TheDieline.com: Package Design

Electroluminescent Liquor Packaging

Upper left: Ballantine’s new electroluminescent label for blended scotch whisky; on right: TyKu’s sake bottle with LED light source; lower left: J&B’s “Mix Light” bottle.

Ballantine’s new “Listen to Your Beat” campaign includes an electroluminescent label with graphic equalizer display. Designed by London-based “The Core,” this label is more evidence of a trend towards animated, self-illuminating liquor labels. Similar to these battery-powered T-shirts, audio references seem to occur frequently in youth-oriented liquor packaging. (The J&B bottle above is another example.)

Battery powered, self-illuminating containers we’ve seen before—(See: NXT on the dieline and this article on Electroluminescent Technology from Packaging Digest)—but it seems to be gaining a particular foothold in the category of liquor packaging.

(A closeup picture of the Ballantine’s bottle and several videos of electroluminescent labels in action, after the fold...)

How Much Packaging is Too Much?

Interesting ongoing packaging experiments are being conducted in Germany. British supermarket giant Tesco co-opted the idea recently to conduct an experiment of its own over a six-week period. The premise of the exercise is simple. Customers in a defined number of supermarkets are allowed to shed any packaging they find excessive near the checkouts after making their purchases.

Not only does Tesco recycle packaging its customers leave behind, it plans to study the results of its exercise and relate feedback to product manufacturers. According to the company, common customer packaging complaints cited are the amount of plastic, board, and foil used; toothpaste cartons; and trays and plastic film containing produce.

New insights are being seriously considered as Tesco, a food retailer, looks for new ways to reduce extraneous packaging on its own store brands and peripheral department packaging based on feedback from its experiment. 
 
Consumer packaged goods (CPG) companies have been reducing excessive packaging for some time, of course. As retailers increasingly focus on developing and managing their own store brands, more sophisticated, responsible packaging is one of their primary concerns, too. Yet, there is a growing consensus that more can and should be done.

Cost savings can be significant with reduced packaging on the front end, yielding fewer materials used and less energy consumed as highly desirable added bonuses. But savings on the back end are noteworthy as well. When consumers send less material to the trash and into recycling containers, energy savings are likewise substantial. Even better: Consumers appreciate having fewer packaging materials to discard after consuming products. CPG companies and retailers should not overlook this insight; consumers attach greater perceived value to the brands involved.

As is the case with most initiatives, a balanced approach is the key to successful packaging changes. A small percentage of consumers are avid environmentalists and more sensitive to perceived excess packaging. But other shoppers might require more information about ingredients and prefer to retain additional packaging. Results will have to be weighed with these considerations after the experiment concludes.

The less packaging consumers have to dispose of during the test period, the greater the affirmation that product manufacturers and retailers are doing a good job. Still, the data collected from discarded packaging near store exits ought to be very revealing and much more insightful than verbal feedback alone. After all, actions speak louder than words.

In many focus groups, companies have focused on soliciting consumer input on the design of packaging rather than the amount of packaging. Though experiments like this might spur CPG companies to consider adding the design-of-packaging dimension, maybe it’s not a good idea to add the topic into focus-group discussions without also observing customer interaction with actual packaging.

In many instances, respondents are likely to either say what they think is expected or adopt a “herd mentality” and go along with predominant group consensus. Sometimes, it’s hard to get at the truth about the various elements of packaging that consumers respond favorably to and also ones they dislike in group sessions.

Getting back to Tesco’s experiment: What better way to find out how much packaging is too much than by allowing consumers to show product manufacturers and retailers themselves? Observing how and what consumers discard after making purchases is invaluable. In Germany, for example, retailers observed that consumers readily threw toothpaste cartons into receptacles as they left stores. This action and the resulting feedback prompted product manufacturers to develop toothpaste tubes that stand upright on store shelves, sans outer cartons.

The idea must be gaining steam because Procter & Gamble has decided against outer cartons for some of its Crest oral-care products. Perhaps P&G is taking a cue from its European counterparts. Or, perhaps P&G’s decision results from its own internal testing or information gleaned in collaboration with an outside design consultancy.

Regardless, this development presents new challenges, because products like toothpaste must include regulatory information on the packaging, not to mention OTC remedies. When it comes to food products, allergy, and dietary concerns, ingredients and sourcing make the stripping away of extraneous packaging a challenge, too. The need to eliminate excessive packaging must be balanced with a sense of responsibility. Consumers’ need for information and product safety concerns also must be carefully considered.

In spite of these concerns, brilliant package reduction solutions are being devised.

