I've been doing freelance brand design work on the side for a few years. Each time I do go through the process, I become a bit more comfortable and confident in my methods. This year, I finally feel like I'm able to let my branding process be informed by my practice as a designer for play.

I'm currently working on a pro-bono branding project in the early stages where I partner with the organization to boil their brand values into a four-page deck (mission, vision, value proposition, cultural position). In order to facilitate this discussion, I designed a playful activity called Utopia/Dystopia. Participants answer a series of hypothetical prompts about the future of the organization in utopian and dystopian scenarios.

Here are some example prompts:

Utopia: It's the year 2050, and [the organization] has totally transformed the world. There is an exhibit at a prominent museum in New York about the impact [the organization] has made on the world. It is broken up into three sections, which each focus on one aspect of society that has changed due to [the organization's] success. What are the three sections? In a sentence, describe the main idea of each section.

Dystopia: It's year 2050, and [the organization] has totally transformed the world, but in the worst way imaginable. Unfortunately, as the organization grew, it's leadership drifted further and further from the ideas that [the organization] was founded on. In an interview with a prominent newspaper, a journalist asks you the following question: "We can all agree that although [the organization] plays a prominent role in society, it's impact is a mixed bag at best. What do you think are the impacts [the organization] has made on the world that are most at odds with it's original vision?" How do you respond?

These are meant to be playful so I encourage my partners from the organization to embrace the hypothetical nature of the prompts to exaggerate or strengthen their ideas. "Good" answers won't necessarily be realistic, but they will focus on a real idea. For example "The worst case scenario would be that all our fans die" is not a particularly helpful answer because that would be a dystopia for ANY organization. The best answers are specific to the organization.

This exercise was helpful because it creates a magic circle wherein participants feel like they can stretch and pull what they think the organizations values are. Participants disagree with each other and debate in ways that they wouldn't if they just filled out a survey. This leaves me with a much more nuanced understanding of the brand, which aspects are fixed & concrete versus fluid and open to interpretation.