Brand Building and Aesthetics

Why the Way Things Look, Feel, and Sound Is Never Just About Looks

There is a moment most of us have experienced but rarely stopped to analyze. You walk into a store, open an app, unwrap a product, or simply glance at a logo on a passing vehicle — and within seconds you have already formed a feeling about the brand behind it. Not a considered opinion. Not a rational assessment. A feeling. Warm or cold. Trustworthy or suspicious. Exciting or dull. Premium or cheap.

That feeling is the work of aesthetics. And in brand building, it is among the most consequential work there is — yet it remains one of the most underestimated disciplines in business strategy.

---

What Brand Aesthetics Really Means

Beyond the Visual

Brand aesthetics is not simply visual identity, although visual identity is part of it. It encompasses the entire sensory and emotional signature of a brand: how it looks, certainly, but also how it sounds, how it feels to the touch, how it moves, how it speaks, and — most importantly — what emotional response all of these elements produce in the person encountering them.

Apple’s brand aesthetics is not just the minimalist white packaging or the clean lines of its product design. It is the specific weight of a MacBook lid, the resistance of a keyboard, the sound the startup chime makes, and the language used in every piece of communication. Each element is a deliberate aesthetic choice, and together they produce a cumulative emotional experience that communicates confidence, precision, and aspiration. No single element achieves this alone. It is the coherence across all of them that creates the effect.

• The Fundamental Principle – Coherence across every sensory and emotional touchpoint is what creates identity, trust, and meaning. This is the foundational principle of brand aesthetics—and the standard against which every brand-building decision should be measured.

The Strategic Role of Aesthetics

Aesthetics as Differentiation

In markets where functional differences between competing products are increasingly small, aesthetics frequently becomes the primary differentiator. When two smartphones have comparable processing power and feature sets, the decision often comes down to which one feels right in the hand, on the desk, and in the perception of others who see you using it.

Dyson understood this when it made the internal mechanisms of its vacuum cleaners visible rather than concealing them. At a time when vacuum cleaners were uniformly beige and anonymous, Dyson’s transparent dust chambers and bold industrial colour palette communicated engineering confidence in a way that no product specification sheet could. Customers paid a significant premium not just because the product performed better, but because it looked like a product that would. The aesthetics preceded the experience and shaped the expectation.

Aesthetics as a Trust Signal

There is a well-documented relationship between aesthetic quality and perceived trustworthiness. Consumers consistently associate well-designed, visually coherent brands with competence and reliability. The reverse is equally true: poor or inconsistent design signals carelessness, which raises doubts about the quality of the product or service behind it.

This has profound implications for emerging and mid-market businesses. A startup with genuinely superior technology but an amateur visual identity will frequently lose ground to a competitor with inferior technology but a polished, coherent brand aesthetic. If an organization cannot invest the care required to present itself well, what does that suggest about the care it brings to its actual product or service? First impressions, in business as in life, carry disproportionate weight.

Aesthetics as Competitive Moat

What makes aesthetic investment particularly valuable strategically is that it is difficult to replicate quickly. Competitors can copy a product feature or match a price point overnight. But the coherent aesthetic identity of a well-built brand — accumulated over years of consistent expression — cannot be cloned. It is embedded in organizational culture, in customer memory, and in the emotional associations that have compounded over time. This makes it one of the most defensible forms of competitive advantage available.

The Core Elements of Brand Aesthetics

Visual Identity: The Full Picture

Visual identity is typically the first element businesses address, and frequently the one they address most narrowly. The logo gets the attention; everything else is treated as secondary. This is backwards.

A logo is one instrument in a much larger orchestra. The full visual identity includes colour palette, typography, photography style, layout principles, iconography, and the use of white space — and each of these elements carries meaning.

Colour is one of the most powerful emotional triggers available to brand builders. Tiffany & Co. built significant brand equity around a single, trademarked shade of blue. This colour now conjures associations with luxury and exclusivity entirely independent of any accompanying words or images.

Typography carries similar weight. The typefaces a brand chooses communicate personality before a single word is read. Netflix’s investment in a custom-designed proprietary typeface — Netflix Sans — was not an aesthetic indulgence. It was a strategic move to own a piece of visual territory that no competitor could replicate.

---

Sound and Motion: The Expanding Frontier

As brand experiences extend into digital and audio environments, the acoustic and kinetic dimensions of aesthetics are becoming critical differentiators.

Intel’s five-note sonic logo is one of the most recognised sounds in the world, playing hundreds of millions of times per year across every device that carries Intel processors. Those five notes communicate reliability and technological confidence in a fraction of a second — working in environments where visuals cannot, including radio, podcasts, and background audio.

