A logo is one of the most misunderstood design objects in business communication. It is simultaneously overestimated (“a great logo will transform our brand”) and underinvested (“let’s just get something done quickly, we’ll sort it later”).
The reality is more specific: a good logo does not transform a brand, but a bad logo systematically undermines it. And the criteria for distinguishing the two are more objective than most people think.
What a Logo Actually Is (and Is Not)
A logo is a visual identifier. Its primary function is recognition: when someone sees it, they should immediately think of the brand it represents.
A logo is not:
- A complete summary of the brand’s values
- A piece of art that should be beautiful in isolation
- A representation of what the company does (the Apple logo is not a computer)
- A permanent identity (it can and should evolve over time)
A logo is:
- A recognition mark that works consistently across all contexts
- An anchor for the brand identity system
- A tool that should work in contexts the designer did not explicitly anticipate
The Five Criteria for Effective Logo Evaluation
1. Recognisability
Can it be immediately identified as representing a specific brand? Recognisability is built through repetition over time, but the logo must have sufficient distinctiveness to be memorable after a few exposures.
Test: Show the logo for 3 seconds to someone who does not know the brand. Can they describe it accurately 24 hours later?
2. Scalability
Does it work at 16×16 pixels (favicon) as well as on a building facade? A logo with excessive detail, very thin lines or small text becomes illegible at small sizes.
Test: Print the logo at 15mm wide. Is every element still distinguishable? View it at 16×16 pixels. Is the shape still recognisable?
3. Versatility
Does it work in black and white? On dark backgrounds and light backgrounds? On photographs? In embossing or laser engraving? On screen and in print?
Logos that only work in full colour on white backgrounds have serious application limitations.
Test: View the logo in greyscale. Does it still communicate effectively? Place it on a dark background. Is it legible?
4. Durability
Will it still communicate the brand’s values in 10 years, or does it feel strongly tied to a current trend?
Trend-chasing logos (fonts popular this year, effects in fashion at this moment) require rebranding in 3-5 years. Logos with a clear strategic foundation tend to last longer.
5. Strategic Alignment
Does the logo visually communicate the brand’s values and positioning? A luxury brand with a playful logo creates dissonance. A sustainable brand with aggressive geometric shapes sends contradictory signals.
This is the most difficult criterion to evaluate objectively because it requires knowing the brand strategy. Which is why brand strategy must precede logo design.
Logo Types and When to Use Each
Wordmark
The brand name in a distinctive typographic treatment. Works when the name is short and distinctive (Google, FedEx, eBay).
Advantages: maximum name memorability, simple to scale. Disadvantages: requires a distinctive name, difficult to reduce to icon for small applications.
Lettermark (or Monogram)
Initials or abbreviation of the brand name (IBM, HBO, CNN). Works when the full name is long or difficult to pronounce.
Brandmark (Symbol Only)
Purely graphic symbol, no text (Apple, Nike swoosh, Twitter bird). Requires significant brand building before the symbol becomes independently recognisable. Generally not recommended as the only logo option for emerging brands.
Combination Mark
Symbol + wordmark, usable together or separately. The most versatile approach for most SMEs: the wordmark builds initial recognition, the symbol becomes increasingly recognisable over time.
Recommended for most SMEs building brand recognition.
Emblem
Symbol and text integrated in a single form (Starbucks, Harley-Davidson). Classic, solid feeling. Less flexible — difficult to use text and symbol separately.
Common Mistakes in Logo Design
Multiple conflicting concepts. A logo trying to communicate too many things communicates nothing. One strong, clear concept is better than three weak ones.
Illegible typographies. Script and display fonts chosen for aesthetics that become illegible at small sizes or in dark versions.
Raster format only. Logos delivered only in JPEG or PNG without vector source (SVG, AI, EPS) cannot be scaled without quality loss.
Trendy visual effects. Drop shadows, gradients, bevels — effects that date quickly and do not reproduce well in single-colour contexts.
Excessive complexity. A logo with 12 elements, multiple colours and fine lines works in a large print format and nowhere else.
How to Evaluate a Logo Design Proposal
Questions to ask the designer or agency:
- Can you show this in black and white version?
- How does it work at 16×16 pixels (favicon)?
- Does it work on a dark background?
- What is the strategic rationale for each visual choice?
- Can you provide vector source files (SVG, AI)?
Red flags:
- “It just looks good” as the only justification
- Only one version delivered (colour on white)
- No clearly explained strategic rationale
- Files only in JPEG or PNG
→ Find out how MarfCode builds lasting identity systems
Related: Brand Strategy vs Brand Identity: the order that matters | Rebranding: when it makes sense and how to do it
