Integrated Package Design: an Interdisciplinary Approach to Package Design That Benefits Consumer Experience and Brand Perception
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
COMPUTER-AIDED DESIGN & APPLICATIONS, 2017 VOL. 14, NO. S1, 33–40 https://doi.org/10.1080/16864360.2017.1308079 Integrated package design: an interdisciplinary approach to package design that benefits consumer experience and brand perception Todd Timney and Peter Chamberlain University of Cincinnati, USA ABSTRACT KEYWORDS It is perplexing that Package Design has traditionally been taught as a course isolated in either Interdisciplinary; design Graphic or Industrial Design programs. To develop a truly unified brand narrative, package design education; consumer necessitates an interdisciplinary, human-centered, and collaborative approach, which expands on experience; branding; the knowledge of each discipline and reaches into other areas of expertise. Communicating a brand packaging message extends beyond the information and visual content applied to a package. The package’s physical structure, materials, finishes, and interactions can also strongly influence the consumer’s experience and subsequent perception of the brand. As a result, the effective communication of a brand’s message requires a symbiotic relationship between the languages of two- and three- dimensional form. This paper presents case studies of successful integrated package design projects produced through an interdisciplinary studio course with 30 undergraduate design students from Graphic Communication Design and Industrial Design. The experience challenged students and pro- fessors to negotiate the intersection between disciplines while clarifying their own areas of expertise. Industrial Design students applied their knowhow of materiality and form development using digital 3D software to support the structural packaging dimension of the studio, while Graphic Communi- cation Design students shared their informed perspective on brand messaging and 2-dimensional communication. This paper reflects on innovative new methods employed in the studio, the lessons learned, and the impact on future interdisciplinary collaborations in Package Design. 1. Introduction respective courses, Peter Chamberlain (Associate Pro- Successful package design leverages the whole pack— fessor, Industrial Design) and Todd Timney (Assistant applied graphics and structural form—to effectively com- Professor, Graphic Communication Design) uncovered municate a brand’s core values. Despite this, package this redundancy and became the catalyst for the planning designhastraditionallybeentaughtasacourseisolatedin of a new, innovative approach to package design based on either Graphic or Industrial Design programs. This seg- interdisciplinary collaboration. regated approach typically produces two types of results: Two significant logistical obstacles—course schedule 1.) An advanced use of materials and explorations of alignment and course administration—were overcome structural form with an unrefined sensitivity to applied with the introduction of a progressive revision to the type, image, and information hierarchy, from Industrial School of Design’s curriculum. In the fall of 2012, a Design-centric courses; 2.) Cardboard structural forms curriculum overhaul resulted in the introduction of sev- typically derived from templates, with a strong under- eral experimental studio courses dedicated to the con- standing of two-dimensional compositional space, visual cept of interdisciplinary collaboration. Running simul- communication, and printing technologies from Graphic taneously, these courses were opened to Year 4, junior- Design-centric courses. Until 2013, this too was the level(DAAPisafive-yearprogramasaresultofa approach to package design at the University of Cincin- robust cooperative education component to its curricu- nati’s College of Design, Architecture, Art, and Planning lum)acrossthethreedisciplinesintheSchoolofDesign: (DAAP). Two separate courses, each with the same core Graphic Communication Design, Industrial Design, and philosophy and approach, were taught in different disci- Fashion Design. plines. A fateful and unexpected conversation between An interdisciplinary, collaborative approach to pack- the two faculty members responsible for teaching these age design for Graphic Communication Design and CONTACT Todd Timney [email protected]; Peter Chamberlain [email protected] © 2017 CAD Solutions, LLC, http://www.cadanda.com 34 T. TIMNEY AND P. CHAMBERLAIN Industrial Design students, co-taught by professors from these values must be defined, communicated, and man- each respective discipline was a natural fit for this new agedacrossanetworkoftouchpoints(Figure1), and opportunity. Issues such as form & communication, with multiple stakeholders who are invested in the