So you want an "ownable" brand asset...
I mean, who doesn't? Your core brand assets should absolutely be ownable — unique, different, identifiable, & easy to link to your brand.
(Unless they're category things, in which case, cut it out. You can't "own" an orange slice if you make OJ, or ‘refreshing’ if you sell water. Sheesh.)
Well, the good people at the Ehrenberg-Bass Institute have been chiseling away at this ownability rock for a while. A new paper written by Ella Ward & co. covers findings from studies in 19 countries, surveying over 26,000 people, on over 1,200 distinct brand elements, from 13 different CPG categories, and dozens of brands. Whew.
The result? Characters lead the pack, followed by logos & typography. Colors bring up the rear with taglines (which, tbh, kind of suck lately).
But every asset type has the potential to be uniquely linked to your brand. (Depending on context, history, competitors, etc. Because #itdepends.)
CAVEATS BEWARE (My new regular feature):
CPG only
Visual assets only (no audio!)
Not tested at shelf (where colors & pack shapes might rock)
Not controlling for age of brand / investment in asset
It’s a fantastic paper and you should read it now.
Ward, E., S. Yang, J. Romaniuk and V. Beal (2020). "Building a unique brand identity: measuring the relative ownership potential of brand identity element types." Journal of Brand Management 27(4): 393-407.
https://doi.org/10.1057/s41262-020-00187-6
Now excuse me while I go work on my new Applied Brand Science character.