International Journal of Innovation Science

Innovating product appearance within brand identity

Martin Ondra, David Škaroupka, Jan Rajlich,
Article information:
To cite this document:
Martin Ondra, David Škaroupka, Jan Rajlich, (2017) "Innovating product appearance within
brand identity", International Journal of Innovation Science, Vol. 9 Issue: 2, pp.153-169, https://
doi.org/10.1108/IJIS-12-2016-0055
Permanent link to this document:
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJIS-12-2016-0055
Downloaded by UPPSALA UNIVERSITY At 14:08 10 July 2017 (PT)

Downloaded on: 10 July 2017, At: 14:08 (PT)

References: this document contains references to 35 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 78 times since 2017*

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-
srm:232583 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald
for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission
guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as
well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and
services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for
digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

 The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/1757-2223.htm

Innovating product appearance Brand identity

within brand identity

Martin Ondra, David Škaroupka and Jan Rajlich
Institute of Machine and Industrial Design, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering,
Brno University of Technology, Brno, Czech Republic 153
Received 14 December 2016
Revised 2 February 2017
Abstract 19 February 2017
Purpose – This paper aims to study the appearance of drills from one brand by using currently available Accepted 1 March 2017
design tools. It aims to find and discuss the relationship between appearance innovation and maintaining key
design features.
Downloaded by UPPSALA UNIVERSITY At 14:08 10 July 2017 (PT)

Design/methodology/approach – The innovation process is studied on drills of a Czech power tool

maker and a previously created concept of a new drill. First, the authors explore the similarities between the
designed concept and previous models of the brand by calculating the degree of similarity of given shape
features. Second, they capture the drills simple shape grammar and strive to generate a sketch of the concept.
Findings – Results show the use of several similar shape features from previous models in the innovated
design. Shape grammar can create a principally similar concept, but some innovations cannot be achieved this
way. A description of appearance innovation within brand identity in terms of shape grammar is given.
Research limitations/implications – The research is limited mainly to a small group of previous
products that can be analyzed. It is done only for one particular brand identity. When used with the shape
grammars, design generation is limited.
Practical implications – Better understanding of the innovative process aids designers in working with
designs for brand identity and may serve to shape grammar enhancement.
Originality/value – The paper describes what happens during the innovation of product appearance and
implicates enhancement and meaning of design analysis done by shape grammars and exploring similarities.
Keywords Innovation, Product design, Evaluation, Brand identity, Design tools, Shape grammar
Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction
Maintaining brand identity in product appearance is critical to achieve success in the current
competitive marketplace (Aaker, 2003). Recognition of brand identity in the design of a
product influences consumer response (Michell et al., 2001). Designing such products is a
challenge for designers, as they also need to adhere to other aspects such as technological
requirements, ergonomics, ecology, production costs and more (Ullman, 2010). The time
required for designing has also become an influencing variable, as it might be desired by
manufacturers to react more quickly to changes in customer demands, competition and
technological advancements (Prats et al., 2006). In reaction, studies on how to support and
evaluate the design process are appearing. Designers therefore not only can rely on their
intuition and experience but also have proven objective methods when designing products.

This work is an output of cooperation between project FSI-S-17-4144 and NETME Centre, regional R&D
centre built with the financial support from the Operational Programme Research and Development for International Journal of Innovation
Science
Innovations within the project NETME Centre (New Technologies for Mechanical Engineering), Reg. Vol. 9 No. 2, 2017
No. CZ.1.05/2.1.00/01.0002 and, in the follow-up sustainability stage, supported through NETME pp. 153-169
© Emerald Publishing Limited
CENTRE PLUS (LO1202) by financial means from the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports under 1757-2223
the “National Sustainability Programme I”. DOI 10.1108/IJIS-12-2016-0055
 IJIS Recognition of the brand in the appearance of a product is fostered by retaining key design
9,2 features of the design in continual development. Karjalainen states that this may relate to shape
features or other aspects of design (Karjalainen, 2003). In a subsequent work (Karjalainen and
Snelders, 2010), he states that designers should implement symbolic cues that serve as visual
references to the brand. These shapes or features may then be protected by patents, as they
represent visual distinctions from other brands (Holston, 2011). During innovation of product
154 appearance, designers must carefully apply these features, as they influence recognition of the
future product.
Shapes creating product appearance belonging to one group can be captured and maintained
by using shape grammar (Pugliese and Cagan, 2002). This also supports the designing process as
an opportunity to generate a large number of concepts in a short amount of time. However, shape
grammar only combines elements taken from captured designs, and innovation appears only as
designs that we might have missed during initial design. Studies performed on shape grammar
Downloaded by UPPSALA UNIVERSITY At 14:08 10 July 2017 (PT)

have been mostly concerned with the automotive industry.

Supporting the evaluation and quantification of design and its similarity to other products
was discussed by Ranscombe et al. (2012a). The degree of similarity and the bounding range
taken from analyzed products reflect whether products are similar. Although the rate of
similarity can be quantified and the identity captured, new shape elements in the products might
appear during innovation. These have unknown effects on brand identity. A further
understanding of how designers transformed brand identity during innovation might support
the design process for beginning brands or introduction of innovated products.
We aim to raise a discussion about designing for brand identity and evaluate whether the
product conforms to it. Drills produced by one brand were chosen to study this in a real case
scenario. First, we design a concept using our experience, and then we compare it to the
brand’s other products. We search for changes in design and limits of brand identity by
analyzing similarity and capturing features of four consecutively developed drills of the
NAREX brand in shape grammar. From our findings, we try to describe the design process
for brand identity by a shape grammar-based hypothesis.

