A few days ago, while paying for something I wanted to buy, the POS transaction failed. It was important so I asked for the nearest ATM location and walked out to get cash.
Now, the security guard who gave me directions had said it was an Access bank branch. When I got there, I realised it was a legacy Diamond bank branch which had just been re-branded.
As a brand management professional, I took note of the guards referring to the merged entity by its new name and nodded to myself. This was evidence of a re-branding effort going well. As I waited on the queue. (It was quite long!) I went online to read up communication around the merger and happened upon a few reviews about the new logo. Apparently the reveal had generated some buzz and this got me thinking.
So here are a few of my thoughts on the new visual identity. For starters, I must say, from past experience as a part of teams driving re-branding efforts in two Tier 1 banks, I know all too well how they can be such high-wire, make or break moments for brand managers. Such projects are usually politically tense, with high levels of executive involvement, and all that comes with it. It’s not a walk in the park!
Even with this in mind, I personally think the Access Bank team have done a great job. Kudos to the Team!
Here’s why.
While there may be some questions about whether it was a merger or acquisition, the narrative being presented by the bank is that it was a merger. I have therefore adopted the presented narrative as the yardstick for assessing the new look and feel. It helps that they have communicated this narrative consistently, starting with the optics of having both CEOs at the announcements, co-sponsoring the Lagos Marathon (at least that’s how it came across) and right up to the manner of combination of elements of both brands in the new identity as you would see.
I have adopted a very different approach in my review, a more ‘Customercentric’ one. My approach has been to review the new logo not just in isolation as it seats in whitespace or in reverse, which appears to be the default approach adopted in most reviews that I have read, but rather from the customer perspective, which is about how it comes across ‘in use’.
So how does the new logo present in the most important customer visual touch points for banks in Nigeria today, which are; the physical bank branches, branded business forms (deposit slips, forms, cards etc.) and digital channels. These may hold different levels of importance for Retail versus Corporate customers, but for both segments, these are the most important touch points.
Starting with legacy Access bank branches, the most visible change is the introduction of the lemon green from the Diamond bank colour palette. This has significantly infused the attention- grabbing, youthful, vibrant, human attributes of Diamond bank. These branches have suddenly become more visible on the high-street. This is a big plus for the Retail play.
Existing Access bank customers get a sense of ‘an energized bank’, signaling about the merger that ‘bigger is better’. This creates a celebratory air which is great for the brand which had come to be perceived as quite dull even though trustworthy and global.
Interestingly for legacy Diamond bank customers, encounters with legacy Access bank locations will have their attentions grabbed by the all too familiar, highly visible lemon green. This means several new locations of ‘their bank’, would be added to the mental repository of branch locations in the minds of these customers. This again is a plus.
However, at legacy Diamond bank branches, the change is more subtle with very little change to colour scheme as two of the colours from the legacy Diamond bank brand colour palette; Orange and lemon green, are still present even though in a new configuration. The major change here is the replacement of the Diamond wordmark with Access in the Access typeface, colour and font. (That is from a customer’s perspective). The change can be easily missed.
On the whole subtle. From a strategic point of view this is good.
Existing Diamond bank customers need to be reassured and that’s exactly the way this execution feels. It comes across as a subtle, non-threatening evolution.
The new logo mark, that is the diamond shape fused into the three chevrons, which radiate in all directions to create layers around a core, plays an important role. It is orange in colour and has now become quite prominent. It fuses elements from both legacy brands : The Chevrons from Access and the diamond from Diamond bank. Great strategy.
However, Legacy Access bank was known for speed with the Chevrons representing this attribute. This is something that has been campaigned aggressively over the years which holds considerable equity. (Remember the train?) I would have leaned toward an execution that retained them in a stronger manner, as I feel the manner in which this has been done (incorporating in the diamond shape) causes the mark to lose strength in signaling ‘speed’. The Chevrons no longer subliminally signal speed. At least not as strongly as they used to.
Is ‘speed’ still an important need as far as needs/motivations and opportunities are concerned? Is the Brand moving away from the ‘speed’ positioning? To my mind, when your emerging competitors are Fintech companies and digital banks, a traditional bank, no matter how digitally transformed, differentiating on the basis of ‘speed’ is a weak positioning.
Also, there was some mention in certain communications about a new positioning around ‘access’. What this means is not yet clear. If this is in line with the emerging trend of ‘bringing emotions to banking’ not majoring on functional needs, then it should be a winner.
Personally, I would have retained the chevrons in a stronger manner. Perhaps changed the 'CC' in the Access wordmark to Chevrons? I feel that something important has been weakened, if not totally lost.
What’s happening on digital channels? I took a quick look at the banks website and some social media platforms and the new look seems to be working well. Especially with the use of the new diamond icon. Within the digital space, with the peculiar requirements for logos that present well as Favicons, AVIs, App symbols and social media profile images, the diamond icon takes over. This diamond shape fused into the three chevrons, which radiate in all directions to create layers around a core, works very well!
As digital becomes even more prominent, I foresee this icon becoming the de facto bank logo.
However, an increased use of the orange colour, on the bank website, raises some concerns for me. I understand the intention is to use the orange colour for the more corporate touch-points but its combination with the grey colour, which is also predominant here, begins to put the look in the range of a known competitor within the category that has come to own this combination of colours. (orange and grey). And if you know the history of the bank, they have once been in the position of a 'me too'. With the amazing feat that this merger represents and the size and scale of the new bank, no such hint should be allowed to play off even if innocently.
Also, the lemon green seems to play a secondary role. I would have thought, flowing from its role in the Retail, physical channels it would dominate here also. On the landing page it was only one of many colours on a slideshow.
Finally a few other key considerations:
1. Brand Clarity – A merger means, a new brand has emerged. It means the new is not exactly legacy Access bank, neither is it legacy Diamond bank. There is need to be clear on what this new brand stands for. So we have a new ‘access’ positioning, we also have claims of infusing the youthful, vibrant, human elements of the Diamond bank brand. There is need for one congruent narrative that joins all these pieces together.
2. Evidencing the change - The brand needs to provide evidence of the new claims. Whether as regards ‘access’ as a positioning or the infusion of the youthful, vibrant, human elements of legacy Diamond brand. We need to see the new Access do youthful, vibrant, human brand initiatives that perceptions around the old Access would have been deemed ‘not possible’.
3. Staff would drive the narrative. How staff are managed would play a key role in reinforcing the ongoing narrative, especially staff of legacy Diamond Bank. Recall that in the past, some of the perception around how staff of the acquired Intercontinental bank were treated drove perceptions around the bank. All the work done can be destroyed with poor handling of any staff action, especially as in that instance it was an acquisition while in this case the narrative speaks to a merger.
4. Converting the most loyal customer base of Legacy Diamond bank - Legacy Diamond bank commanded strong loyalty from a key regional/ethnic demographic. Evolving the basis of their loyalty from sectional considerations to brand driven affinity would require deliberate action.
On the whole, I think the Re-branding effort is off to a great start. What do you think?