Menu

Branding

image

Let Them Eat Aesthetics

, , , , , ,

Hey beauty skeptics—

Let’s kill a sacred cow: the idea that if something costs more, it must be more beautiful.

We’re not just talking luxury handbags or designer chairs.

This illusion creeps into how we see, desire, and validate everything around us.

And yes, there’s science to prove it.

Price messes with your brain

In 2008, Stanford and Caltech ran a sneaky little wine experiment.

People drank the same exact wine twice—once with a $10 label, once with a $90 label. Want to guess which one they raved about?

The expensive one. Their brains even lit up more in the pleasure zone (orbitofrontal cortex, if you’re into that kind of thing).

Same wine. Different story. Because the price wrote the story.

It doesn’t stop at wine. In 2020, researchers in Bologna gave people identical paintings with different price tags. The expensive ones? “More moving,” “more beautiful,” “deeper meaning.” Even art students fell for it.

Turns out your aesthetic judgment might just be a receipt in disguise.

How luxury brands trick your eyes

Luxury isn’t about better stuff. It’s about better theater.

Monochrome branding. Overexposed photography. Cryptic slogans. A logo so minimal it might not even exist. All of it whispers: “We’re expensive, therefore important.”

Sociologist Pierre Bourdieu called this symbolic violence. Translation: rich people make the rules of taste, and everyone else plays along.

And it works. A 2021 McKinsey report found that 70% of Gen Z luxury buyers picked “brand legacy and narrative” over actual product quality.

You’re not buying shoes. You’re buying a story where you’re the protagonist—and your shoes prove it.

Contenuto dell’articolo

Real beauty, small price

Some of the most iconic designs ever? Dirt cheap. And proudly so.

  • Bic Cristal pen: Less than a euro. Transparent barrel, perfectly balanced, and a design so good it’s been copied endlessly—but never bettered. Even MoMA said yes.
  • Fiat Panda (1980): Designed by Giugiaro as a tool, not a toy. Squared off, no frills, no fantasies. And yet, oddly poetic.
  • Casio F-91W: A $20 watch that outlived fashion trends, batteries, and even surveillance fears. Functional, loyal, and iconic without trying.
  • IKEA Billy: The democratic shelf. It doesn’t scream design—because it’s too busy serving it. And it’s probably in every city on Earth.

These objects didn’t ask to be beautiful. They became beautiful by being useful, honest, and real. No champagne-soaked launch parties. No limited editions. Just clever thinking, made accessible.

Why we still fall for price = beauty

Because we hate buyer’s remorse.

You drop €2,000 on something? You better love it. Even if it looks like a beige fungus. That’s post-purchase rationalization at work. Your brain edits the narrative to protect your ego.

And in a world full of design you don’t understand, price becomes your compass. It tells you what to like. What to envy. What to post.

But just because something is expensive doesn’t mean it’s beautiful.

It might just mean you’re scared to question it.

Contenuto dell’articolo

If luxury wants to survive the next generation of consumers, it has to grow up.

That means dropping the smoke and mirrors: no more false scarcity, inflated markups, or storytelling that hides mediocre craftsmanship behind heritage cosplay.

Ethical marketing isn’t a buzzword—it’s a correction.

It means pricing things based on real value: quality of materials, durability, originality of design. It means being transparent about production, not romanticizing sweatshops through sepia filters.

What would that market look like?

One where luxury isn’t about exclusion, but excellence. Where a beautiful object earns its price tag not through aura, but through intent. Where desirability comes from design, not deception.

Luxury can still be aspirational.

But let’s stop pretending mystery is a substitute for meaning.

Stop outsourcing your taste

Here’s a trick: next time you see a €12,000 chair in a showroom, imagine it at a flea market with a handwritten tag: “€70, negotiable.”

Would you still stop and stare?

Would you still call it art?

Because real beauty isn’t fragile.

It doesn’t need context. It doesn’t need a TED Talk or a celebrity endorsement. It just is.

And the moment you stop confusing cost with quality, you start seeing clearly.

Until next time, stay sharp.

Alex

At Kredo, we design brands that earn attention—not just price tags. If you’re building something that matters, we should talk.

image

Do Products Really Sell Themselves?

, , , , , , , ,

Hey demand chasers—

We’ve all heard it. “That product sells itself.” It’s the ultimate compliment—part envy, part resignation. But is it true?

Do some products really defy gravity and move on their own, without the push and pull of marketing? Or are we just blind to the invisible hands doing the selling?

Let’s break the myth apart. And maybe burn it a little.

The Illusion of the Self-Selling Product

There’s a seductive fantasy in business: if something is so good, it doesn’t need marketing.

Think of ChatGPT in late 2022. Ferrari. iPhone. The Birkin bag. Taylor Swift tickets. They all seem to flow through the market by some mysterious inertia. But that’s not absence of marketing. That’s marketing so deeply embedded, so culturally entrenched, that we no longer recognize it as such.

Ferrari doesn’t “sell.” It withholds. No test drives. No discounts. No influencer collabs. It’s scarcity turned into prestige. Every PR release is a masterclass in reverse psychology.

The Birkin bag has zero advertising spend. Yet has a waiting list, resale market, and entire YouTube channels dissecting “how to get one.” It’s the product equivalent of a religious artifact.

Taylor Swift? A billion-dollar tour machine powered by social currency, layered storytelling, Easter eggs, fan communities, media manipulation and a personal brand curated with surgical precision.

None of these are self-selling. They’re just so well-marketed they feel organic.

Contenuto dell’articolo

When Demand Exceeds Supply, Marketing Changes Clothes

Marketing isn’t always persuasion. Sometimes it’s framing. Sometimes it’s restraint.

In economics, when demand consistently exceeds supply, the job of marketing shifts. It’s no longer about pushing product.

It’s about managing desire.

This is what happened with Nintendo’s Wii, where artificial scarcity led to a 50% jump in media coverage and secondhand prices skyrocketing. Or with Glossier, where user-generated content, exclusivity drops, and minimalist branding made fans feel like insiders.