2. Background
In a market with homogenous consumer needs, engineering design can be compared to looking
for a solution to a problem. The problem is specified by the manufacturer and management team,
and the solution is the design. This involves the whole design team in search of a cost-effective
and high-quality product. This process also has to be efficient and effective for the producer that
competes in the global market (Ullman, 2010). During the process, the design team performs
actions to find the ideal form of the product that responds correctly to given constraints (Bloch,
1995; Tovey, 1997). One of these constraints is product appearance.
Global competition is forcing producers to increase the value of their products while
reducing costs at the same time. (Behncke et al., 2014). Consumers are currently becoming
more heterogeneous (Ferguson et al., 2011), and their needs are harder to reflect. While the
need for reduced expenses on product development may be solved by model cost estimating
(Lee et al., 2011), target costing and value engineering (Behncke et al., 2014), and the needs of
consumers can be reflected by mass-customization through configurators, product
platforming and developing product architecture (Ferguson et al., 2010); all of these
phenomena are increasing the complexity of the design process. In addition, brands may
design and offer a variety of products, but they still leave some customers unsatisfied. With
more available computer tools and information about the products, the user innovation is
filling the gaps where the manufacturers cannot do so (von Hippel, 2009). The innovation
 process and new product development have to be studied more deeply if companies wish to Brand identity
compete in the global market.
Product innovation responds accordingly to consumer demands or technological
advancements, radically or incrementally, as summed up by Borgiani and Rotini (Borgianni
and Rotini, 2012). According to Morris (2009), innovation can be thought of as a stage gate
process. It is a state of constant progress that is important for companies to be competitive in
the market (Singh and Terzidis, 2015). Some compare the innovation process to storytelling.
Analysis of product usage is similar to hearing a story and being inspired by it. Finding a 155
solution to the problem is like telling a new story (Beckman and Barry, 2009). Designers are
continually innovating brand products. Whether only in appearance or technologically, the
design is influenced and so is the message that is sent to customers by their looks.

2.1 Design and brand identity

Downloaded by UPPSALA UNIVERSITY At 14:08 10 July 2017 (PT)

Product appearance in mass-market products is mainly influenced by brand identity. According

to Olins, every company has its own identity, whether it recognizes it or not. The question is if it
seeks to control its identity (Olins, 1994). Brand identity must be clearly defined (Karjalainen and
Snelders, 2010), as it is instantly communicated to others through any interaction with the brand’s
products, services, employees and others. Therefore, product appearance itself is an element of
communication between the brand and the customer.
Karjalainen studied design and brand identity (Karjalainen, 2003). He suggested using
symbolic cues throughout the product line or among product groups and their innovated
counterparts. Consistency in this design language is a vital part of maintaining brand identity in
design. These elements exist in three main levels – explicit (shapes), qualitative (traits connected
with design) and implicit (brand culture). For example, he presented two case studies on Volvo
and Nokia brands, both keeping the language of the design by different elements (certain shape
elements for Volvo and maintaining strategic personalization for Nokia).
Explicit shape elements are focal points of other studies concerned with design language.
The shape grammar method, which is a generative design method first presented by Stiny
and Gips (1972), was first used to study brand design elements by Pugliese and Cagan.
Capturing the language of the Harley–Davidson brand led to the understanding that shape
grammars are available to maintain the explicit shape elements and generate concepts by
combining them differently (Pugliese and Cagan, 2002). These generated concepts were
recognized as being a part of brand identity; however, when some of them changed
parametrically, the recognition was also changed. Brand elements were further studied by
building the Buick grammar (McCormack et al., 2004) which has proven the ability of shape
grammar to preserve shapes which contribute to the enhancement of communication and
understanding of design teams. Outlines of MINI brand cars have also been analyzed by the
shape grammar method (Ang et al., 2011). Aqeel developed shape grammar for the front
masks of the Porsche brand to highlight its key shape features, so they would be clearer in the
communication between marketing, design and engineering (Aqeel, 2015). As shape
grammars consist of a set of shapes that are derived from past products, it serves as a library
of features. Changes in these features and the rules used to modify them can be used to trace
how a design was innovated. None of the works on shape grammar use the rules to inspect
the number of features included in innovated designs.
For the consistent appearance of a product family the brand may use color, surface
texture, shape angularity, shape orientation and patterns. Similar angularity has been found
to be a significant factor for carrying the brand identity (Ranawat and Hölttä Otto, 2009). A
method for exploring similarities in products makes it possible to objectively quantify
differentiation in groups of studied products (Ranscombe et al., 2012a). First, the products
 IJIS have to be traced and decomposed to shape features (Ranscombe et al., 2012b). Then they are
9,2 analyzed in terms of proportion, orientation and shape similarity. An evaluation by this
method is based on the degree of similarity, which is influenced by the range of products
analyzed. It is stated that the product may be thought of in two ways – as being a part of the
group of products or as not being a part. However, the degree of similarity and its meaning
for product design with several features outside the boundaries are not mentioned.
156 A more complex method for performing shape analysis was presented by Hyun et al.
(2015). This method is also based on a mixture of several methods and provides an approach
on how to quantify the style of car designs. One way to identify, extract and interpret similar
shapes was presented by Bluntzer et al. (2014). Although not sufficient for finding the
relationship between the identity and a specific country, it has shown that geometrical
differences can be studied among shapes.