Motion design has similarly evolved from technical afterthought to brand-defining discipline. The way a digital interface animates as it loads, the transition between app screens, and the behaviour of interactive elements — these are aesthetic experiences that communicate care, competence, and personality.

Google’s Material Design system established motion principles that gave every Google product a consistent kinetic identity: fluid, responsive, purposeful. Users absorb these patterns as part of their felt sense of the brand, even if they would never articulate it in those terms.

---

Physical and Tactile Aesthetics

For brands operating in physical categories, the tactile dimension of aesthetics is often where the deepest emotional impressions are made. The way a luxury watch feels on a wrist. The sound a car door makes when it closes. The texture of a shopping bag from a premium retailer. These are not accidents — they are engineered aesthetic experiences designed to produce specific emotional responses that reinforce positioning.

Aesop built one of the most distinctive retail aesthetics in the world by treating every store as a unique architectural installation rather than a standardised retail format. Each Aesop store is designed for its specific location, using local materials and artisanal craftsmanship. The result is a brand that communicates intellectual curiosity and craft through the physical spaces it inhabits — values entirely consistent with its market positioning.

Building and Sustaining Aesthetic Equity

The Compounding Effect of Consistency

Every time a consumer encounters a brand’s aesthetic in a form coherent with their previous experience, the association is reinforced. The emotional response becomes more automatic. The brand occupies a more prominent position in the consumer’s mental architecture.

Coca-Cola has maintained the core elements of its visual identity — the distinctive script logo, the red, the contour bottle — for over a century. The aesthetic has evolved but has never been abandoned. The result is a visual signature so deeply embedded in global consumer consciousness that it has become a cultural artefact. That is the compounding effect of aesthetic consistency operating over a very long period of time.

When Aesthetic Evolution Is Necessary

Consistency does not mean rigidity. When a brand is repositioning — moving upmarket, targeting a new demographic, or signalling a fundamental shift in values — the aesthetic must evolve to support that shift. But the most successful aesthetic evolutions maintain threads of continuity that signal identity rather than abandonment.

Burberry’s transformation in the early 2000s illustrates this perfectly. Overextended and associated with a consumer profile inconsistent with its luxury positioning, Burberry responded by returning to heritage elements, adopting a dramatically elevated visual identity, and refining its colour palette. The evolution was significant but coherent. Customers who knew the old Burberry could recognise the new one. That continuity was as strategically important as the change itself.

Aesthetics from the Inside Out

The Internal Aesthetic Environment

There is a dimension of brand aesthetics rarely discussed but enormously important: the aesthetic experience of working inside a brand-driven enterprise. Workspaces, internal communications, and the quality of materials used in daily operations — all send signals to employees about how seriously the organisation takes its own values.

Pixar’s campus, designed to engineer accidental collisions between people from different disciplines, is an aesthetic as much as an architectural statement. The design communicates collaboration and creative collision through physical space. Employees experience the brand’s values before they ever encounter them in a brand document. That is aesthetics doing its deepest strategic work.

Integrating Aesthetics Into Brand Strategy

Brand building, at its best, is an integrated discipline in which strategy, culture, and aesthetics develop in dialogue with one another. When this integration is achieved, the brand becomes genuinely difficult to replicate — because it is not merely a set of visual assets that can be copied. It is the coherent expression of a particular way of being in the world. And that is what customers return to, advocate for, and build genuine loyalty around.

Reference

Aaker, D.A. (1996). Building Strong Brands. Free Press. https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/Building-Strong-Brands/David-A-Aaker/9780029001516

Olins, W. (2003). On Brand. Thames & Hudson. https://thamesandhudson.com/on-brand-9780500511459

Neumeier, M. (2006). The Brand Gap. New Riders. https://www.amazon.com/Brand-Gap-Distance-Business-Strategy/dp/0321348109

Lindstrom, M. (2005). Brand Sense. Free Press. https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/Brand-Sense/Martin-Lindstrom/9781416550693

Wheeler, A. (2017). Designing Brand Identity. Wiley. https://www.wiley.com/en-us/Designing+Brand+Identity-p-9781118980828

Kapferer, J.N. (2012). The New Strategic Brand Management. Kogan Page. https://www.koganpage.com/product/the-new-strategic-brand-management-9780749465155

Interbrand (2023). Best Global Brands Report. https://interbrand.com/best-global-brands/

Harvard Business Review — Design Thinking and Brand. https://hbr.org/topic/subject/design-thinking

Google Material Design System. https://material.io/design

Kantar BrandZ Global Reports. https://www.kantar.com/campaigns/brandz/global