These strategies aren’t passive. They’re calculated. And they work because they understand that human psychology wants what it thinks it can’t have.

The Myth Is Dangerous (Especially for Startups)

Believing that great products sell themselves is a dangerous bias. It leads founders to underinvest in marketing, delay go-to-market planning, or ignore feedback loops.

In a 2023 survey by First Round Capital, 79% of failed startup founders cited “poor marketing execution”as a core reason for collapse.

Not product. Not funding. Marketing.

Stripe had a better developer experience. But it also built a legendary blog, launched on Hacker News, did partnerships with Y Combinator, and crafted elegant documentation.

Airbnb had photos. Craigslist didn’t. And they made sure everyone noticed.

Contenuto dell’articolo

If It Sells Itself, It’s Because Someone Worked for That

If a product seems to sell itself, it’s likely because:

  • Someone shaped the narrative early.
  • Someone built a community.
  • Someone invested in design.
  • Someone obsessed over product-market fit.
  • Someone whispered in the right ears.

You just didn’t see it.

The “self-selling” myth is often just post-rationalized success. A product that looks effortless is usually the result of effort so well-deployed you missed it.

So… Does It Exist?

The honest answer? Rarely.

Some products catch a viral wave—timing, network effects, and a bit of luck. But even then, luck is just a name we give to unseen preparation.

Marketing isn’t just ads and copy. It’s product design. It’s timing. It’s distribution. It’s how you’re talked about when you’re not in the room.

So next time someone says, “This sells itself,” smile. And ask them: “Who made it look that way?”

Until next time, stay skeptical.

Alex

f your product’s great but no one knows it, you don’t need better luck. You need better marketing. At Kredo, we help brands design the demand they deserve.

Let’s make your product actually sell itself—by design.

alexdevita0536_hyper-realistic_portrait_of_an_unrealistically_80b4626c-6635-4798-9f8d-2c3672547d08_1

Future Beauty Is Unreal — And Marketing Made It That Way

, , , , , , ,

Hey beauty hackers —

We didn’t just photoshop faces. We photoshopped reality. Then we called it aspiration.

And now, after decades of airbrushed perfection and Instagram-filtered lives, we’re entering the next stage: bioprinted skin, AI-optimized symmetry, and synthetic hormones that can boost your face for the algorithm.

It sounds like science fiction. But it’s happening. And worse: it feels normal.

Welcome to the era where beauty isn’t just unattainable.

It’s post-human.

Let’s get one thing straight: marketing didn’t invent beauty standards. But it industrialized them. Turned them into KPIs.

When I started out in the industry, I remember working with a skincare brand where we tested thirty shades of “natural” skin tones — and the more unrealistic, the better they performed. The final ads looked like portraits of aliens: smooth, glowing, uncanny.

“It pops on feed,” the creative director said.

It popped, alright. It also helped create the visual grammar of the uncanny beautiful — a style that now dominates TikTok, Instagram, and your cousin’s wedding reel.

We taught algorithms what beauty looked like. And now they’re teaching us back.

Neuroaesthetics and the Rise of AI-Optimized Beauty

Let’s talk science.

Neuroaesthetics shows that humans respond to certain proportions, color balances, and symmetry patterns in deeply emotional ways. We’re wired to crave beauty that calms us, excites us, or signals health.

But here’s the twist: AI can now generate faces that hit those neural sweet spots better than real faces do. Not idealized.

Optimized.

So what happens when beauty is no longer human, but computational? When filters become surgical? When influencers look like digital clones?

Answer: people start to feel like defects.

You see it in the data: rising demand for cosmetic tweaks in teenagers. TikTok filters with 700 million uses in two days. Clinics offering “AI face scans” to suggest enhancements.

Marketing doesn’t need to sell a product. It sells an improved self. And when that self is a neural composite of data, emotion, and fantasy — you get a generation chasing perfection against a non-human benchmark.

Case Study: Dove’s Real Beauty Commitment (2024)

Let’s look at a brand that chose to go radically against the trend.

In 2024, Dove celebrated 20 years of its Real Beauty campaign with a clear message: no AI-generated faces, no post-human perfection. Just real people. Their campaign featured portraits of women of all ages and backgrounds — pores, wrinkles, freckles and all — shot in natural light, with zero filters.

One of the key visuals featured a 53-year-old community teacher from Lisbon, wearing no makeup, laughing openly in front of a classroom of teenagers. The image went viral across Europe, with the hashtag #NoDigitalDistortion trending for days. Unilever, Dove’s parent company, reported a 24% increase in engagement across German and Scandinavian markets.

But the real victory? Gen Z’s reaction. Thousands of young users reposted the campaign with captions like “this is what my mom looks like” or “finally someone who looks like my aunt.”

It wasn’t nostalgia. It was relief.

Dove didn’t just promote a product — it reclaimed the visual language of beauty. And it proved that in a market saturated by synthetic aesthetics, authenticity doesn’t just break through. It leads.

The Psychology of Beauty Fatigue

Psychologists call it “aesthetic numbness.”

It’s what happens when your brain is pummeled with flawless faces, perfect product shots, and algorithmically curated feeds for too long. Like a song on repeat, beauty — when too consistent — becomes background noise. The first time you saw a filter that smoothed the skin and added sparkles, you probably noticed. By the hundredth time? You scroll right past it.

Years ago, I sat in a meeting with a creative director who insisted we use the same retouched lighting, soft-focus filters, and pastel palette across every campaign image. “Consistency sells,” he said. But by the end of the quarter, engagement was down 18%. People weren’t angry. They were just… gone. Eyes glazed over. Comments stopped. We’d optimized the life out of it.

The human brain is bored by perfection. It craves micro-tension — like a crooked smile, a surprising color palette, a wrinkle that says this person has lived. Neuromarketing studies have shown that the amygdala, our emotional processing center, responds more intensely to unpredictable or slightly asymmetric visual inputs than to sterile balance.

Simply put: we feel more when things aren’t quite right.

