No, no, I’m not about to re-hash the debate on how we all got here, but I am going to talk about the best choice for a brand roll-out. I’m working on a couple of projects that involve creating a brand from scratch, and I just switched to the new Microsoft Outlook email system, so I’ve been following their roll-out of the re-brand. So, which is better: the brand evolution or the big bang roll-out?

Honestly, I think both have merit, depending on the situation. The brand evolution is a piecemeal roll-out, where you implement new product lines, logos, campaigns, and platforms as you create them. The big bang roll-out goes all in from day one, with a content-rich website, booming Twitter presence, snazzy ad campaign, and forums with a ton of information. Can you guess which company chose the big bang? Microsoft, of course! One of my projects is for a musician, and I’m advising the piecemeal roll-out for him. So, why do some projects need evolution, and some need a big bang?

The Big Bang:

– Ideal for companies with an established brand identity

– Companies with the time, money, and manpower to create, distribute, and manage content across multiple platforms

– Companies that need to make a splash in the press – nothing says “big news” like the buzz of something big, and then flipping the switch on a new brand identity!

– Products with a broad market appeal – you need to make a splash in the press to get their attention, remember?

The Evolution:

– Ideal for brands that are new to the marketplace

– Roll-outs of each new aspect of the brand creates more customer touch-points by offering new reasons to invite your customers to view your content

– Small companies/individuals will NEVER release a brand if they have to wait until it’s completely finished because they’ll be wrestling with themselves forever! (Trust me, I’m struggling to kick a project out of the nest right now, even though I know it will fly!)

– Limited resources necessitate making a little money before spending a long of money, and the steady roll-out allows you to get a little business before you invest in the next piece. You won’t get in over your head by trying to manage a web site, an ad campaign, a Twitter presence, and… oh yeah, actually making and selling your product or providing your services!

– Ability to test, try and fail. You might not need every tool in the marketing tool box, so start with the most effective tool, and work your way down. It’s easier to add it on later than to watch your whole brand crumble because you took on too many ineffective tools.

I think there’s a strong case for each option, but it depends on your goal and your resources. Microsoft is a well-oiled machine when it comes to re-brands or brand roll-outs, and you expect to hit a fully formed marketing effort when they flip the switch. My musician, on the other hand, will be well-served by a slower release of his content. He’s excited to jump in with a website, blog, YouTube channel, and Twitter presence, but I’m advising him to slow down the releases. Instead of posting all 6 videos on launch day, just post one. That way, you already have a bank of content to draw from, and you can release the videos over several weeks to keep people coming back. Don’t commit to blogging every day, start with once a week. Again, you can always build up to multiple posts each week, but posting weekly will give you a reason to talk to your customers in the beginning.

Do you prefer evolution or a big bang? Do you think one method is truly better than the other, or does it depend on your business?