2.2 Shape grammars

Downloaded by UPPSALA UNIVERSITY At 14:08 10 July 2017 (PT)

As presented above, a shape grammar is a generative method (Stiny, 1980). It is used for
various options in engineering design (Cagan, 2001). Mainly, it enables the creation of an
infinite number of concepts from a finite number of elements. This ability offers great
potential throughout the creative process. However, concepts that are created consist only of
the given elements in the shape grammar. Rules may be parameterized to fill in
transformations of shape features in concepts. However, this parameterization also creates
another set of potential solutions beyond what the designers would normally consider as
impossible. This may result in creating a truly innovative concept with a clearly different
solution, but it could also result in a completely wrong solution with poor usability.
The successful capture of brand identity was achieved mainly in the automotive industry
for Buick, Porsche, MINI and Harley–Davidson brands (Pugliese and Cagan, 2002;
McCormack et al., 2004; Ang et al., 2011; Aqeel, 2015). Other works about shape grammar
were focused on the creation of a tool to support the design process (Prats et al., 2004;
McCormack and Cagan, 2002). Shape grammars offer great support for the process in terms
of building design rules and shape repositories, as well as in following parallel lines of
thought (Bernal et al., 2015). As the actions performed by the designers can be taken as
computations, making grammars are recently introduced and show more general application
(Knight and Stiny, 2015).

3. Materials
Cooperation with an actual brand had to be considered to evaluate how a designer creates an
appearance for a product with focus on maintaining the brand identity. Therefore, a case
study of designing drills for the NAREX brand was made to simulate this. NAREX is a Czech
brand of power tools that was founded after the Second World War. The company is mostly
recognized in the Czech Republic for the impact drill EC 513D (Plate 1, top left), which started
production in the 1970s. Since then, it has been consecutively innovated to three models of
impact drills.
EVP 13C-2H3 (Plate 1, top right) was the first successive drill to the EC 513D. In 1991, the
next model of the drill (EVP13E-2H3) was introduced (Plate 1, bottom-left), which was
equipped with continuous regulation of speed. It was the first drill that joined handle and
gearbox by an orange element. EVP13H-2C (Plate 1, bottom right) is the newest model,
introduced in the 2000s and designed by Miloslav Šindler. The design featured smoothly
tensed curves and a new way to connect the gearbox and engine parts. Also, the newest drill
contains a rubber backing on the handle of the drill. Some other tools such as angle grinders
and battery powered tools were available for further analysis.
 Brand identity

157
Downloaded by UPPSALA UNIVERSITY At 14:08 10 July 2017 (PT)

Plate 1.
Drills of the NAREX
brand

We decided to create a concept (Plate 2) of a drill that would be considered a future product
of the NAREX brand with innovated appearance before analyzing any previous products by
a quantifiable method. Our drill design was based on the experience of a junior designer. It is
stated as a task to design a concept of an impact drill that would follow the brand identity of
NAREX and enhance comfort during use. The drill was designed non-generatively by
following a method of work: analysis of current state of the art, then presenting some
variants and choosing one final concept. For the analysis, the designer searched for common
technical parameters of drills and roughly summarized products available on the market. We
also visited a NAREX brand museum that stores all their products. The designer studied the
shapes of other brand products without any quantifiable method, and we assume that he
performed the work to the best of his potential. At the concept stage, the work was considered
ready to be evaluated for appearance similarity by the method presented by Ranscombe et al.
(2012a). The main thought resulting from this concept was to add greater rubber backing on
the handle part to absorb more vibration during drilling. The shape is inspired by the
popular design of the EC 513D drill.

Plate 2.
Designed concept of
impact drill
 IJIS 4. Methods
9,2 For similarity analysis and evaluation, we will use a side view of the drill. It is the side that
is exposed to customers in shops with power tools. Photographs of products were taken and
traced in the 3D software Rhinoceros 5.0. This has been similarly done with the concept.
Traced shapes of drills were decomposed to features (Figure 1). Every drill includes an
engine, handle and a gearbox. They also include control buttons – two switches for the speed
158 or impact control that are located on the gearbox. The handle incorporates a button for
locking its main power switch, which is used to control the drill. A logo sticker and
ventilation holes are present in decomposed features. The last included features were lines
created by the curvature of the surfaces. These are similar to muscles in automotive design.
The chuck and jaws were not studied, as they are not designed for appearance by the
designer.
Products belonging under one brand identity have to be similar in appearance. The key
elements of design are, however, not known in our case. Using the method for exploring
Downloaded by UPPSALA UNIVERSITY At 14:08 10 July 2017 (PT)

similarities, we will try to understand how the design of drills evolved in terms of similarity
to previous products. We assume that models without innovated appearance will logically
look the same as a previous one. However, as the design should adhere to a single brand
identity, we expect several features will be more similar across the product innovation than
other. To fully belong to a brand identity group, the analyzed product would need to result in
a degree of similarity below 1. In other words:
H1. A product that fully respects brand identity should be within the bounding range of
shape similarity.
The shape features have been divided into 100 sections in the case of shape feature similarity.
Drills that are going to be analyzed in this step are EVP 13E-2H3, EVP13H-2C and our newly
designed concept. The similarity of EVP13C-2H3 to its predecessor EC 513 D cannot be
evaluated by calculating the degree of similarity.
Actual collection of data from decomposed shapes was provided by Grasshopper plugin
for Rhinoceros 3D software. We have devised a structure of commands, which calculates
areas and length of features (functions of the CAD software), distances from incremental
points on their outlines to feature area centroid and listed them to MS Excel software for
further studies. Similarly, for orientation analysis, the command structure calculated the
lowest and the highest values of outline points and compared them to feature area centroid.
All numerical data for all shape features were copied to MS Excel tables, and mean values
from them were calculated by in-built functions of the software.
The same decomposed features from the similarity analysis were used to create simple,
non-parametrical shape grammar that would capture the language of the NAREX brand and
can be handled manually in CAD software. The shape grammar consists of 59 rules and an
initial shape (Figure 2). Rules 1 to10 are used to generate a different back side of the handle.
Specifically, 1 to 3 create different top ledges of the handle part. The next 7 rules consider
different shapes of the back part and optional rubber. Rules 11 to 17 are used to generate
different front parts of the handle, as well as to create the main control switch and the locking