That’s why brands embracing imperfection aren’t just doing it for ethics or aesthetics. They’re doing it for engagement. A freckled model, an out-of-place strand of hair, even the reflection of a photographer in the mirror — these “errors” draw us in because they break the loop of visual monotony. They remind us there’s a human behind the lens.

And in a marketplace where attention is currency, disruption is value.

So What Do We Do?

Here’s the tiplist:

  1. Make realness visible — not as a campaign stunt, but as a long-term narrative.
  2. Audit your aesthetic defaults — are you choosing visuals that reflect reality or just reflect the algorithm?
  3. Champion narrative beauty — faces with stories last longer in memory.
  4. Design for trust, not just attention — beauty that looks good but feels fake is a liability.
  5. Reclaim the uncanny — if you use AI, make it surreal, not synthetic. Art, not lie.

and in the End…

The future of beauty is up for grabs.

We can either keep chasing the ultra-optimized self, defined by pixels and predictions. Or we can rehumanize beauty — one imperfection at a time.

The market is already shifting. What was once edgy now feels hollow. And what once felt raw now feels rare. That’s your cue.

Beauty isn’t disappearing. It’s mutating.

Let’s make sure it doesn’t lose its soul.

Until next time, stay uncanny.

Alex

Want to craft campaigns that stand out without selling out?

Kredo Marketing helps brands rediscover their truth — in strategy, in design, in storytelling.

Let’s make marketing feel human again.

22682

The Instagramification of Everything

, , , , ,

Hey feed-surfers—

Have you noticed how everything looks like it’s trying to be… liked?

Coffee shops. Book covers. Packaging. Logos. Even cities.

We’re living in the golden age of “Instagramification”—a culture where every object, product, and experience is filtered through the logic of the grid: sharp lines, muted colors, sans-serif fonts, and photogenic shadows. Aesthetics optimized for scrolling. Not for meaning.

And that’s a problem.

When Form Devours Function

Go to any newly opened café in Paris, Milan, or Düsseldorf. Chances are it features terrazzo countertops, arched mirrors, plants in clay pots, and just the right hue of beige. It’s not that it’s ugly—it’s that you’ve seen it a hundred times.

What used to be local flair has turned into global sameness. A kind of aesthetic monoculture. Architecture, once contextual and expressive, is now often guided by how good it looks in a reel. Just like food, furniture, hotel lobbies, and even churches.

The logic is clear: if it photographs well, it spreads well. If it spreads well, it converts.

But what are we losing in the process?

Contenuto dell’articolo

The Instagram Brain

Psychologically, this shift has deeper consequences than we think. Studies in cognitive neuroscience suggest that our brains are increasingly wired to favor pattern recognition over substance digestion.

That is: we scroll faster, we judge quicker, and we remember less.

This is especially problematic in marketing. When visual branding relies too heavily on surface trends, brands begin to blur. They become pretty but forgettable. Studies show that the average brand impression lasts less than 2 secondsin a social scroll.

If your brand looks like the last ten your user saw, congratulations—you don’t exist.

And there’s more.

A 2022 paper from the Journal of Consumer Psychology notes that overly aestheticized product design creates what researchers call “cognitive friction”—when form overshadows function, users feel confused, even anxious. They hesitate. They churn.

Contenuto dell’articolo

But… Who’s It For, Really?

This aesthetic obsession is also an economic paradox. A company spends months designing a new app interface, storefront, or brand campaign. It wins awards. It gets reposted. But it doesn’t sell more. Or worse, it alienates the audience that actually pays.

Because here’s the catch:not every user is on Instagram. And even among those who are, not everyone values the same visual codes. In trying to please the algorithm, many brands stop speaking to their core audience.

They start designing for designers.

This disconnect is not just theoretical. Look at the countless rebrands that backfire because they swapped character for “modernity.” Think Tropicana’s infamous packaging redesign in 2009, which led to a 20% drop in sales—roughly $30 million lost in a few weeks.

Why? Because the new design looked cleaner… but felt generic. Customers didn’t recognize it. So they didn’t buy it.

Contenuto dell’articolo

A Counter-Example: Vitsœ in Germany

Let’s stay in Europe.

Vitsœ , the German-British company that produces Dieter Rams’ modular shelving system, has resisted this aesthetic contagion. Their branding is borderline anti-Instagram: minimal but not trendy, calm but not sterile. Their website feels more like a personal letter than a showroom.

Yet they have a cult following. Not because they shout louder—but because they whisper consistently. Their whole ethos is long-term thinking: sustainability, timeless design, slow consumption. And customers respond. They don’t just buy a product—they buy into a philosophy.

This is key: when everyone else is screaming visuals, a clear voice cuts through.

So what’s the cost of aesthetic conformity?

In economic terms:wasted budget. High design costs, low return.

In psychological terms: decision fatigue, shallow engagement, short-lived loyalty. In strategic terms: a brand that can’t differentiate itself.

Brands need to stop designing for screenshots and start designing for resonance.

Because in the end, likes don’t equal loyalty.

Tips for De-Instagramifying Your Brand

Contenuto dell’articolo
  1. Audit your visuals — Does your website, packaging, or content look like a Pinterest board from 2021? Be honest.
  2. Reclaim your voice — What does your brand sound like? If you took away all visuals, could someone still recognize you?
  3. Design for use, not likes — Ask: does this asset help my user do something better? Or just look good?
  4. Stay rooted in your story — Before choosing a style, revisit your why. Aesthetics should express it, not replace it.
  5. Test with outsiders — Get feedback from people who aren’t designers or marketers. If they “get it,” you’re doing it right.

There’s nothing wrong with beauty.

But when everything is optimized for optics, we risk building a world of brands that look alive but feel empty.

So here’s a better goal: design things that matter in feeds and in minds.

Because your job isn’t to go viral. Your job is to be remembered.

Until next time, stay sharp.

Alex

Want to escape the scroll-driven marketing trap?

