|
|
750966 |
<sect1 id="identity-project-structure">
|
|
|
de4714 |
|
|
|
0acfb2 |
<title>Corporate Structure</title>
|
|
|
de4714 |
|
|
|
de4714 |
<para>
|
|
|
de4714 |
&TC;; corporate structure is based on a &MCVIS;. In this
|
|
|
de4714 |
configuration, one unique name and one unique visual style is
|
|
|
de4714 |
used in all visual manifestation &TC;; is made of.
|
|
|
de4714 |
</para>
|
|
|
de4714 |
|
|
|
de4714 |
<para>
|
|
|
de4714 |
In a monolithic corporate visual identity structure, internal
|
|
|
de4714 |
and external stakeholders use to feel a strong sensation of
|
|
|
de4714 |
uniformity, orientation, and identification with the
|
|
|
de4714 |
organization. No matter if you are visiting web sites, using
|
|
|
de4714 |
the distribution, or acting on social events, the one unique
|
|
|
de4714 |
name and one unique visual style connects them all to say:
|
|
|
de4714 |
Hey! we are all part of &TC;;.
|
|
|
de4714 |
</para>
|
|
|
de4714 |
|
|
|
de4714 |
<para>
|
|
|
de4714 |
Other corporate structures for &TC;; have been considered as
|
|
|
de4714 |
well. Such is the case of producing one different visual style
|
|
|
de4714 |
for each major release of &TC;;. This structure isn't
|
|
|
de4714 |
inconvenient at all, but some visual contradictions could be
|
|
|
de4714 |
introduced if it isn't applied correctly and we need to be
|
|
|
de4714 |
aware of it. To apply it correctly, we need to know what &TC;;
|
|
|
de4714 |
is made of.
|
|
|
de4714 |
</para>
|
|
|
de4714 |
|
|
|
de4714 |
<para>
|
|
|
de4714 |
&TC;;, as organization, is mainly made of (but not limited to)
|
|
|
de4714 |
three visual manifestions: &TC;;, &TC;; and &TC;;. Inside
|
|
|
de4714 |
&TC;; visual manifestations, &TC;; maintains near to four
|
|
|
de4714 |
different major releases of &TC;;, parallely in time.
|
|
|
de4714 |
However, inside &TC;; visual manifestations, the content is
|
|
|
de4714 |
produced for no specific release information (e.g., there is
|
|
|
de4714 |
no a complete web site for each major release of &TC;;
|
|
|
de4714 |
individually, but one web site to cover them all). Likewise,
|
|
|
de4714 |
the content produced in &TC;; is industrially created for no
|
|
|
de4714 |
specific release, but &TC;; in general.
|
|
|
de4714 |
</para>
|
|
|
de4714 |
|
|
|
de4714 |
<para>
|
|
|
de4714 |
In order to produce the &TCPMCVIS; correctly, we need to
|
|
|
de4714 |
concider all the visual manifestations &TC;; is made of, not
|
|
|
de4714 |
just one of them. If one different visual style is
|
|
|
de4714 |
implemented for each major release of &TC;;, which one of
|
|
|
de4714 |
those different visual styles would be used to cover the
|
|
|
de4714 |
remaining visual manifestations &TC;; is made of (e.g., &TC;;
|
|
|
de4714 |
and &TC;;)?
|
|
|
de4714 |
</para>
|
|
|
de4714 |
|
|
|
de4714 |
<para>
|
|
|
de4714 |
Probably you are thinking: yes, I see your point, but &TC;;
|
|
|
de4714 |
connects them all already, why would we need to join them up
|
|
|
de4714 |
into the same visual style too, isn't it more work to do, and
|
|
|
de4714 |
harder to maintain?
|
|
|
de4714 |
</para>
|
|
|
de4714 |
|
|
|
de4714 |
<para>
|
|
|
de4714 |
Harder to maintain, more work to do, probably. Specially when
|
|
|
de4714 |
you consider that &TC;; has proven stability and consistency
|
|
|
de4714 |
through time and, that, certainly, didn't come through
|
|
|
de4714 |
swinging magical wands or something but hardly working out to
|
|
|
de4714 |
automate tasks and providing maintainance through time. With
|
|
|
de4714 |
that in mind, we consider &TCPCVIS; must be consequent with
|
|
|
de4714 |
such stability and consistency tradition. It is true that
|
|
|
de4714 |
&TC;; does connect all the visual manifestations it is present
|
|
|
de4714 |
on, but that connection is strengthened if one unique visual
|
|
|
de4714 |
style backups it. In fact, whatever thing you do to strength
|
|
|
de4714 |
the visual connection among &TC;; visual manifestations would
|
|
|
de4714 |
be very good in favor of &TC;; recognition.
|
|
|
de4714 |
</para>
|
|
|
de4714 |
|
|
|
de4714 |
<para>
|
|
|
de4714 |
Obviously, having just one visual style in all visual
|
|
|
de4714 |
manifestations for eternity would be a very boring thing and
|
|
|
de4714 |
would give the idea of a visually dead project. So, there is
|
|
|
de4714 |
no problem on creating a brand new visual style for each new
|
|
|
de4714 |
major release of &TC;;, in order to refresh &TC;; visual
|
|
|
de4714 |
style; the problem itself is in not propagating the brand new
|
|
|
de4714 |
visual style created for the new release of &TC;; to all other
|
|
|
de4714 |
visual manifestations &TC;; is made of, in a way &TC;; could
|
|
|
de4714 |
be recognized no matter what visual manifestation be in front
|
|
|
de4714 |
of us. Such lack of uniformity is what introduces the visual
|
|
|
de4714 |
contradition we are precisely trying to solve by mean of
|
|
|
de4714 |
themes production in &TCAR;.
|
|
|
de4714 |
</para>
|
|
|
de4714 |
|
|
|
750966 |
</sect1>
|