Figure 1.
Levels of
decomposition –
Silhouette – Parts –
Muscles and buttons –
Graphics
 button. Rules 18 and 19 are used to create a muscle curve around the locking button Brand identity
characteristic for the handle of the newer models. Rules 20 and 21 close the shape of the
handle. Rule 22 is inserted so that splitting of the handle does not occur. Rules needed to split
the grip of the drill and the engine part, are 23 to 26 (Figure 3).
Rules 27 to 35 are used for generating optional air suction and joining element, as well as
different speed controls. Rule 36 creates the shape of the whole gearbox, which is then
159
M6
E1 E2
M3
V1
M4 Figure 2.
E3 M5 E4 Initial shape
Downloaded by UPPSALA UNIVERSITY At 14:08 10 July 2017 (PT)

E2 H1
R3 H5 H5
R1
1 H3
17 B1

E4 E4 9 B2

E2 H1

2 H3 R2
R2
D3
18 B2
E4 E4 R1 D4

H1 H2 H1
10
3 H3 H3 D3
19 B2

E4 E4 R2 D4
R2

R1 R2
H3 R2
4 11 20 H7
D1
E4 H5

R2 H6
R2 R2
H7
21
D1
R1 H5
H3

5 12 E4

H6
22 D1

R2 H5
H5
B1
H3 R1 13 H9
H6
23 L1 L1
6 H7
D5
H5
H5
R2
14 B1
D2

H6
H3 R1 24
H7
D1 D
7 H5
H5
B1

R2 15 25 D
D3 D2 D
H6

R3 H7
R1

8 H5 H5 Figure 3.
D
16 B1
26 D4
D5
D
Shape grammar Rules
R2
1-26
R2
 IJIS modified by rules up to Number 47 (Figure 4). Ventilation holes are created by Rules 48 to 51.
9,2 The next three rules generate different places or sizes of the logo sticker. The last rules
generate muscle curves in the representations (Figure 5).
Shape grammar has to be verified by generating all four representations of the parental
products. By starting with the initial shape, the back of the handle part of EC 513 D may be
created by applying Rules 1, 3 and 4. The following Rules are 11, 14, 16, 20 and 22. These will
160 make sure that the handle is closed and not divided in the middle. The joining element with
the hole for air suction may be created by applying Rules 27 and 30. Rule 34 places a speed
control switch. The gearbox is created by Rule 36 and modified by Rules 44, 47, 41, 43 and 37.
Rule 49 applies the vents, Rule 53 applies the logo sticker and Rules 55 and 57 apply the
muscle curves. After Rule 57, no further rules can be applied.
Drill EVP 13-2H3 can be generated by using Rules 1, 3, 4, 11, 13, 16, 20, 22, 29, 30, 33, 36,
45, 38, 42, 41, 51, 54 and 56, respectively. EVP 13E-2H3 can be made from the sequence of
Rules 1, 5, 10, 12, 15, 17, 19, 21, 22, 28, 31, 33, 36, 45, 39, 42, 40, 50, 54 and 56. The steps to
Downloaded by UPPSALA UNIVERSITY At 14:08 10 July 2017 (PT)

generate the EVP13H-2C are 2, 7, 9, 11, 15, 17, 18, 21, 24, 25, 48, 23, 26, 28, 32, 35, 36, 44, 46, 40,

E1 J1
B5 G2 G1 G2
I1
33
B3
40
27 I2 B4 B6
E3 J2 G2 G1 G2 M7
B5
41
B3

E1 J1
34 M0
I1 B4
B6
42 G3
G2
G3
G2

28
I2 B3 B5
G2
E3 J2
35 43 G3
B4 B6
E1 J1
G3
I1 G3
29 J1 G2 G1 44 G4 G4
I2 G3 G5
M1 G5
G4
E3 J2
36 G5

I1 J2 G6 G3 G3
B3
45 G4
30 I2 B4 G5
G5 G5

37 G6
M2
G3 M2
M8

31 I1 B3
G5
46 G4

Figure 4. I2 B4 38 G6
M2
M8
G5
G6 M8 G8

Shape grammar rules

for joint, speed buttons I1 B3
G5
G3 G3

and gearbox 32 39 M2
47 G4
I2 B4 G6 M8

M3 H9 M6
48 V1
M4
L1
53 L1 L2 M3
56
M4
M5
M3 M3
49 V1 L1
M4 M4 54 L1 L2
M1
M5

57
M3 M3 M2
50 V1 L1 M6 M8
M4 M4
M3
55 M4

Figure 5. M3 M3 M5 58 M8
M5
51 V1 L1
Shape grammar rules M4 M4

for ventilation, logo

M2
and muscles 52 L1 L2 59
R3
 43, 52, 58 and 59. By generating all four parental representations, we consider the shape Brand identity
grammar verified and usable for testing:
H2. Design fully respecting the brand can be created from shape grammar rules that
were set by previous products.
To better understand the process of what features were maintained in the design, we can find
rules that are unique or shared among the parental products. To confirm our hypothesis, we
seek to generate a concept similar to the design created earlier. Logically, if the concept can 161
be generated, it has to consist of the brand identity elements. Any inconsistencies present in
the generated design will show that the design does not share the same features of the brand
identity.