Let’s design strategies that actually stick. 👉 www.kredo-marketing.com

1751526576016

Corporate ADHD: Why Brands Can’t Focus (And Customers Can Tell)

, , , , , , , ,

Hey attention crash-testers—

Ever walked into a meeting with five priorities? Congratulations, you have zero.

Brands are burning out. Not because of lack of ambition — but because they can’t sit still. One quarter it’s Gen Z. The next it’s TikTok. Then it’s sustainability. Now it’s AI. And don’t forget NFTs, because someone’s cousin made a million with a pixelated llama.

We’re not iterating. We’re twitching.

And like a sleep-deprived intern juggling Slack, Zoom, and a boss yelling “BE MORE DISRUPTIVE,” brands are living through a full-blown attention crisis.

The result? Customers feel it. Employees drown in it. Strategy dies because of it.

The Corporate ADHD Epidemic

Let me tell you a story. A few years ago, I was consulting for a mid-sized fashion brand in Berlin. They called us in because “they wanted to rebrand.”

Classic.

But by week two, they weren’t sure if the priority was expanding their menswear line, launching a podcast, building a Roblox activation, or going full vegan.

I remember asking the CEO in a workshop, “What’s the one thing your customers come to you for?”

He paused. Looked around. Then said: “Aesthetics?”

It was a question.

This is how it always starts: with a loss of focus disguised as opportunity.

Their Instagram became a random mess of half-baked campaigns. They launched a capsule collection no one understood. Eventually, their loyal base started drifting. They weren’t angry — just… confused. Within 12 months, revenue was down 23%.

This is what happens when you confuse busyness with progress. When you chase everything, you dilute everything.

Contenuto dell’articolo

The Illusion of Agility

Corporate ADHD hides behind words like “agile” and “fast-moving.” But real agility isn’t about reacting to every trend. It’s about knowing when not to.

A 2023 Deloitte report found that only 17% of brands that adopted “rapid pivot” strategies post-Covid saw long-term growth. The rest either plateaued or regressed. Why? Because in most cases, the pivot wasn’t rooted in strategy — it was panic rebranded as responsiveness.

Take CNN+. Remember that streaming service? Neither does anyone else. It launched in 2022. Died in 2022.

Why? Because CNN tried to play Netflix without understanding their own audience’s media habits. They mistook the content boom for a license to diversify, instead of asking the obvious: Do people want more CNN… or better CNN?

Case Study: Oatly’s Focused Weirdness

Now, let’s flip it.

Oatly is weird. Purposefully so. You might think of them as just “the oat milk brand with the loud packaging.” But behind the chaos is ruthless focus.

Their tone is eccentric, but consistent. Their messaging — from TV spots to carton sides — always reinforces the same identity: irreverent, plant-based, anti-corporate.

In 2020, they had a 70% market share in Sweden’s alt-milk category. Globally? They became a symbol of how to be everywhere without being everything.

Even when expanding into Asia, they didn’t dilute. Same fonts. Same humor. Same activist edge. That coherence makes them recognizable — and trustworthy. You don’t need to love oat milk to know what Oatly stands for.

That’s strategic focus. Not rigidity. Not sameness. Focus with personality.

Contenuto dell’articolo

Saying No

In 2022, I was working with a startup in the food tech scene — a scrappy team of twelve, great product, good energy. They’d just closed a decent seed round and were drunk on potential. At our kickoff meeting, the founder burst in late, phone still glued to his ear, and launched into a monologue:

“We want to expand into Germany, open a pop-up in London, relaunch the website, hire a Head of Brand, start a podcast, and explore a metaverse experience — oh, and maybe do something with NFTs.”

I remember blinking, sipping my lukewarm espresso, and saying, “Pick one. Then we’ll talk.”

They weren’t thrilled. They paused the project. I think the CMO even rolled his eyes.

Three months later, I got an email. Subject line: “We should’ve listened.”

The campaigns had flopped. Social was a ghost town. Developers were building two unfinished landing pages at once. Everyone was exhausted. They’d burned through half the budget, chasing noise over clarity.

It was a classic case of cognitive overload disguised as ambition. And saying no wasn’t just advice — it was the only act of strategic mercy I could offer.

Focus isn’t sexy. But it’s the only thing that scales.

Contenuto dell’articolo

Symptoms of Corporate ADHD

  • You’re launching five things and maintaining none
  • Your team is burned out but directionless
  • You’re on every social platform — but with no strategy
  • Quarterly goals shift monthly
  • No one can articulate your brand’s core narrative in one sentence

According to a 2024 PwC survey, 64% of marketing leaders say their biggest struggle is “too many simultaneous priorities.”

So How Do You Treat It?

Here’s the checklist. Stick it to your office wall:

  1. Define what you don’t do — Strategy is subtraction.
  2. Audit your narrative every quarter — Are you still telling the same story?
  3. Build fewer things, but finish them — Launch less. Land more.
  4. Reward long-term KPIs — Not just engagement spikes.
  5. Make ‘no’ a default option — Kill ideas fast. Before they become projects.

I’ll leave you with this.

A few years back, while consulting for a lifestyle brand drowning in half-launched projects, I remember sitting in a dim-lit boardroom covered with sticky notes. The walls screamed potential. But none of it stuck. Each note represented a “priority” — which, by definition, meant none really were. The founder looked at me, wide-eyed, and asked: “So… which one do you think we should go all in on?”

I replied: “Which one would still matter if TikTok disappeared tomorrow?”

Silence.

That’s what focus sounds like.

In a business culture that rewards noise, focus is an act of rebellion. It means resisting the dopamine hit of constant novelty. It means building something — slowly, consistently — until it matters. And it means having the courage to stay boring long enough for your audience to trust you.

Because customers don’t leave because you’re boring. They leave because you’ve lost the plot.

Until next time, stay grounded.

Alex

If your brand feels overwhelmed by too many ideas and zero clarity, we can help. At Kredo Marketing, we turn chaos into strategy — and ambition into results. Let’s talk before your audience drifts away.

Hand drawing illustration set of development

Digital Darwinism: Why Most Brands Aren’t Evolving

, , , , , , ,

Hey evolutionary misfits—

Some brands evolve. Most just mutate. And the difference between the two?

