Branding, image and public perception create an expectation in the minds of the consumer. And I whole-heartedly agree with you that when it comes to “mom and pop” businesses, “stepping up” can actually be taking several steps backward.

A major image upgrade/makeover can alienate just as many folks in the short term as it attracts in the long term. It’s a double-edged sword and a difficult transition to make. I’m working with a local restaurant right now that is in the process of “stepping up,” and I’ve been hyper-aware of doing it in such a way as to minimize existing customer alienation.

The reality is that if you are going to attract a larger and broader client base, I believe you have to have an attractive presence. I don’t care how nice a person is: if they’re unattractive, they’re going to get approached a lot less often. It’s the same way with a business. In our highly brand-aware (some would say brand over exposed) culture, image may not be everything — but it’s very, very important.

I think the secret is not being too slick or, as I often tell folks I work with, not being “too clever by half.” Overly clever, “slick” or “I’m going to win a design award”-type branding can be way too much, way too fast for many small enterprises.

Not every business needs or wants “design.” Homespun charm is great — as long as that’s all a business is aspiring to be (i.e. the local “mom and pop” “corner store” — or whatever).

But if a business is going to expand quickly (as opposed to the slow road of word of mouth), then I believe branding/marketing/advertising is necessary. I also agree, though, that in doing it (and incurring the additional pressures and costs) it may fundamentally change the very thing that made the business successful before. There’s a real risk of losing touch with what it was that worked on a small scale.

The wise consultant will consider this and discuss it with clients before undertaking any “upgrades” to an existing business.

This post and comments has been quite refreshing in a way, and put things into perspective. I always wrestled a bit with the idea that design can/should not be used everywhere because it is my bread and butter!

I believe there are two ends of the spectrum; 1) Too much design 2) Not enough design. Debatably I think there is no definite rule of where your business should sit. I think that it depends on the direction and type of business. The fact is that the right answer may lie at either end (1 or 2) or in the middle. Example: Global doughnut shop = 1, Local doughnut shop = 2, Shopping centre doughnut shop = 1.5

There is something artificial introduced when you have what is effectively an idea whore enter the equation. Design as a business forces designers to play up trends and levels of polish, even when it hardly benefits the mom and pop.

Or when designers care more about awards in their portfolio than the ROI, we have a clear conflict of interest.

I clicked “Send” on this post feeling like it had merely scratched the surface on this topic. Obviously, there are tons of variables at work here. I hoped that it would serve as a launching point for discussion.

“Rooting for the underdog” definitely resonates for a consumer like me. And that’s what makes me wonder whether we’re dealing with a matter of consumer expectations and perceptions. If “brand is the tipping point,” then are there some consumers who don’t want too much “brand” in their bagels? Would I rather not be advertised to when I’m trying to get my shirts dry cleaned? For me, the answer is a definitive “No.” My local dry cleaner literally backs up to an expensive “luxury” dry cleaning chain that not only offers pickup and delivery, but also free coffee, tea or lemonade — and a drive-thru where they’ll wash the windows on your car. They have a legitimate identity and a carefully crafted brand. No, thank you.

There’s something that happens to a product or service when branding is introduced. On the plus side, a business can separate itself from others in its category. Assuming that the small business owner desires more business, then it would make sense that he or she should hire someone to help them build a brand and establish a unique selling proposition. So shouldn’t designers rush to help these people build their businesses? Wouldn’t we want to help our local dry cleaner open three more stores next year?

My dilemma is that branding might also change customer perceptions in a negative way. When the consumer can sense that a business has made an effort at branding, they can view it as “selling out.” This assumes that, like me, many consumers have a sort of “branding radar.” They know when they’re being “sold” something. And sometimes, they don’t want it. It changes the consumer’s perception of the product or service.

Usually, my reaction is, “What am I having to pay for this branding?” And sometimes that cost isn’t an actual markup on the product or service. When a restaurant expands, they sometimes have to face the possibility of cutting corners on the food. So while the customer can now find “Brand X” donuts in three or four locations around town, will those donuts taste the same?

I guess what I’m saying is that mom-and-pops have the best, most “homemade” food. So we as designers should just quietly order our rib plates and potato salad — while being mindful not to mess up the mojo.

And as you’ll see in my subsequent posts, it all comes back to food.

Don’t know whether this response answers any more questions or merely keeps the conversation going. But I’m told that that’s all part of this “Web 2.0″ thing. Enjoy!

In many cases their lack of high polish design lends a charm that a “real” designer would never bring. You root for the underdog.

But in an industry where there are many similar goods, or you hope to show the emotional value of your service, brand is the tipping point to a sale. And if you lack a compelling brand it is the reason to keep driving by.

On the web I’d flip the priority. Brand is everything and product is nothing. People will buy almost anything if you look professional and trust worthy.