In the world of branding and design, one question persistently echoes in our client meetings: “Why these colours?” It’s a seemingly simple question, yet the answer is far from straightforward.
As brand consultants, we are often asked to justify our colour choices, but the truth is that colours are contextual.
The selection of a brand’s palette isn’t merely about picking appealing hues. It’s a nuanced decision influenced by several factors:
- Typeface
- Category
- Application medium (print, digital, out-of-home)
- Current design trends
This complexity underscores a fundamental truth in the world of visual identity: colours don’t exist in isolation. Their meaning, impact, and effectiveness are deeply intertwined with their context.
The Color-in-Context Theory
The ‘Color-in-Context theory’ proposed by Andrew J. Elliot, a professor of psychology at the University of Rochester, and Markus A. Maier, a professor of psychology at the Ludwig-Maximilians-University (LMU), supports this contextual approach to colour.
While this theory might not be specific to branding, it offers valuable insights. According to their theory, the perception and psychological impact of colour are not fixed but rather depend on the environment and circumstances in which the colour appears.
This challenges the idea of universal colour effects and instead suggests that a complex interplay of physical surroundings, cultural associations, individual experiences, and situational factors shapes how we perceive and react to colours.
Let’s examine two pairs of brands that use similar colours but in different contexts:
- Shell vs. McDonald’s
The founder, Marcus Samuel, chose these colours for their practical significance in naval signalling. The vivid red made Shell’s kerosene cans stand out against the blue containers of their competitor, Standard Oil. Here, red and yellow signify visibility, differentiation, and industrial heritage.
While the chain has not officially confirmed this, colour psychology expert Karen Haller suggests that red stimulates appetite and attracts attention, while yellow evokes happiness and friendliness. For McDonald’s, these colours create an inviting, appetite-inducing atmosphere.
- Ford vs. Facebook
For the automotive giant, blue embodies strength, excellence, and grace, qualities the company strives to associate with its brand and products. This deliberate selection aims to convey specific brand attributes.
The blue palette was reportedly chosen because founder Mark Zuckerberg is red-green colourblind, making blue the most visually distinct colour for him. In this context, blue represents accessibility and personal preference, a choice born out of practicality.
These examples highlight the malleability of colour interpretation in branding.
The Importance of Context in Branding
Understanding the contextual nature of colour is crucial for effective brand design. It’s not just about choosing colours that look good together but about selecting hues that resonate with the brand’s identity, industry, and target audience. The success of a colour scheme lies not in the colours themselves but in how well they align with and enhance the overall brand story and context.
As brand strategists and designers, we must recognise that colour meanings aren’t universal. The effectiveness of colour choices depends heavily on context. Rather than relying on simplistic associations, we should consider how colours function within the specific context of each brand, category, audience, and medium. This nuanced approach leads to more effective and resonant use of colour in branding, creating visual identities that truly speak to their intended contexts.