Survival.

In the natural world, evolution is adaptive. It’s a response to the environment. But mutation? It’s random. It’s the business equivalent of slapping a TikTok account on a B2B software firm because “everyone’s doing it.”

Welcome to the age of Digital Darwinism, where tech moves faster than strategy, and survival isn’t guaranteed by innovation — but by relevance.

The Law of the Jungle Is Now the Law of the Feed

Evolution doesn’t reward the strongest or smartest. It rewards the most adaptable. And in marketing, adaptability doesn’t mean chasing trends — it means responding to user behavior, technological shifts, and cultural context with intention.

Blockbuster. In 2000, they laughed Netflix out of the room. In 2010, they were bankrupt. Not because streaming killed them overnight — but because they failed to adapt while their customers did.

It’s never the comet. It’s always the inertia.

Mutation Marketing: A Dangerous Game of Brand Roulette

We see it every day: brands mimicking each other like confused parrots. Suddenly, everyone’s “disruptive,” using the same shade of blue, writing like Duolingo, and putting “AI” in places it has no reason to be.

That’s not evolution. That’s panic-induced mutation.

A McKinsey study in 2023 found that 61% of rebrands failed to improve customer perception.

Why? Because they weren’t strategic responses.

They were stylistic overhauls without ecosystem thinking. If you’re just re-skinning your brand without re-thinking your relevance, you’re not evolving.

You’re molting.

Contenuto dell’articolo

Kodak vs. Fujifilm

Let’s rewind to the early 2000s. Both Kodak and Fujifilm were dominant forces in the film photography world, staring down the barrel of digital disruption.

Kodak had the upper hand in brand recognition. They even invented the digital camera back in 1975 — and shelved it to protect their film business. Their corporate DNA was deeply tied to physical film, and their internal culture was allergic to cannibalizing it.

Fujifilm, on the other hand, saw the writing on the wall and treated digital not as a threat but as a signpost. They invested heavily in R&D and diversified, leveraging their core capabilities in chemicals and imaging into medical diagnostics, regenerative medicine, and cosmetics (see: their successful skincare line Astalift). By 2012, they had cut their film business down to just 1% of total revenue — and thrived.

Kodak filed for bankruptcy in 2012. Fujifilm grew.

It’s not that one had better tech. It’s that one had the cultural flexibility to adapt — and the strategic foresight to redefine itself.

Both giants. Both hit by the rise of digital photography. One died. The other pivoted.

Kodak clung to film like a security blanket. Fujifilm, meanwhile, leveraged their chemical expertise to branch into cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, and healthcare imaging. Today, Fujifilm is thriving.

Same threat. Different reaction. Different outcome.

Evolution is not about protecting the old. It’s about leveraging what’s core to adapt to what’s next.

Your Org Chart Is Fighting Evolution

It’s tempting to think evolution is a matter of tools. Better software, new platforms, smarter automation. But what if the real obstacle to evolution isn’t your stack — it’s your structure?

Most companies are built like machines: hierarchical, rigid, optimized for repeatability. But digital ecosystems are more like organisms — fluid, messy, adaptive. And when a machine meets an organism, guess who bends?

Legacy org charts are the biggest blockers to adaptive change. Why? Because they’re designed to preserve stability, not embrace flux. Consider how ideas travel inside a traditional company: a junior UX researcher has a brilliant insight from user testing. That insight needs buy-in from a PM, who needs approval from a director, who then waits on quarterly alignment from the brand VP. By the time it gets greenlit, the customer behavior has already changed.

According to a 2023 Capgemini report, companies with highly siloed structures were 42% less likely to complete digital transformation initiatives compared to those with cross-functional teams and flatter hierarchies.

Even when companies talk about agility, they often just repackage old structures with new terminology. “Squads” that still need director approval aren’t agile. They’re theatre.

And let’s not forget the human layer: job titles as identity, turf wars over brand ownership, resistance to anything that threatens legacy metrics. These aren’t just annoyances — they’re evolutionary handbrakes.

If your org chart rewards maintaining the status quo, you’re not set up to evolve.

You’re set up to ossify.

Contenuto dell’articolo

What Evolutionary Brands Actually Do

  • They experiment with intent — Testing isn’t about novelty. It’s about feedback loops
  • They hire anthropologists, not just analysts — Data shows you what. Anthropology shows you why.
  • They invest in internal evolution — It’s not just the brand. It’s the mindset.
  • They question legacy success — What worked five years ago might be the anchor today.

Look at Spotify: continuous redesigns, regional personalization, and AI-curated listening that adjusts to your mood.

That’s brand evolution in real-time.

Checklist: Are You Evolving or Just Twitching?

Think of this as your brand’s evolutionary stress test — a diagnostic to understand whether you’re adapting with purpose or just convulsing at every passing trend. Mutation is easy. Evolution is hard. Let’s find out where you stand.

  1. Do you have a test-and-learn loop integrated into marketing? Not just A/B testing banners, but systemic loops that influence product, communication, and UX? Brands like Booking.com run thousands of experiments weekly — what’s your volume?
  2. Are you tracking cultural shifts — not just industry trends? It’s easy to follow what competitors do. It’s harder (and more valuable) to decode cultural codes and shifts in user sentiment. Are you tuning into Reddit, TikTok, and Discord — or just reading LinkedIn posts?
  3. Is your design changing with user behavior or despite it? Figma’s rise wasn’t just because of design tools — it aligned with how distributed teams work. Is your design evolving from user input, or is it dictated by the latest Dribbble trends?
  4. Do your values evolve or just your color palette? Rebrands often change the visuals, but keep dated slogans and outdated tone. Patagonia evolved their messaging with climate urgency — have you evolved yours?
  5. Are your KPIs driving relevance or just performance? Are you tracking Net Promoter Score without understanding what drives it? Do you know why your bounce rate is high or just that it is?

