As a creative with a background in graphic design, I notice the aesthetic details of corporate brand work. I notice when a logo color looks terrible in a commercial. I notice when a brand identity is terribly misused or when a font is substituted with something “close enough.” And don’t get me started on all those amateurs using inch marks for quotations. So of course, I was well aware that Starbucks had a twin-tailed siren, or as I like to call her, a mermaid in the center of their circular brand mark. But we designers are a mere fraction of the audience for this logo.

Coincidentally, not long ago I asked my wife (a nurse by training) about the mermaid inside the Starbucks logo. Her response was, and I quote: That’s a mermaid? I never really looked at that before. Unquote. This, I will argue, is the real crux of the logo redesign. People knew something was in that circle, but I contend that clear knowledge of it was nowhere near common—let alone the story behind it.

Some might say that because the mermaid was more of a texture that lacked equity, it should not be over-leveraged. But I assert that she is the only element, albeit underplayed until now, that could evolve into a shorthand for the brand.

Aesthetics aside…My gut thought is that this is a very strategic move akin to what Apple did a couple years ago when they removed the word “computers” from their name, wanting to be more broadly know as a tech brand and not just a computer company. With Starbucks offering more and more food options, a new wine and cheese concept and trying to get more of our different day-part bucks, I think the logo move is a smart one. They already have awareness of their mark (green circular object on a white field) and also the white cup with a brown holder around it…so why not take a page from Apple’s book but go one step further.

I suspect this will have very little affect on the coffee chugging public, as long as they get their iconic white cup with a brown holder (that’s Starbucks REAL identity if you ask me).

I love a good logo. There is nothing quite like the elegance of a brand boiled down to its core values and essence and then visualized in a single symbol or signature. Great logos or brand identities are simple, iconic, and powerful.

Simple means the identity doesn’t have to literally represent every single aspect of the brand, but it does have to be able to encompass everything the brand delivers, and that is no small task.

To be iconic a brand has to be aware of its industry, and look for white space or opportunities to differentiate, As well a be aware of general trends, and the overall cultural and human experience that is delivered by its symbol or signature. Of course, always being sensitive to building or leveraging its heritage where appropriate, which is really a key point—the idea that great brands always evolve their identity to be relevant to the era, brand, and most importantly the customer. Coke, AT&T and Apple are great examples of brands that understand that their identities or logos are living breathing assets that must be tended to like a garden from time to time in order to keep them fresh.

When is an identity powerful? I think there a several measures to consider. First and foremost, do your customers think it signals the right kind of emotions? Next, it’s important to understand the uniqueness of the mark. Is it different, disruptive, eye-catching, attractive, aspirational, really is it special? Does it have badge factor? Do you want to wear it? When the brand can answer yes to these questions there is a good chance the mark is powerful.