Blog - the (non)sense of rebranding on the first of January

Facebooktwitterlinkedin
Traditionally many merged organisations go ‘live’ on the first day of the new year. From a legal perspective, this makes sense. Two or more organisations cease to exist by the first of January and a new organisation, usually with a new name, arises. But should this date also be the deadline for the implementation of the new brand identity?

If the answer is yes, this means you ask a lot of the organisations involved and of your suppliers. After all, during the holiday season (which is the intended timeframe for the implementation) many organisations are closed. Capacity is sparse, which increases the costs of implementation.

Apart from your suppliers, you also need your own people to be present at the office to receive the new stationery, to open the doors for installers of (illuminated) signage and to make sure the vehicles are ready to be rebranded. We are sure most of your staff did not intend to work during the holiday season and, even worse, nobody will notice the new brand identity yet!

On the first of January, we are all celebrating the new year. And in the days after it takes some time to go back to business as usual. Therefore, business news like about your new brand identity is hardly noticed. None the less, the January first deadline remains an annual phenomenon. We as brand implementation specialists invent all kinds of complicated arrangements to make it happen.

Since your new brand identity is hardly noticed in the first days of the new year, we advocate postponing the deadline until after January 1st. What is wrong with the 9th, or 12th? Or even on the 16th of January?

Of course, software and documents should be available with the new brand on the first business day of the new organisation. However, it makes absolute sense to set the implementation deadline for all labour-intensive adaptions (such as the vehicle fleet, signage and corporate wear) and the start of the brand campaign at a later date. It has significantly more impact, it generates less chaos during implementation and minimises additional costs.

So who is with us?