The goal isn’t to tick boxes. It’s to trigger honest reflection. Because evolution requires discomfort. Mutation just needs panic.

and the winner is…

Brands don’t go extinct because the market changed.

They go extinct because they didn’t.

In the age of Digital Darwinism, clarity beats chaos, strategy beats novelty, and intentional evolution beats blind mutation.

Until next time, stay adaptive.

Alex

Want your brand to evolve, not just mutate?

Let’s work together to build strategies that survive the next wave.

👉 KREDO  is Here!

conceptual-scene-with-people-walking-through-clouds

Your Design Is Killing Conversions – Here’s Why Ego Is Expensive

, , , , , ,

Hey ego busters—

There’s a quiet epidemic in marketing: brands designing for themselves instead of their customers.

It looks like innovation. It feels like taste. It wins awards.

But when you peel back the pixels, you often find a product that looks amazing and performs terribly.

This isn’t just bad design — it’s ego design.

The Seduction of Branding Narcissism

Let’s face it: many design decisions come from the top, not from user data. Founders obsessed with minimalism. CMOs chasing competitors. Agencies crafting for Dribbble, not for usability.

In a 2023 survey by NN/g, 67% of in-house designers admitted they often adjusted interfaces to “meet stakeholder tastes” at the expense of user clarity.

That’s not user-centered. That’s a branding selfie.

And it’s expensive. Brands spend millions crafting digital experiences that alienate the very people they’re meant to serve.

In fact, Gartner reports that companies waste an average of 17% of their design budgets on aesthetic changes that offer no improvement in user performance.

Contenuto dell’articolo

Ego Design in Action — The Airline That Hid Its Booking Button

In 2021, a European airline launched a visually striking redesign. Hero videos. Parallax scroll. Invisible menu. Floating typography. It won a Webby and got praised in design blogs.

But within 3 months, customer support tickets rose by 38%, with most complaints about booking steps being unclear.

Internal analytics showed that click-through rate on the homepage CTA dropped by 44%. A UX audit revealed users literally couldn’t find the “Book Now” button unless they scrolled for 10 seconds.

The culprit? A creative director who wanted the homepage to “feel like a cinematic experience.”

The result? A cinematic disaster.

A follow-up test using eye-tracking showed that less than 12% of users noticed the booking button in under 8 seconds. That’s a lifetime in digital.

Ego Is Expensive. Confusion Is Costly.

Here’s what ego-driven design does:

  • Adds friction in the name of flair.
  • Prioritizes novelty over function.
  • Assumes brand aesthetics matter more than cognitive clarity.

And it backfires. Badly.

A 2022 Forrester study found that poor UX design causes 89% of users to switch to a competitor after a frustrating interaction — and ego-driven interfaces ranked highest in frustration triggers.

Another meta-analysis by Baymard Institute reveals that a staggering 68% of e-commerce users abandon their carts due to usability issues, many of which stem from overcomplicated, self-indulgent design elements.

Why “Taste” Is Not Strategy

Taste is subjective. Usability is measurable.

When a CMO pushes a pastel palette because “it feels premium,” or a founder wants an all-text navigation bar to look different — you’re no longer designing for your audience. You’re designing for yourself.

Your metrics will suffer. Your team will get blamed. And your customers? They’ll bounce.

In 2023, a SaaS startup redesigned its onboarding flow to look “slicker.” After implementation, trial-to-paid conversion dropped by 21%.

Why?

They buried the signup logic under modal transitions and over-designed steps. A rollback to the older, simpler interface recovered the lost conversions within 2 weeks.

Contenuto dell’articolo

How to Spot Ego Design in Your Own Work

Ask:

  • Who is this layout pleasing — our users, or our CEO?
  • Are visual choices justified by data or just “gut feeling”?
  • Have we A/B tested before locking in big aesthetic changes?
  • Is the design helping the user act — or making us look cool?

The hardest part? Realizing your creative pride might be your conversion killer.

Also: check heatmaps. Where users actually click often reveals how misaligned your visual priorities are with their behavior.

Design for the Brain, Not for the Portfolio

Some of the highest-performing designs out there look… boring. Think Amazon, Booking.com, Basecamp.

But boring isn’t bad. Boring is invisible. Invisible means usable.

These platforms aren’t designed for portfolios — they’re designed to get users from point A to point B with zero cognitive overhead. That’s not boring. That’s brilliant.

Research from the Nielsen Norman Group shows that visually simple interfaces increase task success rate by up to 47% compared to high-design ones. When function leads form, friction disappears.

Actionable Strategy: Anti-Ego Design Sprint

Next time you’re about to redesign:

  1. Interview 5 customers. Ask what they expect to see first.
  2. Do a 3-second test: can they tell what you offer instantly?
  3. Remove 1 decorative element for every step in your funnel.
  4. Define success by clarity, not creativity.
  5. Assign one person on your team to play “usability devil’s advocate.” Their job? Push back on every ego-driven decision.

Remember: clarity converts. Ego flatters.

In the end..

Your brand is not your aesthetic. It’s the clarity of your promise, and the ease with which people can say yes to it.

Design for your users, not your ego.

Until next time, stay humble.

Alex

Tired of choosing between pretty and profitable?

At Kredo Marketing, we design with one goal in mind: clarity that converts.

Drop us a message — we actually listen.

104233

Your Competitors Are Boring. Why Are You Copying Them?

, , , , ,

Hey creative rebels —

Let’s start with a brutal truth: most of your competitors are boring.

Their campaigns blend into a sea of sameness. Their social posts are indistinguishable. Their websites? Templates with empty words and safe colors. And yet — so many brands still copy them.

Why?

Because in the absence of courage, familiarity feels safe. But safe rarely makes history. Safe is the enemy of distinctiveness. And distinctiveness is the only thing that makes marketing work.

The illusion of safety in sameness

A 2024 Deloitte study found that 74% of mid-sized companies admitted to modeling their marketing strategies on industry competitors rather than consumer insight or brand purpose.

It’s herd behavior dressed up as strategy.

The logic?