5. Results
5.1 Exploring similarities
Downloaded by UPPSALA UNIVERSITY At 14:08 10 July 2017 (PT)

When looking retrospectively at NAREX drills and their respective shape features, the
results show dissimilarities throughout the appearance innovation process. In the first two
drills, the muscle curves look different. The shape evolved mainly by joining the parts
together, as a newer engine and mechanics were placed into the body. Both drills use the
same main switch and share a couple of features, but, because we have no other group to
compare them to, we cannot outline this by quantification. The results for the successive drill
EVP 13E-2H3 are shown in Table I.
The EVP 13E-2H3 fits the bounding range only in terms of muscle curves and logo
features. The numbers show the biggest differences in the handle and main switch feature
parts. A large degree of similarity indicates innovation of the switch size and shape but not
its relative position on the product. The same results are shown for ventilating holes. The
handle is similar in proportion but differs greatly in shape. The outline of the drill does not fit
the bounding range of the constructed identity, but the curve constructed from the results
has a similar progression to an average of two previous drills.
Results forEVP13H-2C (Table II) show it fits the bounding range of similarity in logo and
the main switch feature. As opposed to the EVP13E-2H3, it does not share muscle curves that
are similar to previous models. This is also projected to the handle and engine features. The
handle and gearbox feature parts are the most outside of the bounding range, but, overall, the
silhouette results are better than the previous model.

Degree of similarity Silhouette Gearbox Engine Handle Muscle Main switch Logo Venting
Table I.
Proportion 0.334 1.595 1.79 0.863 0.538 10.353 0.138 3.036 Average degree of
Orientation (mean) N/A 4.932 1.08 1.334 0.87 3.274 1.417 1.707 similarity for
Shape (mean) 4.004 4.484 1.871 18.687 0.416 10.699 0.446 3.359 features–EVP13E-2H3
Average 2.169 3.67 1.58 6.961 0.608 8.109 0.667 2.701 to previous products

Degree of similarity Silhouette Gearbox Engine Handle Muscle Main switch Logo Venting
Table II.
Proportion 1.738 10.397 3.214 13.006 0.82 0.527 0.653 1.696 Average degree of
Orientation (mean) N/A 1.303 4.299 1.599 2.959 1.062 1.172 0.911 similarity for
Shape (mean) 0.956 5.136 7.332 2.231 4.194 0.529 0.921 1.335 features–EVP13H-2C
Average 1.347 5.612 4.948 5.612 2.658 0.706 0.915 1.314 to previous products
 IJIS The new drill’s concept is found to be similar in terms of the proportion of the complete
9,2 product outline, with a degree of similarity 0,409. The gearbox and engine features results
are very close to the mean value, with degree values 0,053 and 0,003, respectively. The
muscle proportion is found to be dissimilar as the result is 0,971, with a 5,573,632 mm2
difference in area to mean value. The logo feature is also dissimilar with a degree of 1,496.
The ventilation and main switch of the concept are similar in proportion.
162 The similarity of orientation shows that the engine, muscle and main switch features
(Figure 6) are similar with degrees of similarity lower than 0,5. The handle feature part is
similar with the exception of the maximum “x” value, differing by 45,317 mm and resulting
in a degree of 2,348. The ventilation holes are different from the analyzed group of products
in x coordinates of the maximal point and feature centroid, with both values slightly above
the 0,5 degree of similarity. The gearbox feature part is dissimilar in the location of centroid
and “x” coordinate of minimum point. The logo feature has values of degree of similarity
below 0,5 only in case of “y” coordinates of centroid and minimal point (Figure 7). The
Downloaded by UPPSALA UNIVERSITY At 14:08 10 July 2017 (PT)

concept outline shape is outside the boundaries between Points 19 and 27 (handle top ledge)
and again between 55 and 62 (front part of the gearbox feature). The mean degree of
silhouette similarity is 0,267, and results are shown in Figure 8. The engine feature is similar
in all but seven points. The gearbox feature is different in the area of the upper speed switch.
The handles of the brand drills differ largely in their outlines; the average degree of similarity
for the handle feature is 0,94. The logo designed on the new drill has a degree of similarity
larger than the needed limit in proportion and shape, resulting in an average degree of
similarity of 1,699 for 100 plotted points.
By combining the results of previous analyses, we get an average degree of similarity for
each of the concept features. The overall outline is found similar in proportion and
orientation. The degree of similarity is below the value of 1 at the engine, gearbox, control
button and ventilation features. The handle, the muscle curve and the logo are found to be
dissimilar as per Table III.

5.2 Generating the concept

The number of shape grammar rules for respective parental drills is shared in Table IV. The
first of the NAREX drills in this grammar would need 21 rules to be applied for creating its

70
Average 60
drill concept
EVP 13 H-2C 50
EVP 13C-2H3
40
EVP 13-2H3
EC 513D 30

20

10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Figure 6.
Main switch
orientation
 Brand identity

163

60 50 40 30 20 10

20
Average
30 drill concept
Downloaded by UPPSALA UNIVERSITY At 14:08 10 July 2017 (PT)

EVP 13 H-2C
40
EVP 13C-2H3
50 EVP 13-2H3
Figure 7.
EC 513D
60 Logo feature
orientation

range

Drill concept

Average
Radial length

Figure 8.
Result of the concept
Outline points
outline analysis

Degree of similarity Silhouette Gearbox Engine Handle Muscle Main switch Logo Venting
Table III.
Proportion 0.409 0.053 0.003 0.424 0.971 0.355 1.496 0.167 Average degree of
Orientation (mean) N/A 0.664 0.18 0.512 0.236 0.198 0.554 0.347 similarity for
Shape (mean) 0.267 0.221 0.199 0.987 0.561 0.34 1.699 0.36 features– concept to
Average 0.338 0.312 0.127 0.641 0.589 0.297 1.25 0.291 previous products

sketch. The innovated shape of EVP 13C-2H3 has to be created with several different rules.
The first innovation shares some of the elements with its predecessor. Even the last of the
drills shares rules with the first generation of the product appearance. Innovation of every
drill takes a couple of previous features and adds some new ones. Rules 6 and 8 are not used
in any of the original designs and are the result of feature combinations.
First innovation of the drill produced new rules for the bottom ledge of the handle, a
different button for speed control and gearbox shape. A new rule to adhere to the ventilation
 IJIS shape had to be made. The EVP13E-2H3 also needed new shapes for gearbox and the
9,2 ventilation. The most innovated part was the handle which brought rules for back, front and
bottom parts with a new main switch. The final drill in the line demonstrated innovation in
the set of shapes by a lowered top ledge, rubber backing, divided handle part and the
ventilation. The air outlet was changed every time the drill had been innovated. The logo
maintained a similar shape but its location changed with the innovations.
164 By successive application of Rules 1, 5, 8, 11, 16, 14, 20, 22, 27, 30, 33, 36, 45, 39, 40, 42, 49
and 54, we can generate the most similar concept in the design principle (Figure 9). It includes
rubber backing on the handle, a flat bottom and top ledge of the handle. The gearbox, with a
curved bottom side, is joined with the engine by the characteristic element. The generated
concept also includes speed and impact control switches on the side and on the top of the
gearbox. The shape of the generated concept has some differences, which cannot be resolved
by the current set of shapes in the grammar.
One of these problematic parts is the top curve of the engine, which is slightly lowered in one
Downloaded by UPPSALA UNIVERSITY At 14:08 10 July 2017 (PT)

third of its length. Other features are the speed control button and muscle curve that goes behind
the engine part. However, several shape elements can be generated. The bottom of the engine,
joining element, front part of the handle and control buttons are within the generated sketch. The
rubber backing on the handle can also be generated, although dissimilar in shape.

6. Discussion
The shape features of the last two drills were found not similar to previous models. The
degree of similarity of the main switch of EVP13E-2H3 showed a large dissimilarity, as a new
shape of the switch was introduced to the design. The same switch has been used in the

Shared rules with

Product Rules needed EC 513D EVP13C-2H3 EVP13E-2H3 EVP 13 H-2C

EC513D 21 21 0 0 0
Table IV. EVP 13C-2H3 19 10 9 0 0
Shared rules between EVP13E-2H3 20 3 5 12 0
parental products EVP13 H-2C 24 4 0 5 15

Figure 9.
Generated concept
that is most similar to
design
 design of EVP13H-2C and the degree of similarity showed better results. The best results Brand identity
were found for the logo feature of the respective drills and muscle curves of EVP13E-2H3. We
conclude that these shapes were maintained throughout the innovation process and are the
key features of the brand identity described in the literature review. Despite not fully
reflecting the identity in all of the features, the drills were manufactured under one brand and
represent it on the market currently, and only key features were maintained during
innovation. This statement rejects our H1: that all features have to be found similar to respect
the brand identity. 165
Consistency in keeping some but not all of the features is supporting current literature
relating to brand identity. In comparison to explored similarities in BMW vehicle fascias
(Ranscombe et al., 2012a), the NAREX brand appears to be less consistent in more shape
features. Designers in BMW were able to keep the grill and headlamps of the car similar
across their car models but were not consistent in fog light and air intakes. In NAREX, the
designers were able to maintain logo feature and some muscle curves from past generations.
Downloaded by UPPSALA UNIVERSITY At 14:08 10 July 2017 (PT)

Principally, the results of both case studies are similar.

The designed concept is found similar in gearbox, engine, main switch and ventilation
features to brand products, and we can conclude that it would need to be modified in certain
places to fully belong to brand identity (Figure 10). The resulting degrees of similarity for general
outline, handle and muscle curves were better than even previous brand products but are worse
for the logo feature. Our design would have to be changed to fully respect the bounding range
given by the appearance of brand products. But as we have shown in the analysis of previous
models, brand identity is in our case given by the similarity of muscle and logo features. From this
point of view, our concept would belong to NAREX brand identity, but its logo feature should be
redesigned, as it was the only resulting as dissimilar feature.
When producing a new shape, which results from innovation, to product appearance, we
cannot achieve complete similarity and retain the innovation. Similarity to previous brand
products may foster recognition, but the greater the similarity the lower the innovativeness
of product appearance. This raises the question of how several differences in feature shapes
affect recognizability of the identity in the product. As similar angularity is significant for
product variants (Ranawat and Hölttä, 2009), we believe that the size of the bounding range
and the degree of similarity are the keys. They may serve as quantification of how clearly the
brand identity is defined, or, from a different point of view, how radical is the innovation of
appearance. The brand can set ranges for features that it wishes to maintain and to ones that

Figure 10.
Indication where the
concept should be
redesigned according
to analysis
 IJIS are not as important, or the designer can analyze the previous designs in search for key
9,2 design features and the range of their similarity.
Shape grammars show supportive results to the same theory of using key elements. We
used it to generate a concept from a given set of shapes, which were derived from impact
drills and analyzed the rules, which show the evolution of a drill by one brand identity. Every
parental drill was based on feature shapes from the past but added nearly the same amount
166 of rules that are unique for it. For EVP13H-2C, the Rules 8 and 9 are important, as they
brought the innovation of rubber backing, which could not be achieved with only the
previous sets of shapes. Addition of shapes to designs during their innovation rejects our H2.
The brand was maintained only by key shape features.
We conclude that the set of shapes and set of rules is innovated with new products. The
designer enhances the sets with new ones while adopting previous key brand features.
Previous studies considering the shape grammars worked mainly with the possibility of
creating new concepts by combining previous shapes, but this would not work when a brand
Downloaded by UPPSALA UNIVERSITY At 14:08 10 July 2017 (PT)

creates their first product. In that situation, no current rules exist, and only new rules form
the identity. We believe that by evolution of the shape and rule sets, new elements are added
until there are only shapes and rules that form such combinations that all products within the
identity could be generated.
Using shape grammar to create a new appearance that we designed is difficult. First, it
consists only of elements provided at the beginning; therefore, generating a concept that would be
100 per cent the same as a concept designed through a non-generative approach is impossible.
However, in principal similarity a concept can be designed, but without special details that could
be the designer’s intention. Second, this might depend on the size of the set of given shapes. Our
study is limited by the amount of products created by the brand we have analyzed. If the shape
grammar consisted of more drills, more similar concepts could be generated.
On the contrary, our design contains several shape elements that were already present in
the shape grammar. Sets of shapes and rules would have to be enhanced to generate a sketch
of our design. This is in accordance with results from exploring the similarities. Some of the
features are different, and it may be up to the brand to decide whether they are important.
From these findings, we cannot clearly state that the concept would belong to the identity.
From the abovementioned findings, we think that a non-generative process of design for
brand identity may be described by a generative approach. By joining different sets of
shapes and rules, a designer creates new shape grammar, and results from this generation
are sketches of new designs. This is distinct to previous literature that considered designing
with shape grammars, as it tested only whether new concepts that are not in the set of
parental products can be generated. We believe there is a relationship between being the
same and belonging to the brand identity and being different and innovative. This
relationship should define the boundaries of where the shape can be changed or innovated
and where it should remain similar for fostering brand recognition.

7. Conclusion and suggestions for further research

We are contributing to the discussion of innovating design for purposes of brand identity by
evaluating the design of drills for a power tool brand and creating a new design. Here, we
introduce a point of view which reflects on how that design is made and how it can be studied.
It is an evolutionary process of adding shapes to a basis that the designer is building upon.
A shape grammar-based hypothesis can be concluded. The new design concept is the result
of set union with starting shape grammar sets of shapes and rules with added sets of
innovation shapes and rules. This hypothesis is supported by the result of the case study.
Using this approach in shape grammars can lead to the enhancement of their usability in
 design practice. However, the limitations of designing while maintaining full recognition of Brand identity
brand identity is the remaining question. Ideally, the designer in practice should analyze
previous products for similarities. Then, depending on the brand, he should innovate or
maintain shape features in his design for remaining within the identity. Every identity is
defined but less or more clearly.
The clear definition and measurement of brand identity by a range of explored
similarities in shape is suggested for further research. The values here show how clearly the
brand we were working with is defined, but this may vary across product categories and 167
brands. Further expansion can be made to relationships between brand performance and the
size of the bounding range to see whether identities that are defined more clearly are
performing better on the market. Analysis of previous products can help brand managers
and designers for better knowledge of identity so they can build better strategies for
fostering recognition of their products.
Our study is currently limited by the fact that we do not know which features are brand
Downloaded by UPPSALA UNIVERSITY At 14:08 10 July 2017 (PT)

related and which features are related to whole category. The sample of the drills is small,
and further research could focus on a different product by the same manufacturer to see
which shapes they wish to maintain.
The continuous process of designing can be captured by shape grammar rules. Further
studies can relate to what actually happens during design, how the shape repository of the
brand expands or how the rules differ when the shape grammar is parameterized. By
studying designs from experienced designers by computational methods could lead to more
efficient design-centered tools to support the creative process. To develop these tools, we
suggest comparing current designing processes and computational algorithms and
searching for possibilities to make them more similar.

References
Aaker, D. (2003), Brand Building: Budování značky: Vytvoření silné značky a její úspěšné zavedení na trh,
Computer Press, Brno.
Ang, M., Chong, H., McKay, A. and Ng, K. (2011), Capturing Mini Brand Using a Parametric Shape
Grammar, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 1-12, available at: http://dx.doi.
org/10.1007/978-3-642-25200-6_1
Aqeel, A. (2015), “Development of visual aspect of Porsche brand using CAD technology”, Procedia
Technology, Vol. 20, pp. 170-177, available at: www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S22120
17315002054
Beckman, S. and Barry, M. (2009), “Design and innovation through storytelling”, International Journal
of Innovation Science, Vol. 1 No. 4, pp. 151-160, available at: www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/
10.1260/1757-2223.1.4.151
Behncke, F., Maisenbacher, S. and Maurer, M. (2014), “Extended model for integrated value
engineering”, Procedia Computer Science, Vol. 28, pp. 781-788, available at: http://linkinghub.
elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1877050914001562 (accessed 29 January 2017).
Bernal, M., Haymaker, J. and Eastman, C. (2015), “On the role of computational support for designers in
action”, Design Studies, Vol. 41, pp. 163-182, available at: www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/
pii/S0142694X15000551
Bloch, P. (1995), “Seeking the ideal form: product design and consumer response”, Journal of Marketing,
Vol. 59 No. 3, pp. 16-29.
Bluntzer, J., Ostrosi, E. and Sagot, J. (2014), “Car styling: A CAD approach to identify, extract and
interpret characteristic lines: a CAD approach to identify, extract and interpret characteristic
lines”, Procedia CIRP, Vol. 21, pp. 258-263, available at: www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/
pii/S2212827114007409
 IJIS Borgianni, Y. and Rotini, F. (2012), “Innovation trajectories within the support of decisions: insights
about S-curve and dominant design models: insights about S-curve and dominant design
9,2 models”, International Journal of Innovation Science, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 259-268, available at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1260/1757-2223.4.4.259
Cagan, J. (2001), “Engineering shape grammars: where we have been and where we are going”,
Formal Engineering Design Synthesis, Cambridge University Press New York, New York, NY,
168 pp. 65-92.
Ferguson, S., Olewnik, A. and Cormier, P. (2011), “Exploring marketing to engineering information
mapping in mass customization: a presentation of ideas, challenges and resulting questions: a
presentation of ideas, challenges and resulting questions”, available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.111
5/DETC2011-48742
Ferguson, S., Olewnik, A., Malegaonkar, P., Cormier, P. and Kansara, S. (2010), “Mass customization: a
review of the paradigm across marketing, engineering and distribution domains: a review of the
paradigm across marketing, engineering and distribution domains”, available at: http://dx.doi.
Downloaded by UPPSALA UNIVERSITY At 14:08 10 July 2017 (PT)

