Dare to be different

Many wine brands are pursuing a very similar design aesthetic, resulting in a rather dull uniformity of packaging on the shelves. Ultimately, this doesn’t do any favours for consumers, brands or retailers, argues Ben Grant

NEXT TIME you’re in the supermarket and you’re strolling down the wine aisle, try squinting. With your eyes half closed a worrying truth will immediately become apparent: yard after yard of shelf space is lined up with hundreds upon hundreds of bottles but, to all intents and purposes, they look virtually identical. OK, the occasional daring design adds a dash of colour and some brand owners are brazen enough to alter the shape of the label or even lengthen the neck of the bottle. But, aside from these (frankly minor) deviations from the norm the vast majority of wine bottles on sale in the UK are lined up like soldiers, decked out in near-uniform packaging that has been conceived to make it look elegant, classy and expensive – even (in fact, especially,) if it’s not. Is it any wonder that consumers are confused?
“On the supermarket shelves the design of most wine bottlesis much of a muchness,” says Design Bridge business development director Nick Grey, “they don’t stand out, in fact none really stick in my memory.” From an aesthetic point of view, you could scarcely deliver a more damning indictment.  

Inoffensive and uninteresting
One of the principle factors that has resulted in this rather dull, cookie-cutter approach to design in the wine trade is the desire to appeal to an unrealistically large demographic. Rather than identifying a precise target, says Abigail Pitcher of design agency Barlow Doherty, “Big brands are all designed to hit as many people as possible. That’s why it’s become bland; they’re trying not to offend anybody.” From a commercial point of view it’s easy to see why brand owners would opt for a lowest common denominator that maximises their potential audience, but among the design community there is a unanimous sentiment that such an approach is ultimately bad for business.

Their argument boils down to the very essence of what makes design such an important element of the brand-building process. In order to become a long-term favourite the brand must “establish an emotional connection with the consumer”, says Portland Design’s creative head Michael Fern. The design must, therefore, have some meaning. Because aesthetic appreciation is so subjective, it’s inevitable that for a design to resonate strongly to a certain group of consumers it must, almost by definition, be unattractive to others.
It would be nice to think that the success of a product would be determined exclusively by its quality – but this is, of course, not the case. Unless the presentation is right, it simply will not catch the eye of the consumer and so will remain languishing on the shelf. Grey draws a fitting analogy with human attraction: in the long run the success of a relationship is dependent upon the personality (or, in the case of a bottle of wine, the liquid itself), but looks and clothes play an undeniably important role in sparking the initial attraction.
A sales rep for each and every brand of wine on the market could deliver a spellbinding pitch to convince the average shopper that their particular product is infinitely superior to its competitors – but not only would this be impossible from a financial perspective, it would also result in a rather claustrophobic wine aisle. No, the product must be able to sell itself, and as Kevin Shaw of Stranger & Stranger explains, “Design is the factor that can make the difference, that’s its role.” JKR chief executive Andy Knowles takes the argument a step further: “When all other things are equal, in a tight market – and obviously the wine category is a particularly tough environment – design can be the factor that gives a competitive advantage.” Even luxury goods ultimately become commoditised, he warns, so investing in good quality and distinctive design can be the key to long-term success.

Given the fact that most brands tend to adopt a very similar look and feel surely, you’d assume, the sector provides ample opportunity to try something a little different. Well, that’s certainly what the designers seem to think, and Grey sums up the mood when he states that wine producers “have a real opportunity to think laterally”. In reality, however, this simply doesn’t seem to be the case. The intimidating nature of wine combined with the overwhelming range that packs the aisle means that often consumers are desperately seeking reassurance. Pitcher believes that it is this desire to hold the hands of timid imbibers that has compelled the brand owners to adhere to an almost uniform design aesthetic.

The quality criterion
Because the market is so fiercely competitive brand owners are desperate to ensure that their product looks premium. “Every project we work on is all about reassuring the consumer,” Pitcher explains, “it’s about making the wine look more expensive than it is.” Shaw agrees, stating, “For the past five years quality has been the key theme, we’ve done lots of big, elegant, white labels.” In a crowded marketplace it’s easy to understand why every brand wants to give the impression that it over-delivers – but if every brand is aiming to achieve the same objective, the result is the current state of affairs where there’s frankly scant differentiation to aid the averagely educated consumer navigating their through the selection process. With such uniformity on the shelf, is it any wonder that price has become the principle factor in decision-making?

Homogenisation has been driven by the increasing domination of the supermarkets and the need to squeeze maximum revenues from every square millimetre of shelf space. The multiples are so dominant – and their top buyers, as gatekeepers, wield so much power – that designers actually bear in mind the personal preferences of individual buyers when drawing up designs. “The buyers have individual tastes and we’re well aware of them, all the design companies are,” says one. “We always ask our clients who they are seeing at which supermarket.” Such a dangerous concentration of power will surely hinder all parties – not least the supermarkets themselves – in the long term if it is allowed to continue unabated.
Pitcher laments that the need to reassure consumers has resulted in a real lack of “quirkiness” in UK wine packaging. She compares wine with smoothie brand Innocent: it has generated phenomenal success with a quirky, individual “personality”, but she doesn’t believe it would work with wine because consumers are too afraid to be adventurous. The US is more receptive to more off-the-wall design, for example YellowTail (perhaps because they are exposed to fewer lines, so feel less intimidated?) “but it doesn’t really resonate with UK consumers”. As a result, she is pessimistic and predicts that the status quo is here to stay. “Years ago the wine trade was prepared to experiment, but they’re just not willing to take risks anymore. That’ll be the direction for the future: more reassuring premium cues that make the wine look more valuable.” Pitcher’s argument follows the logic that “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”. But if you consider quite how important price has become, well, there’s a pretty compelling argument that actually, yes, it is broke, and it’s time to fix it – by giving consumers another hook to base their decision-making process on.

A number of other designers, thankfully, are rather more optimistic about the direction that the trade is heading. Design aesthetics tend to follow something of a cyclical pattern, Shaw suggests, and the move towards similar, “over-delivering” designs has been so comprehensive that it’s inevitable that there will be a swing back in the opposite direction. Grey believes that we are beginning to enter a phase where “more brand owners are looking to create a point of difference” and will use design as an important tool to achieve this. Shaw agrees, and indicates that this process is already underway. “We’re a barometer of what’s to come,” he says, “and a lot of our clients have recently come to us and said that they want to stand out from the crowd, to give their brand a stronger visual identity.”
Knowles is similarly upbeat – not least, as he explains in the box (right), because more senior executives are taking an interest in aesthetics. “In the recent past, we have started to see a refreshing acceptance of the importance of design,” he enthuses. Shaw, meanwhile, believes that the recent progress that has been made in terms of using design to make products look more premium need not be lost as more room is given to creativity. “Quality will still be a key element,” he predicts, “we certainly won’t be going back to the bad old days of terrible, tacky wine labels.”
It appears that there’s a clear divide among the design community about which direction the wine trade will go in future – and that plurality of perspectives is, in itself, surely a good thing. But let’s hope that the likes of Knowles and Shaw are correct, and big brand owners will have the ambition to commission the sort of designs that even somebody squinting as they walk down the wine aisle will be able to pick off the shelf. Because, for the time being, as Pitcher points out, “Everybody always talks about innovation, but in reality they’re not prepared to take the risk of doing it. It’s the great oddity of the UK wine trade.”  

© db May 2008