective.

Ute Braasch:

Yeah, and I think we also had some external numbers. For us, one of the things that I look at is reaction from the external market around applications. And we literally, after the launch, got thousands, and I mean seriously thousands, of new applications in overnight, which was just unbelievable because we're a small firm, as you said, sub 600 employees. To get several thousand new applicants expressing interest in the firm is something really special. So that was awesome.

Blake Howard: