top of page

Logo Testing Survey

Project Overview

 

The New Logo Testing 2024 project aimed to evaluate several alternative logos for a retailer to understand their perception among consumers. The study involved presenting ten logos, including five logo versions, to a representative sample of the general population to gather perceptions of various attributes.

 

Objectives

 

The primary objectives of the survey were to:

  1. Evaluate Logo Perceptions: Assess how different logos are perceived on attributes such as premium, positive, active, authentic, stylish, and corporate.

  2. Compare Logo Versions: Identify which logo performs best on these attributes.

  3. Provide Directional Insights: Offer insights to guide the creative teams in their logo development process.

 

Implementation

 

  • Methodology:

    • Conducted an online survey with 1165 general population shoppers in the US, partnering with a gen pop sample provider. Participants included men and women aged 18-64 with household incomes over $50K who are open to online shopping for shoes and apparel.

  • Logos Tested:

    • Ten logos were tested, including five versions of the retailer logos and five logos from direct competitor brands. Each respondent rated the logos on a 7-point Likert scale for six attributes: premium, positive, active, authentic, stylish, and corporate.

  • Data Analysis:

    • Standardized z-scores were computed for each logo based on the ratings.

    • Qualitative survey responses were analyzed for patterns.

 

Key Results

 

  • Attribute Ratings:

    • Premium: Competitor 1 and Competitor 2 logos were perceived as above average, with Competitor 1 rated the highest. All retailer logos were rated below average.

    • Positive: All retailer logos were rated above average, with D2 being the highest and D4 the lowest.

    • Active: All retailer logos were above average, with D3 the highest. Competitor 3 logo was the highest among all logos.

    • Authentic: All logos were rated above average, with Competitor 4 the highest and Competitor 1 the lowest. Retailer logos were in the middle range.

    • Stylish: All retailer logos were below average, with D4 the lowest. Competitor 3 was the highest, and Competitor 4 the lowest.

    • Corporate (Negative Attribute): Competitor 3 and Competitor 1 logos were above average, with Competitor 4 the highest. All retailer logos were below average, with Competitor 5 the lowest.

  • Retailer Logo Version Comparison:

    • D2 was rated the highest on “positive.”

    • D3 was rated the highest on “active.”

​

See example outputs.

 

Outcomes and Impact

 

  • Enhanced Logo Understanding:

    • The study provided a clear understanding of how each logo is perceived on key attributes, highlighting areas for improvement.

  • Informed Logo Development:

    • The insights offered valuable guidance to the creative teams, helping them refine the logo designs to better align with consumer perceptions.

  • Strategic Direction:

    • By identifying the strengths and weaknesses of each logo, the retailer made informed decisions on which logo to adopt and how to enhance its branding strategy.

 

Conclusion

 

The New Logo Testing 2024 project successfully evaluated several logo alternatives, providing detailed insights into consumer perceptions. The findings highlight the relative strengths of each logo and offer clear guidance for refining the retailer's branding strategy. This project underscores the importance of consumer feedback in logo development and the value of data-driven decision-making in enhancing brand identity.

bottom of page