PREMIUM SEARCH Search by job title, geography and build a list of executive contacts
For companies, brand recognition is a matter of profit and loss. But for the International Committee of the Red Cross, brand recognition can mean life or death. To serve its mission of protecting humanitarian and medical personnel in war zones around the world, the Red Cross symbol must make itself absolutely recognizable and its meanings absolutely clear.
The Red Cross name equals a description of its visual mark -- as do the names Target (TGT) and Apple (AAPL). The symbol, an inversion of the Swiss flag showing a red cross on a white ground, was devised at the inception of the Red Cross movement by its founder, Henri Dunant, in 1863. Soldiers typically used white flags to communicate surrender, so Dunant thought a largely white flag would make troops more respectful of the new, peaceful organization. (Dunant won the first Nobel Peace Prize in 1901.)
VETOED PROPOSALS. For years, the organization has actually identified itself via two symbols: the Red Cross created by Dunant, and the Red Crescent. Introduced in 1876 during an armed conflict between Russia and Turkey, the organization began using the crescent, because many Muslim nations refused to recognize the cross.
On Dec. 8, 2005, government signatories to the Geneva Convention elected to adopt a new symbol: the Red Crystal. This "third Protocol emblem" -- which would have to be officially adopted at an international conference called by the Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies for late June -- would be the first new symbol to be adopted by the Red Cross since the Red Lion and Sun in 1923, a symbol developed for Iran that, while still recognized, has not been used since 1980.
Not that other symbols haven't been proposed. Both Sri Lanka, in 1957, and India, in 1977, tried to establish the Red Swastika, a Hindi symbol of good luck. Both attempts failed. And for the last 50 years, Israel has been pressing for Magen David Adom, the Israeli humanitarian organization with observer status in the Red Cross federation, to be recognized as a full member and its Red Star of David emblem recognized.
POTENTIAL FOR HOSTILITY. The reason for these rejections? The Red Cross fears that, if emblems grow more specific and more numerous, they will compromise the safety of those the Red Cross has sworn to protect. While soldiers in the heat of battle can be relied on to recognize perhaps two or three symbols of protection, expecting them to identify 200 or 300 isn't reasonable.
Moreover, the limited number of marks has a unifying purpose, bringing together individuals from different countries under a common goal. Allowing symbols for the Red Cross to turn into veiled signs for its host countries would risk rendering them useless. Rather than convey neutrality, they could invite hostility.
So it wasn't until the American Red Cross, lobbying on behalf of Israel, withheld almost $35 million in its subscription fees to the Red Cross federation that the organization began serious talks about the creation of a neutral symbol. While the organization will not require any country to use the symbol, it will demand that all nations respect it.
SIMPLE POWER. The crystal's shape is essentially a square with a thick frame tilted 45 degrees. Unlike the cross, crescent, or six-pointed star -- all associated with religions -- the crystal outline tends to suggest the shape of something wholly nonsectarian: any of various common highway and road signs.
The symbol's design, with an empty center, emphasizes its connection to a frame. The symbol is an empty vessel, a neutral shape, a sign of sign-ness. As such, it is hardwired in our brains as something that simply means "take notice." Such a reaction amounts to precisely what the Red Cross wants. As the organization's Web site shows, the Red Crystal's frame can remain empty, as it will for Israel, or it may carry the mark of the Red Cross, Red Crescent, or -- in the case of Eritrea -- both.
Every piece of communication, visual or verbal, has a sender and a receiver. The degree to which the communication conveys its intended message depends on an absence of "noise," or interference. In the case of the Red Cross, noise might come from a lack of visibility (the symbol obscured by the mud on the door of a jeep), or it might stem from a bias inherent to the sender or receiver (the symbol isn't recognized because it's also a symbol from a warring religious group).
A WISE DECISION. While it has done everything in its power to minimize the first type of noise -- hence using a clear and readable logo -- the Red Cross had done little over its history to minimize noise of the second type, leaving both of its major symbols vulnerable to cultural bias.
The Red Crystal, then, marks a major step in the right direction for this groundbreaking organization. Like all doctors, the Logo Doctors are fans of the Red Cross. Now we have one more reason to celebrate. If a successful logo translates into a call to action, there's no greater call than, to borrow from the words of Hippocrates, "First, do no harm."
Giampietro and Smith are the founding partners of Giampietro+Smith, a design studio in New York City that focuses on editorial and strategic design for cultural, nonprofit, and corporate clients. The studio also produces critical writing about design. Visit their studio at www.studio-gs.com. The Doctors will be "in" every other week at
BusinessWeek Online.
Printer-Friendly Version