• Prilosec OTC redesigned its packaging to double the number of pills on a blister card, reducing packaging waste.
•  HP’s laptop-in-a-bag won Walmart’s competition for innovative packaging ideas, and an exclusive promotion in its stores sold out the 15,000 laptops in a limited run.
• Aveda lipstick packaged one lipstick tube with six refillables to cut down substantially on waste.
• McDonald’s decision to convert hash brown containers from paperboard cartons to paper bags saves an estimated 2.9 million pounds of packaging annually.

Good package solutions can be developed when companies know where their packaging can be reduced without compromising product integrity or consumers’ “need to know.” Actually seeing how consumers interface with packaging gives companies the most solid information possible and also a real starting point. That also could lead to the development of more distinctive, proprietary packaging undreamed of until now. In turn, new advancements could be leveraged to refer back to their brands in a highly recognizable, differentiated manner.

Rather than viewing consumer disenchantment vis-à-vis current packaging as a negative, it is wiser for CPG companies to regard these insights as great opportunities. The chance to develop better package designs that are fully aligned with consumer expectations should not be missed—especially now, in a tough economy. Smart brands will survive and thrive now and be much better positioned to pick up more share when the economy turns around.

Ted Mininni is president of Design Force, Inc., the leading brand design consultancy to consumer product companies with Enjoyment Brands™. Design Force helps their clients market brands that deliver positive, gratifying experiences to consumers. Their expertise lies in emotionally connecting consumers to brands by creating compelling visual brand experiences, which motivate purchase decisions.

Simplicity Rules

Against a backdrop of an increasingly complex and fragmented consumer culture, media overload, multiplying retail channels, and an increasing cynicism among consumers, some marketers are rediscovering the power of simplicity in expressing their brand ideas. It simply makes sense. 

Simplicity rules the day. In our über-branded world, we’re seeing a sea-change washing over the landscape. Some say it started with Google, sporting the cleanest user interface on the web at the time. (Interesting that Microsoft’s Bing is now trying to out-simplify Google on functionality.) Others say Target paved the way, with a simpler, cleaner shopper experience, utilizing design as a strategic advantage in its pitched battle with Wal-Mart. (Equally interesting that Wal-Mart is now trying to out-design and out-simplify Target.) 

Other examples abound:

Häagen-Dazs touts a few simple ingredients with its Häagen-Dazs five™ line.

Pepsi creates Throwback versions, harkening back to simpler times.

Coca-Cola renovates its trademark brands, eliminating gratuitous and superfluous design elements to express brand symbols more simply and compellingly.

Volkswagen builds an entire design language around simple forms.

Philips touts “Sense and Simplicity” as more than a tag line but as a corporate covenant.

Countless other brands feature simple, back-to-basic value propositions that appeal to a seemingly endless desire for the honest, the true, the uncomplicated...in a word, SIMPLICITY.

WHAT’S GOING ON HERE? 

This is more than a trend, even though it’s clearly trendy. It’s a more fundamental change, a cultural shift, and one that the cultural anthropologists and semioticians will be studying for decades. And the brands that recognized it early are reaping the rewards of reflecting the values that are driving the culture, even as they accelerate the shift through their powerful brand expressions. 

The shift has many parents: our increasingly fragmented culture, media overload, overextended brands, SKU proliferation, and of course, the current economic reversal that fosters a deep desire for simple value as a response to the excesses of the recent past. In The Paradox of Choice: Why More Is Less, psychology professor Barry Schwartz argues that consumers today are faced with far too many choices, noting that consumers would be far better off with a few distinctly different options instead of the countless array of choices they currently have. Whether choosing an insurance plan, a can of tomato sauce, or even a pair of jeans, Schwartz shows that a bewildering array of choices is overwhelming, and paradoxically inhibits happiness instead of enhancing it. He debunks the notion that more choices will make consumers happier, offering instead the idea that having all these choices actually infringes on consumers’ psychological well being. 

Author and consultant Jack Trout similarly contends, in The Power Of Simplicity: A Management Guide to Cutting Through the Nonsense and Doing Things Right, that simplicity is one solution for marketers who find it increasingly difficult to gain traction among consumers beset by too many complicated choices and options. He urges managers to “get back to basics” and use simplicity as an organizing principle to guide enterprises to success. Trout notes that simplifying the value proposition will reduce cost and increase sales and profits. 

In our own practice, we’ve seen brand owners leverage the power of simplicity to strengthen their brands. Heinz, in its Australian market, launched a new line of frozen stir-fry vegetables with a fresh, confident look that communicates convenient, everyday cooking. Bright, complementary colors, ample white space, simple design, and appetizing photography suggest healthy, unprocessed, and easy to use benefits. 

