We’re judging rebrands all wrong

The latest buzz about Jaguar’s rebrand felt like déjà vu—a replay of how quickly we rush to criticize a new or refreshed brand the moment it’s unveiled. Many experts were quick to dissect the rebrand, focusing on the aesthetics without pausing to consider whether it managed to achieve what it was meant to do—move the needle. This wave of instant reactions is a microcosm not only of how the public evaluates branding but also of how companies themselves tend to approach it.

Personal preferences undeniably play a role in branding decisions. For decision-makers, who are often the first to connect with a brand's new identity, their preferences naturally carry significant weight. It’s not about ignoring these preferences but rather balancing them with the deeper insights and research that should ultimately guide the process.

From the other side, the popular notion that the audience is the only thing that matters doesn’t always hold true. While branding must resonate externally to be effective, the internal connection—the confidence and belief of those who create and champion the brand—is just as crucial. A successful brand needs both: a foundation rooted in research and insights, and a team that feels fully aligned with its direction.

The chicken-and-egg of product and brand

People have rushed to comment on Jaguar’s rebrand based on the product they were familiar with—the one they used to see. But what many forget is that a shift in branding often signals a deeper change within the product itself. It’s not just about the way the brand looks, it’s about what it represents and how it evolves.

This is where the relationship between product and brand becomes like the classic chicken-and-egg scenario. Does the product influence the brand, or does the brand shape the product? The truth is, it’s both. They’re intertwined, constantly influencing and redefining each other. A rebrand isn’t just a surface-level adjustment; it’s often a marker of a broader transformation in the company’s direction, priorities, or offerings.

With the reveal of Jaguar’s new all-electric lineup, as highlighted in Wired, the rebrand appears to signal a larger repositioning for the company. It’s not just about a fresh visual identity—it’s a reflection of a broader shift in product strategy and market ambitions. A strategic move to align the brand with its vision for an electric, forward-thinking future.

In this case, the rebrand and product evolution reinforce each other, demonstrating the dynamic relationship between the two. The brand doesn’t just mirror the product—it helps shape how it is perceived and what it represents moving forward. This interplay makes branding far more than an aesthetic exercise but a powerful tool to support and communicate transformation at every level.

But what about feedback?

The obvious question arises: How can you ignore public feedback? The answer is, you don’t—but you also don’t treat it as the only metric. Feedback can be misleading, especially when it’s based on immediate reactions.

Malcolm Gladwell’s stories illustrate this well. In The Tipping Point, he discusses how Hush Puppies, once nearly extinct, made a comeback not because of deliberate efforts or focus groups but because a small group of trendsetters in New York unexpectedly embraced the brand. Their influence spread, creating a cultural moment that no amount of market research could have predicted.

Moreover, in his 2004 TED Talk, “Choice, Happiness, and Spaghetti Sauce”, Gladwell shares the story of tomato sauce preferences. Consumers might claim they prefer smooth sauces, but when it comes to actual behavior, chunky sauces outperform in sales. The gap between what people say and what they do highlights why brands can’t rely solely on feedback to shape their direction.

Jaguar’s rebrand might face criticism now, but the real test lies in whether it connects with the right audience over time.

Time will tell

Branding isn’t about immediate reactions—it’s about effectiveness over time. Same with Jaguar’s rebrand story, which can’t be fully understood through today’s critiques; its true success lies in whether it aligns with the company’s evolution and supports its long-term goals. Will it solidify Jaguar’s place in a rapidly changing market? Will it redefine perceptions in a way that resonates with its audience? These are the questions that truly measure its impact, and only time will reveal the answers.