By: Brad Daly
Google, the company that seems to always be right, at least in our eyes, has made a “brilliant” move to change their corporate structure. In the Forbes.com article “Google, Again, Makes A Brilliant Branding Move”, the author, Allen Adamson, gives his opinion of Google’s move to put everything under the new brand of “Alphabet”. Adamson, a “branding expert” gives his professional opinion of Google’s move to do this and I could not agree more with him. This move for Google is enormous in that it is taking the Google brand, other companies it is associated with and everything in between, and putting it all under one umbrella.
According to Adamson, the logic behind this is to overall, become more “streamlined”, and have everything associated with one name. Within the article, Adamson suggests criteria for branding that must be met and they are certainly met in a unique way, but that is no surprise when talking about Google. When we think of Google, we tend to think of simplicity and continuous innovation. In addition to the search engine, maps, images, and now cars that drive themselves, this case is certainly no different.
According to Adamson’s criteria for branding, three things must be met. The first thing is “a brand name must break through all that aforementioned clutter. It needs to be simple and easy to pronounce and remember or, in branding parlance, “sticky.”” Second, “a brand name must tell a story”. Third and finally, a brand name must be authentic to the category.” Google and Alphabet do this with ease and accuracy, both are words we don’t tend to think about when thinking about changing corporate structure and rebranding a massive company. The qualities of simplicity, uniqueness, and ease of understanding, just to name a few, are very evident with this big change. A lot of times, we do not think of big changes such as this one as simple. However, the people at Google have certainly put their time into coming up with this one because it does not disappoint. In addition to this, in agreement with Adamson, when I hear the word “alphabet”, I think of ease and order. Essentially that is what Google is and does. It is simple to use, and it order’s information in regards to relevance to the topic being searched.
Building a brand and maintaining loyalty is not an easy task, let alone rebranding a multitude of services, products, and applications under one umbrella. However, since Google stayed simple, basic, and met all of Adamson’s criteria, this is certain to be a hit for the company as a whole, and those loyal to the Google brand. As long as Surgey Brin, Larry Page, and every one else involved with the rebrand and the “streamline” restructuring convey their meaning, message, and market properly, this will certainly be a hit for the company overall.
References
Adamson, A. (2015, August 11). Google, Again, Makes A Brilliant Branding Move. Retrieved September 14, 2015: http://www.forbes.com/sites/allenadamson/2015/08/11/google-again-makes-a-brilliant-branding-move/
Marketing Discussions 
Brad, I do understand and can see the perspective of wanting to put all of Google under one parent name of Alphabet. The parent name they chose is really familiar, something that’s entirely unforgettable seeing as the alphabet is a strong, vital part of every day life. However, I find the transition of putting everything under an “alphabet” parent company umbrella difficult. Everything Google has produced thus far with its brand has had the brand name “Google” attached to it. For example, there are: “Google: Maps”, “Google: Mail”, internet search engine “Google”, “Google: docs”, “Google: Hangouts” etc. The idea in theory would be beneficial and could very much eventually be successful, but I almost feel why should they stray from calling themselves anything other than Google when they’ve conquered so much already and are so globally known for their brand name and what it is they offer.
LikeLike
I really like how google is showing their brand and structure with the “alphabet” theme. I think that their loyal customers will love the new rebranding idea and the order that it foreshadows.
LikeLike
I believe that if a brand is built like Google is there is no reason so move from this brand. This is completely different than Google owning other companies that they manage. In this case if they come out with a new part of their business that doesn’t have Google in the name I do not see the global recognition the Google usually obtains with their products.
LikeLike
I completely agree with Melissa. Google has built a reputation on simplicity. Gathering all products under the parent name Alphabet is confusing and not easily recognizable. Google has become a household name such as Tylenol or Xerox. Alphabet will more than likely fail if implemented, merely because of the unfamiliarity users will have. The name “Google” has many positive traits associated with it, thus extending it to each product rolled out will only promote success.
LikeLike
While reading this post my immediate thoughts were that Google’s idea would not succeed. Like my classmates, I too believe Google has become a household name. When you are asking someone a question that nobody knows the answer to, the first response is always “Just Google it”. Now that I am reflecting on the article and discussion, I think that with time, and a few trials, the rebranding could succeed. While at Merrimack as an undergrad, there was a dorm called Santigati Hall. During my senior year, the college changed the name of the dorm to O’Brien hall. Now for those of us who spent four years calling the dorm “Gati”, it went unnoticed or changed to us. But as new classes come in each year, the name “Gati” is heard less and less. Just like new generations will begin to grow and start to use the term Alphabet instead of Google.
LikeLike