Several years ago when asked to develop a logo for a startup and later their website - as their product was then still in definition - the project surfaced several interesting challenges.

Namely; How can you visually articulate the character of a brand in flux, and upon what value propositions will an end user/comsumer find relevance? Reviewing the project and tracking their progress, I had to field the question. Succinctly, are online products and tools, brands, or are they people?

I received an insightful response from Neil Robinson of LanZen - "... (it's) a problem with modern semantics...". Brands are entities which can and do produce products to diversify and acquire market share within their respective segments. This activity then creates and increases relevance within the respective sector and audience and usually results in increased brand value.

Yet, brick and mortar endeavors benefit from pre-established necessities; healthcare, clothing, transportation, luxury, finance, and education. The associative value provided by furnishing the solutions; Chinos, PPO, Hummers, and MBA's then only requires their transformation of a product into a "want". This can take various forms: elevating your standard of living via price points, accessibility, and value generated from perceived independence or self expression.

Online product launches unlike their offline counterparts have to create the "necessity" and often lacks historical context of presence and appreciation. For instance: although video has been around, there's little reference for video as a consumer tool other than recording personal activities. "Reality" was a broadcast creation offering video journalism has successfully migrated as a tool for online activist and self expressionist.

Yet, in regards its incorporation into all other areas of the web, video as a tool continues evolving. For instance - YouTube does very well within online communities, yet would it fair as well as does Google were it incorporated within Ford, Beatrice, Westinghouse, or Fisher Price? Not likely or not entirely.

As small firms were eager to secure their presence online, their focus was primarily on "Going Public" or reaching "IPO". The smarter firms continued further to develop their technology for integration into other areas.

Here the process of product definition was primarily a Sales and Marketing focus accepting the assumption that online "need" was proven. For those entities which have fallen off the map, it appears, accepting this position "need" became moot as with a clearly defined product it was less important as viral marketing would certainly lead to success.

Yet, many are gone. The recession is proving "need" is important. It's also proving that the establishment of "Necessity" is a two-front effort. Here Sales and Marketing can both define the product's "need" qualities for end-use while defining "need" within other areas furthering a product's applicable development.

Next:
Where do designers fit with this environment and how can we improve the value of our services and its return?