Which comes first--structural or graphic branding?

Let each project’s specific needs, rather than a formal protocol, determine who leads.

Pw 7973 Skin Medica

The successful integration of structural and graphic branding has proved to be a great challenge for many consumer packaged goods companies. “Do we start with the graphics branding and then create a structure around it, or do we create a structure and then start the graphics exploration afterward?” This question is commonly asked at the beginning of the creative process.

The best answer I have found to the question is “neither.” A successful package must be a seamless combination of structural form and function and graphic branding working together in support of a common message to the consumer.
So why is a balance so difficult to achieve?

Possible reasons for much of the difficulty are varied. Structural designers tend to have industrial design backgrounds and they must be technically familiar with many complex manufacturing processes in order to be effective in structural branding. For this reason, in addition to the marketing team, they often interface with a company’s research and development team and operations.

On the other hand, graphic designers are often trained specifically in graphic design. They have little experience in structural manufacturing processes. They typically work directly with the brand manager and/or creative services group in communicating the brand attributes in the two dimensions of print.

If that were not enough of a difference, timelines for structural changes are typically much longer than for graphic changes, making it difficult to work on both concurrently. Projects often start with the “longest lead time” item to be resolved first, leading to a structural kick-off before the graphics team is even assembled.

To be successful, I have found that a collaborative process involving both graphic and structural designers (along with marketing, research and development, and operations) is vital to successful overall package communication. The following examples illustrate the point.

SkinMedica line

 SkinMedica had a very effective line of skin care products that was sold primarily in dermatologists’ offices. Unfortunately, the line was produced in stock packaging with graphics that did not truly reflect the quality (and price!) of the products inside. While the doctor-recommended line of TNS-based medical products continued to sell individually, consumers did not seem to see a reason to buy the remaining 21 products in the line. Instead, they chose mass-market equivalents.

SkinMedica needed a line of products that stood out as unique in dermatologists’ offices and reflected the medical and scientific heritage of the line in order to differentiate the products from mass-market competitors.

Conveying Innovations Report
Editors report on distinguishing characteristics that define each new product and collected video demonstrating the equipment or materials as displayed at the show. This topical report, winnowed from nearly 300 PACK EXPO collective booth visits, represents a categorized, organized account of individual items that were selected based on whether they were deemed to be both new, and truly innovative, based on decades of combined editorial experience in experiencing and evaluating PACK EXPO products.
Take me there
Conveying Innovations Report
Pharmaceutical Innovations Report
Discover the latest breakthrough packaging technologies shaping the pharmaceutical sector. This report dives into cutting-edge innovations, from smart containers that enhance patient safety to eco-friendly materials poised to transform the industry’s sustainability practices. All from PACK EXPO. Learn how forward-thinking strategies are driving efficiency and redefining what’s possible in pharma packaging.
Learn More
Pharmaceutical Innovations Report