org/10.1115/DETC2010-28753
Holston, D. (2011), The Strategic Designer Tools and Techniques for Managing the Design Process,
HOW Books, Cincinnati, OH.
Hyun, K., Lee, J., Kim, M. and Cho, S. (2015), “Style synthesis and analysis of car designs for style
quantification based on product appearance similarities”, Advanced Engineering Informatics, Vol. 29
No. 3, pp. 483-494, available at: www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1474034615000373
Karjalainen, T. (2003), “Strategic design language – transforming brand identity into product design
elements”, Proceedings of the 10th International Product development Management Conference,
Bruxelles, pp. 10-11.
Karjalainen, T. and Snelders, D. (2010), “Designing visual recognition for the brand”, Journal of Product
Innovation Management, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 6-22, available at: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/j.154
0-5885.2009.00696.x (accessed 27 July 2016).
Knight, T. and Stiny, G. (2015), “Making grammars: From computing with shapes to computing with
things”, Design Studies, Vol. 41, pp. 8-28, available at: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/
S0142694X15000605 (accessed 28 July 2016).
Lee, H., Lee, J. and Seo, J. (2011), “Design and improvement of product using intelligent function model
based cost estimating”, Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 38 No. 4, pp. 3131-3141, available
at: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0957417410009012 (accessed 29 January 2017).
McCormack, J. and Cagan, J. (2002), “Supporting designers’ hierarchies through parametric shape
recognition”, Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, Vol. 29 No. 6, pp. 913-931,
available at: http://epb.sagepub.com/lookup/doi/10.1068/b12839 (accessed 15 August 2016).
McCormack, J., Cagan, J. and Vogel, C. (2004), “Speaking the Buick language: capturing, understanding,
and exploring brand identity with shape grammars: capturing, understanding, and exploring
brand identity with shape grammars”, Design Studies, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 1-29, available at: www.
sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0142694X03000231
Michell, P., King, J. and Reast, J. (2001), “Brand values related to industrial products”, Industrial
Marketing Management, Vol. 30 No. 5, pp. 415-425, available at: www.sciencedirect.com/science/
article/pii/S0019850199000978
Morris, L. (2009), “The innovation infrastructure”, International Journal of Innovation Science, Vol. 1
No. 1, pp. 41-49, available at: www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1260/175722209787951215
Olins, W. (1994), Corporate Identity: Making Business Strategy Visible Through Design, Thames and
Hudson, London.
Prats, M., Garner, S., Jowers, I. and Earl, C. (2004), “Improving product design via shape grammar tool”,
International Design conference – Design, Dubrovnik, p. 6.
 Prats, M., Earl, C., Garner, S. and Jowers, I. (2006), “Shape exploration of designs in a style: toward Brand identity
generation of product designs”, AI EDAM, Vol. 20 No. 3, available at: www.journals.cambridge.
org/abstract_S0890060406060173 (accessed 28 July 2016).
Pugliese, M. and Cagan, J. (2002), “Capturing a rebel: modeling the Harley-Davidson brand through a
motorcycle shape grammar: modeling the Harley-Davidson brand through a motorcycle shape
grammar”, Research in Engineering Design, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 139-156, available at: http://dx.doi.
org/10.1007/s00163-002-0013-1
Ranawat, A. and Hölttä-Otto, K. (2009), “Four dimensions of design similarity”, available at: http://dx. 169
doi.org/10.1115/DETC2009-87085
Ranscombe, C., Hicks, B. and Mullineux, G. (2012a), “A method for exploring similarities and visual
references to brand in the appearance of mature mass-market products”, Design Studies, Vol. 33
No. 5, pp. 496-520, available at: www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0142694X12000221
Ranscombe, C., Hicks, B., Mullineux, G. and Singh, B. (2012b), “Visually decomposing vehicle images:
exploring the influence of different aesthetic features on consumer perception of brand: exploring the
Downloaded by UPPSALA UNIVERSITY At 14:08 10 July 2017 (PT)

influence of different aesthetic features on consumer perception of brand”, Design Studies, Vol. 33
No. 4, pp. 319-341, available at: www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0142694X11000548
Singh, M. and Terzidis, O. (2015), “Introducing innovation phase transition”, International Journal of
Innovation Science, Vol. 37 No. 4, pp. 249-262, available at: www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/1
0.1108/IJIS-07-04-2015-B003
Stiny, G. (1980), “Introduction to shape and shape grammars”, Environment and Planning B: Planning
and Design, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 343-351, available at: http://epb.sagepub.com/lookup/doi/10.1068/b
070343 (accessed 28 July 2016).
Stiny, G. and Gips, J. (1972), “Shape grammars and the generative specification of painting and
sculpture”, Proceedings of IFIP Congress, North Holland Publishing, Amsterdam, pp. 1460-1465.
Tovey, M. (1997), “Styling and design: intuition and analysis in industrial design”, Design Studies,
Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 5-31, available at: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0142694X96000
063 (accessed 19 October 2016).
Ullman, D. (2010), The Mechanical Design Process, 4th ed., McGraw-Hill Higher Education, Boston, MA.
von Hippel, E. (2009), “Democratizing innovation: the evolving phenomenon of user innovation: the
evolving phenomenon of user innovation”, International Journal of Innovation Science, Vol. 1
No. 1, pp. 29-40, available at: www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1260/175722209787951224

Corresponding author
Martin Ondra can be contacted at: 101172@vutbr.cz

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com