If they’re doing it, it must work. But if everyone copies, no one leads. And when no one leads, the entire category sinks into mediocrity.

Picture this: you’re on Instagram, scrolling through ten profiles of fashion brands. Neutral palettes. Soft lighting. “Authentic” lifestyle photography. Vague captions about community and sustainability.

You swipe, you forget.

A 2023 Nielsen survey confirmed it: 67% of consumers feel brand content today is interchangeable and forgettable. This isn’t branding.

It’s hiding in plain sight.

It’s tempting to blame marketers for this sameness. But the rot runs deeper. Copying is a symptom of how most organizations are structured. Boards reward the safe bet. Investors favor predictability over originality. Procurement departments prioritize cost savings over craft. Agencies pitch ideas they think will pass through layers of approval, not rock the boat. The machine is built to favor “good enough” over “truly bold.”

And so we copy.

Because standing out might mean standing alone at the next board meeting, defending the unfamiliar. That’s hard. It’s easier to point at a competitor and say: We’re doing what they’re doing.

How copying poisons categories

🔹 D2C mattress wars: Casper shook up an industry. But within two years, a flood of copycats diluted what made them special. 60% of post-2017 D2C mattress startups failed or sold at a loss (CB Insights, 2023). The category drowned in its own mimicry. CACs spiked. Margins shrank. Customers couldn’t tell one from another — so they stopped caring.

🔹 Fintech’s ocean of blue: Fintechs chose blue because blue “signals trust.” But when everyone chose blue, no one stood out. A McKinsey 2023 study found brand recall dropped 35% in fintech between 2019 and 2023. In focus groups, users couldn’t match logos to names. Trust became wallpaper.

🔹 Pepsi’s Kendall Jenner ad: An attempt at boldness that flopped — because it mimicked activism without meaning it.

Different isn’t enough. Different must be true.

What bold brands actually do differently

✅ They seek inspiration beyond their category. Oatly looked to punk zines. Liquid Death borrowed from metal culture. Aesop channels perfumery, not skincare.

✅ They design to be felt, not just seen. Mailchimp’s quirky illustrations and playful tone make SaaS human.

✅ They lead with messy, authentic purpose. Patagonia’s activism. Ben & Jerry’s loud social stands. They don’t follow the conversation. They start it.

And crucially — they accept that daring means sometimes failing. Because failure in the pursuit of originality is more valuable than success in the art of imitation.

How to break the copycat cycle: a framework

👉 Audit your brand like a stranger: Could your assets belong to a competitor? If yes, rebuild.

👉 Ask the tough questions: What truth do we stand for? Where do we blend in? Where could we be unforgettable?

👉 Prototype bravery: Test bold moves in small spaces. Not everything needs to go global on day one. But do something that makes you nervous.

Your competitors are boring. Let them stay that way.

You? You’ve got better things to do. The brands we remember tomorrow are the ones that dare today.

Until next time, stay bold.

Alex

At Kredo Marketing, we help businesses break the cycle of copy-paste strategies and build bold, memorable brands that stand out. Ready to stop blending in? Let’s connect.

mental health support concept background design

The Anti-Scroll Manifesto: Why the Future of Design Might Be Slower Than You Think

, , , , , , ,

Hey restless minds—

Let me guess: your screen time is a horror story.

So is mine.

Between Slack pings, Instagram scrolls, LinkedIn carousels, and twenty open tabs that scream “just one more click,” it’s easy to feel like we’re drowning in design made to seduce us—fast.

Speed has become the default setting for everything digital. Quick reads. Snappy CTAs. UX patterns optimized not for meaning, but for momentum.

We don’t consume information anymore.

We skim, swipe, discard.

And we call it efficiency.

But what if we’ve confused urgency with value? What if slowing down was the real power move?

Design as dopamine trap

Let’s be honest.

Most digital design today is behavioral manipulation in a fancy outfit. Infinite scroll, autoplay, microinteractions tuned to your nervous system. Interfaces are built like casinos:

frictionless, irresistible, and forgettable.

We’ve optimized everything for the click — and almost nothing for the consequence.

You get faster feedback, faster bounce rates, and faster burnout. Good design should feel like a conversation.

Instead, it’s become a slot machine.
Contenuto dell’articolo

But a quiet revolution is coming.

Some brands are flipping the script. They’re rejecting speed as the main KPI and embracing a radical idea: Design that slows you down.

Not because it’s clunky. Not because it’s inefficient. But because it’s intentional.

Let’s take a look at some of the rebels:

  • Aesop — Their website is famously quiet, elegant, even contemplative. No sticky navbars. No auto-play. Just space to breathe. The layout invites reflection. It’s UX as ritual.
  • Kinfolk & The Gentlewoman — These editorial brands embrace friction. Long scrolls, slow fades, unexpected compositions. Their visual language resists skimming. The experience demands attention — and rewards it with intimacy.
  • Off-White (Virgil Abloh) — In fashion, Abloh was a master of embedding slowness into visual communication. Hidden layers, delayed reveals, texts within texts. He weaponized friction to make people stop. In an industry driven by trends, he created moments.
  • Amber Case and Calm Technology — Her work advocates for interfaces that stay in the background. Not every notification needs to buzz. Not every UI needs to glow. Calm tech respects attention as a scarce resource, not a commodity to mine.
  • VK (Russia’s Facebook) — In a bold UX experiment, VK made new users answer a few reflective questions during sign-up. Slower onboarding = higher retention. The friction filtered noise.

These aren’t accidents. They’re signals.

Slowness is not inefficiency. It’s a strategy.

Think about it: when did you last remember a lightning-fast experience? Now think of the ones that made you pause.

Memorability often lives in the resistance.

When everything is instant, delay becomes luxury. When everything is gamified, contemplation becomes rebellion.

When everyone wants your attention, the rarest brands are the ones who don’t beg for it.

Contenuto dell’articolo

The age of anti-anxiety design

Here’s the part nobody talks about:

☞ fast design is making us sick.

It accelerates decision fatigue. It erodes trust. It keeps us in constant pre-reaction mode.