This trend toward simplicity and purity has also taken hold in the beverage category, where unsweetened flavored water beverages are growing faster than any other segment.

Dasani Essence is an all-natural, no-calorie clear beverage that adds a hint of fruit to bottled water, including lime, black cherry, and strawberry kiwi flavors. The design took a straightforward, bold approach to the brand that conveys honesty and simplicity. The new packaging is clean, modern and stylish to help encourage a healthy lifestyle and attitude. 

Gundowring Fine Foods’ design features a series of smart two-color labels; the restricted palette, minimal typography, and a handdrawn swirl create an appealing label design that conveys real food, few ingredients, and simple authenticity. 

How Can Your Packaging become Disruptive?

By Ted Mininni 

Rapid commoditization of consumer products. Jaded consumers. A tough economy that has changed customers’ spending habits. Perhaps permanently. How can a consumer product company grow, or even survive in this new paradigm? I’ve been mulling this over for awhile and it seems to me that it’s time to become “disruptive”.  

Harvard Business School professor Clayton Christensen coined the phrase “disruptive technology” in his 1997 best-seller: “The Innovator’s Dilemma”. The concept has been widely discussed ever since. Christensen’s argument states there are two kinds of companies: those that use sustaining technologies and those that employ disruptive ones.  

Larger companies tend to work with sustaining technology. They utilize it to make incremental improvements to their products over time. Given their corporate framework and strategy, larger businesses often eschew new opportunities that come along if they arise from disruptive technologies. Reasons: they may offer lower, less attractive margins, or they don’t fit in with locked-in company strategies or company goals. 

As a result, smaller companies are often able to see value in disruptive technologies and bring products to market that have the potential—with some tweaks and a certain maturation period—to become hits. Disruptive products have the potential to gain a large audience, significant marketshare and eventual market dominance, usually blindsiding category leaders in the process. Disrupters even give birth to entirely new categories in the marketplace. Think Apple’s iPod. 

Disrupters come along and think of a better way. They offer simpler or better performing, problem-solving products for consumers and create excitement in the process. New vision and approaches applied to age-old problems can yield huge dividends. 

Disruptive examples dot the marketscape. Digital cameras vs photographic film cameras. USB memory sticks vs discs for data storage. iPods vs radios and boom boxes. While great technology product innovations are numerous, many other consumer products result from disruptive thinking, as well. Think single serve beverages in aseptic packs. Broths and stocks in resealable cartons. Reusable cleaning products that require refills like Swiffer. Seasonal packaging: Kleenex “Perfect Slice of Summer” tissue in mouthwatering melon configurations.  

Disruptive products require disruptive packaging, right? But what about further leveraging the potential of packaging to disrupt even in commodity categories where it’s unexpected? In fact, wouldn’t doing that deliver more punch to the most mundane products?  

So what about disruptive packaging?

Here’s the thing: companies that have a culture and strategy that employ disruptive thinking to position unique, game-changing products and services have an edge. For those that don’t, this might just be the optimal time to step back and reassess. If sales are ailing, mightn’t the company benefit from a fresh new point of view? Tweaking products, packaging and the marketing approach might be exactly what the doctor ordered. 

Products in every category are becoming commoditized at a faster rate than ever before. That brings us all back to the true role of marketing: that of providing clear differentiation and memorable experiences for the customer as job #1.  

Packaging continues to grow in importance in the marketing mix. It brings branded products to consumers in a tangible manner, so it’s time to take a fresh, new and yes—disruptive—approach to it. Consider this: in a commodity category like snacks, Pringle’s dared put potato chips in a canister instead of a bag. POM Wonderful dared put its flagship pomegranate juice in a double-curved bottle rather than a typical juice bottle. 

Method broke every mold and packaged its cleaning products in unconventional, sleek see-through bottles. Environmentally friendly cleaning products presented in highly visible, transparent packaging makes perfect sense, doesn’t it? When we look at all of these products, we see how commodity items can be packaged to elevate product and brand in a unique manner.  

Package communications are extremely important. But in essence, the first line of communication entails engaging the consumer with visually exciting packaging. After all, why would consumers approach and read packaging that has no visual appeal? Disruptive packaging is highly differentiated. It attracts the eye when virtually every other category product seems to sit on the retail shelf in roughly the same size and shape of package. 

Major disrupters.

Owners of pet dogs like to purchase special treats. But, what’s more blasé than dog treats? The products and packaging are pretty basic and unexciting. Enter Bit-O-Luv. This small company has taken a decidedly different point of view to an age-old product. A web site features three animated pooches that sell the product concept in a unique manner. The message is simple: good enough for humans, but “specially formulated for dogs”. . .exceeding USDA standards. www.bitoluv.com.  