brand, branding, interaction, and sustainability engage the two and influential in the packaging design process. Accord- groups alike, leading to important considerations for ing to Gavin Ambrose and Paul Harris in Packaging the the appropriate use of type and image, color and fin- Brand,“Packagingisoftenthefirstpointofcontactthat ish, 3-dimensional form, semantic interaction cues, and aconsumerhaswithabrand,soitishugelyimportant materiality. Each discipline brought with it the particular that it initially draws their attention and also quickly expertise of the major, as well as an interest to learn more conveys messages that both present and support the about a holistic, integrated and symbiotic approach to the brand” [1]. topic. In the beginning of a brand’s life—while the orga- This paper presents case studies of integrated package nization is still asserting ownership of it—brand strate- design projects resulting from a recently concluded stu- gists, designers, and members of the organization’s lead- dio course (Fall 2014) involving students, from Graphic ership team collectively define what values they desire Communication Design and Industrial Design, and sev- consumers to associate with their product, service, or eral International Exchange students at the University company. But there comes a point in a brand’s life of Cincinnati’s College of Design, Architecture, Art, and when ownership is subtly transferred to the consumer. Planning. The course challenged students and professors AccordingtoPaulSouthgate,“Beyondthispoint,per- alike to negotiate the intersection between disciplines ception becomes reality. The brand’s values are no more while clarifying their own areas of expertise. andnolessthanwhattheconsumerbelievesthemto be” [8]. 2. Understanding the evolution of branding: 3. Defining the relationship between the brand more than a mark and package design From the ranch-owners and cattlemen in the Wild West Frequently, the package is the first point of contact that to the producer of consumer goods, branding has always aconsumerhaswithabrand.Therefore,itisincredibly been—at the most basic level—about asserting owner- important that it actively works to both quickly capture ship. To the cattlemen, a “brand” was simply a mark, their attention and communicate the values that sup- communicating a clear message to others which stated, port the brand. Despite the proliferation of data that ‘handsoff,thisismine.’Today,abrandissomuchmore demonstrateshowastrongbrandbenefitsacompany’s than just a mark. It has grown to include additional tangi- bottom line, many still view a brand like the cattle ranch- ble design elements—a name, symbol, typography, image ers, as simply a name, logo, or mark, which can be or some combination, which still serve to facilitate iden- slapped on anything to denote ownership. Surprisingly, tification. However, it’s meaning has also expanded to many companies still do not consciously and deliberately include the “intangible values” associated with a prod- use packaging design to encapsulate and communicate uct, service, or company. In other words, the mark is their brand’s set of values. Instead, they take a pas- notthebrand.Themarkismerelythesignorsymbolof siveapproach,focusingfirstandforemostonthefunc- the brand. In The Brand Gap, Marty Neumeier summa- tional necessities of the container (product protection, rizes,“Abrandisaperson’sgutfeelingaboutaproduct, raw material conversion costs, filling efficiency, distribu- service, or company. When enough arrive at the same tion, etc.) while patiently (and frequently fatally) waiting gut feeling, the company can be said to have a brand” for the package to absorb values from a plethora of other [6]. To think about a brand not as a name or logo or communication channels such as advertising. graphic mark, but rather as a set of ‘intangible values’, is In this scenario, any package design could sufficiently tostarttothinkaboutbrandinginamoresophisticated dothejob.Overtime,itwouldtakeonthoseextrinsi- and powerful way. Marketing professors and researchers, cally generated meanings even if they were far removed Van Rompay, Pruyn, and Tieke consider this holistic and from anything inherent in the design of the package itself. seamless product congruence as having a positive affect Unfortunately, time is rarely a luxury in the retail world on consumers, likely helping them to arrive upon positive as manufacturers feverishly compete for shelf space. So impressions [10]. why not design the pack to work actively for the brand Successful brand builders understand and embrace to communicate the very values which it is intended this evolution in meaning. They understand that to build to symbolize rather than serve as a passive receptacle a sustainable, long-term relationship with consumers for them? COMPUTER-AIDED DESIGN & APPLICATIONS 35 Figure 1. Brand