Slow design isn’t just aesthetic. It’s psychological. It restores agency. It whispers instead of shouting.

It offers space instead of stimuli.

It doesn’t just ask “what do you want to do next?” It asks “why are you here?”

What this means for your brand, product, or message.

Don’t slow things down just for the sake of being quirky. But do ask:

  • Can I remove urgency from this interface?
  • Can I replace stimulus with substance?
  • Can I create depth without overwhelming?

Because here’s the real opportunity:

In a market saturated by seamlessness, friction becomes differentiation.

If your audience is drowning in notifications, maybe silence is your brand voice.

If your users are lost in speed, maybe clarity is your anchor.

If your competitors are sprinting, maybe walking is your edge.

Your move.

Design something that doesn’t rush.

Design something that feels like a conversation.

Design something that makes people stop — and maybe even stay.

Until next time, stay deliberate.

Alex

Want to design digital experiences that don’t just convert — but resonate?

At Kredo Marketing, we help brands build interfaces that are intentional, emotional, and unforgettable.

Let’s rethink the way your users interact with your brand.

2149369250

Mediocrity Is the New Currency of Corporate Success

, , , , , ,

Hey you clever rebels,

Let me tell you about a guy I’ll call Marco — not his real name, obviously. I’ve changed it to protect his privacy, though if you’ve ever worked in a large company, you’ve probably met a Marco or two.

We crossed paths years ago in a consultancy firm that lived and breathed spreadsheets. He was one of those rare voices in the room — a systems thinker, fast on his feet, allergic to clichés. The kind of guy who would raise his hand not to echo, but to question. Always respectful, but always sharp.

One day, after yet another internal strategy session — you know, the kind where the blandest roadmap gets hailed as ‘visionary alignment’ — Marco leaned in and muttered: “You know what this place rewards? Beige.”

Then he sat back and crossed his arms, half-smirking, half-exhausted.

It wasn’t the first time I’d heard something like that. But it was the first time it felt like a diagnosis, not a joke.

That phrase stuck with me. Because beige doesn’t scare anyone. Beige is safe. Beige is exactly what most companies want — even if they post on LinkedIn about disruption, courage, or innovation.

So here’s the uncomfortable thesis of today:

mediocrity isn’t accidental — it’s a strategic advantage in corporate systems that fear originality.

Let’s rip this apart.

Mediocrity Feels Safe (and Safety Sells)

Big organizations aren’t designed for brilliance. They’re designed for continuity.

They don’t want someone who questions the whole process. They want someone who can sit through 8 hours of meetings without raising a hand.

Why?

Because predictability scales. And exceptional minds? They tend to shake foundations.

Mediocrity becomes a performance. A carefully curated blend of consensus, jargon, and non-threatening ambition.

“Great idea, let’s circle back next quarter after we realign with our stakeholders.”

You want proof? Look at the case of Kodak. They literally invented digital photography. But the idea was buried internally for years — too radical, too risky, too disruptive to their existing business model. The engineers who pushed for it were sidelined. The company that played it safe went bankrupt.

Talent Is Often Seen as a Risk, Not a Resource

Ever noticed how the truly insightful person in a meeting is often ignored?

Not because they’re wrong. But because their insight doesn’t fit the pre-approved narrative. It’s easier to approve a “Best Practices 2.0” than someone suggesting a clean slate. Mediocrity doesn’t challenge status. It reinforces it.

Marco? He got sidelined for being “too intense.” Meanwhile, the guy who rephrased his points with more buzzwords got a promotion. I remember when Marco submitted a proposal to overhaul our entire client onboarding system. It was smart, cost-effective, and based on solid data. The response?

“Let’s wait until Q4.”

Two weeks later, his manager presented a watered-down version of the same thing. Guess who got recognition?

Another example: Elizabeth Holmes built an empire on vague promises and charismatic nothingness. Investors bought in not because the science was sound — but because the vision was comfortably packaged. Meanwhile, hundreds of medical innovators with real breakthroughs struggled for funding. Why? Because truth is messy, and mediocrity is easy to brand.

Vagueness Is the New Armor

Corporate-speak is a fortress. People hide behind phrases like “alignment”, “synergy”, and “value-driven execution” to avoid committing to anything measurable.

The more abstract your words, the harder it is to hold you accountable. And guess who masters this? The mediocre. They’re fluent in plausible deniability.

A study by Stanford’s Graduate School of Business found that leaders who use vague language are more likely to be perceived as competent, even if their actual performance lags behind.

Why? Because abstraction feels intellectual — even when it says nothing.

There’s a fast-track, and it doesn’t involve brilliance. It involves:

  • Learning the language of vague ambition
  • Avoiding clarity at all costs
  • Echoing leadership just enough to seem aligned, never disruptive

This isn’t incompetence. It’s adaptive behavior. And it works.

We could name names. But you’ve seen it firsthand. The manager who says “we’re on a transformational journey” without being able to explain what’s actually transforming. The VP of Innovation who hasn’t launched a new idea in years.

And yet — they keep climbing.

So What Now?

If you’re allergic to mediocrity, you have two options:

  1. Blend and Climb: Learn the language, play the game, sell small parts of yourself until you forget where they went.
  2. Build and Resist: Create your own space — whether through content, consulting, side projects, or micro-communities — where clarity and originality are not liabilities.

I’m not saying one is better. I’m saying: know the rules of the board before you play.

And if you still think merit wins by default, remember this: in 2020, research by Gallup showed that only 21% of employees strongly agree that their performance is managed in a way that motivates them to do outstanding work.

Most are just trying to survive the system.

Things You Can Start Doing Today

  • Write something that actually says something. No fluff. No SEO garbage. Just value.
  • Ask the one question in a meeting that makes people uncomfortable — respectfully.
  • Stop reposting safe content. Share something that shows you think.
  • Talk to other people who feel the same. There are more of us than you think.

Have you ever watched someone rise, not because they were great, but because they were perfectly forgettable?

Let’s dissect the system — together.

Alex

Load More