The packaging is especially engaging. The same dogs that appear on the web site grace the packages; their mouths open and treats visible inside thanks to a clever window. Three flavor choices are available in bright lime, turquoise and orange packages. The funky Bit-O-Luv brand identity is prominently featured above the artwork. This is disruptive packaging at its best. 

Cute is one thing, of course, but does it have any distribution in this competitive marketplace? Wal-Mart, Albertson’s, Meijer, Food Lion, some Costco locations and Quality Food Centers stock the products. There’s no doubt that these dog treats stand out from every other player on the retail shelf. 

When it comes to a packaging refresh, Mentos delivers with punch. While consumers are familiar with the mints in candy roll packaging reminiscent of Lifesavers, Mentos has parlayed its image created by disruptive advertising into equally disruptive packaging. Mentos sugar-free mints are packaged in an ingeniously designed cardboard box with a hinged lid that actually opens and closes with a click. The latch works so well that the contents remain inside the box even when shaking it upside down.  

Simple, functional and unlike the packaging that’s prevalent in the rest of the category, Mentos mints stand out and stand alone with consumers. Mentos is a deliberately disruptive brand, and everything it does disrupts. 

What about a staple like Kleenex facial tissues? Los Angeles designer Hiroko Sanders’ took the challenge to create artwork that would embody the spirit of summer, and still work with Kleenex’s carton design. What’s fresher than three stylized summer fruits? Unifying package design with brand and product in fresh, seasonal packaging is unexpected and totally delightful.  

When packaging a new line or refreshing an existing one, think about what you can do to surprise, delight or deliver a commodity product in an unexpected manner. These are all emotive qualities that connect consumers to brands in a memorable way. Think: how can you disrupt your whole category, generate a lot of buzz, excitement and sales?  

Ted Mininni is president of Design Force, Inc., the leading brand design consultancy to consumer product companies with Enjoyment Brands™. Design Force helps their clients market brands that deliver positive, gratifying experiences to consumers. Their expertise lies in emotionally connecting consumers to brands by creating compelling visual brand experiences, which motivate purchase decisions.

Why Packaging Matters More than Ever.

Marketing researchers of note, Forrester and McKinsey & Company, recently conducted studies on the nature of consumerism today. Their results are important because they point to a shift away from the classic “consumer purchasing funnel”.  

This classic marketing theory holds that consumers develop awareness of branded products thanks to numerous, traditional advertising impressions. Familiarity leads to eventual purchasing consideration for a limited choice of brands. When entering a retail environment, consumers center their attention on those few choices, and purchase one. Throughout the process, the funnel obviously keeps narrowing. With consistent delivery on the brand promise, loyalty develops over time. 

However, new research demonstrates consumer purchasing patterns no longer fit this model. So could the wrong marketing emphasis be one of the reasons, along with a soft economy, for real shifts in consumer spending and overall loyalty? Given the data, it’s likely.  

According to the latest consumer research, there’s a new paradigm. Constant exposure via traditional and interactive media continues to create brand awareness. When consumers make the decision to purchase a product, they evaluate their choices by conducting Internet research. They participate in word of mouth exchanges, seeking information from social media contacts.  

This is a crucial juncture for brands in the pre-purchasing process; the reason they must have a strong online presence. Marketers need to invest dollars on independent web sites--not only their own--that they’ve identified as the places consumers are seeking information about products like theirs, and buying them. Ditto for interactive media sites-–online and mobile—since these core constituencies will endorse and spread the word about their products.  

Due to a virtual explosion of social media outlets as well as new brands, consumers are actually not narrowing their options now. Rather, they are expanding their possible list of choices. Thus, the narrowing consumer funnel model is now obsolete. 

You’ve Got 20 Seconds Or Less to Live.

That is, your package design does. If that sounds melodramatic, think again. It’s true. Consumer product packaging exists in fast-changing retail channels loaded with competitive products and increasingly skittish shoppers, to boot.  

 When customers make purchase decisions, they’re spending anywhere from 10 to 20 seconds—that according to repeated surveys and research conducted by consumer behavior experts. Okay, so maybe in our currently contracting economy, they’re investing a couple seconds more to further assess their options. But ask yourself: is it any wonder so many products are getting lost and dying on retail shelves? 

So what is a package design consultant to do? I could tell you how important it is for us to collaborate closely with our clients, working to understand their industries and their categories; their business goals and brand strategies. All true. I could tell you how important it is to assess and leverage their brand assets in context of consumer brand perception. True. I could point out that a competitive survey of products within each category is crucial. Especially now.  

