In the first few weeks of this blog I have been fairly gentle, so far, when discussing the creative execution of package design work. Not today.
When I heard that Nestle is running a design competition, to redesign their Goobers, Sno-Caps, and Oh Henry! candy brands, where consumers can vote on their favorite package design, I thought, A. What wonderful heritage brands these are, B. There is significant risk in putting their brand heritage totally in the hands of consumers, C. If this methodology is successful it will put me out of business, D. They are nuts. Then I went to the site. It quickly became apparent that while this might be an interesting idea for Nestle conceptually, this execution is a sham.
A. The work does not support the “living history” of these brands
The one thing you have to get right on candy packaging, before you make any other changes, they have gotten really wrong. With candy packaging, where impulse purchase in the candy and checkout aisles or behind the movie candy counter is key, the treatment of the logotype is the most important first step in any redesign effort. The logotype executions on all three are at best, weak, and in each case diminish the brand communication. This work doesn’t build on any of the brands’ heritage, its simply lousy typography.
B. The consumer is being offered no real choice
As you can see, the choices being offered to the consumer are tiny at best, a small color change for Goobers, the amount of snowfall on Sno-Caps, and a slight logo change on Oh Henry!
C. It looks like I can keep my day job
Say what you will about the work, a designer did help Nestle get this far with the design “alternatives”. Although I can’t imagine what criteria was used to judge this new work.
D. I still think they are nuts