I might also point out that understanding how our evolving culture intersects the brand is crucial. Which demographic segments are loyal to the brand? What are these consumers’ attitudes and values now and how can brand packaging legitimately--without straying from its core--evolve with changing cultural values to remain fresh and relevant? 

Studies show that consumers ignore up to 2/3 of category products when they shop. That kind of statistic points to just how difficult it is to successfully package a new product or new line. It clearly demonstrates why so many products fail at retail. No matter how compelling consumer product marketing can be, the actual sale is made at the retail shelf. Packaging is the tangible representation of brand and product and if it fails to make an impression, it signifies numerous lost sales. 

Here’s the thing. We all know that for every packaging challenge, several viable solutions might present themselves. So how do we hone in on the one great solution, rather than a couple of good ones? How do we prove our value to manufacturers who are slashing budgets; who are loath to invest in “expensive” new product packaging? Or putting off revitalized packaging for products whose sales are beginning to go into decline? 

The first thing we need to do—gulp—is realize that great packaging is about selling first. Communication and persuasion is job #1. Not aesthetics. Package designers ooh and ahh over beautiful packaging, but remember: beauty is in the eye of the beholder. It’s subjective and each consumer responds differently to aesthetics.  

The Path to Innovation

In the world of structural innovation it is far easier to talk about innovating than it is to actually innovate. Large CPG companies are recognizing the need for structural packaging innovation but face many road blocks to actually implement it. The primary issue may very well be that their manufacturing assets are also their liabilities.  

The Need for Innovation

In today’s day and age, consumers expect more from their brands and product offerings. People’s lives are faster-paced and they need solutions to fit their lifestyles. Since consumers are increasingly faced with overload from more than 55,000 brands on shelf, compared to just 15,000 brands in 1991, companies are going to great lengths to vie for attention, provide brand value and create a competitive point of difference. Marketers are awakening to the potential for packaging to play a role in the marketing mix, beyond containment and display. Packaging has the ability to engage all of the senses due to its aesthetic, tangible and functional nature. For many products, packaging can be a lasting brand ambassador throughout the product’s use and create desirable and memorable brand experiences. Companies are now exploring how packaging can create new usage occasions and/or drive new product formulations.  

The Barriers to Innovation

Although there is the need and desire to innovate, many obstacles exist which may restrict success. One is the fact that structural innovation is not often done and most companies have limited or no experience with it. For many, their packaging is a common package form utilizing common equipment.  

Consequently, marketers are often challenged to innovate within unrealistic budgets and timelines. The realities of packaging equipment procurement, setup and qualification timelines are often not anticipated. It is expensive and time consuming to set up an efficient packaging line; sometimes this is much more extensive than product production equipment. It requires more factory space and more equipment so as to be able to form, fill, seal and pack. Unfortunately, many initiatives still place the emphasis and priority on product innovation, relegating the package options to off-the-shelf solutions or no solution at all. Adding to the complexity is the short tenure of brand marketers. It is often difficult or impossible to attain success when project leadership is constantly changing and/or short timelines are dictated by the need for success within ones’ term. These established tenures may work for product innovation but they don’t always work for packaging innovation. There is also lack of accurate predictors for packaging return on investment (ROI), making it difficult for companies to justify costs to upper management. New packaging is often implemented along with other marketing strategies making it difficult to measure its impact in isolation. Furthermore, forecast modeling based on use testing is often inaccurate as consumers may have no or limited context for evaluation. Often, long term packaging benefits aren’t understood and the deeper emotional connections aren’t manifested within the limited duration of a use test. Test markets may be the best way to predict ROI, but can only happen with manufactured products. Test markets can be time consuming, costly and are often not pursued out of fear of prematurely sharing your idea with the competition.  

Branding With Color: Does it Work?

I really like the approach of crafting a brand around color. Especially in a stripped-down way, with simple, bold and modern typography, like Chocolat Factory's packaging (designed by ruiz+company of Barcelona, Spain).

There is one catch, though. Built into this super-simple, stripped down approach is its primary flaw: it can be too simple to 'own'. This popular look, if applied without enough of a differentiating element that is unique to the brand, can be generic. Color blocking is a great solution for differentiating chocolate bar flavors, but something else has to be going on to create an 'ownable' design.

Below are some examples of chocolate brands that are predominantly using color + spare typography in their packaging. I think some of them rely too heavily on color and don't make their packaging distinctive enough from other chocolate brands, while others are doing better job. Can you tell the difference between brands well enough? Are the differences memorable enough so you'll know where to go back for your next chocolate fix? You be the judge!