That said, what I find most interesting about this particular case is that it’s another example of how large-scale overhauls have a tendency to backfire. Now, I admittedly don’t know Tropicana’s rationale for making such a big break with the past in this new design direction. Considering their willingness to scrap it and go back to the previous version, I have to imagine it wasn’t very strong to begin with. Why then didn’t they take a more incremental approach to revising the packaging? I know hindsight makes it easier to make that argument, but still, we see it time and time again. Rarely does taking on a full-fledged redesign yield the same benefit in terms of customer satisfaction and product success as do little course-correcting design changes.

In the end, I’m not frightened by Tropicana’s back-tracking. I think it will serve as a useful example of the advantages of a more incremental strategy (and plenty of user testing/feedback early on) by showing what not to do and what the potential outcome can be.

I thought the Tropicana brand was interesting, bold, and modern, but I don’t think it would ever have been as strong as their image of the orange with the straw. I think they made the right decision, this time, to listen to their customers.

I don’t think this is anything to get worried about. I don’t see companies reacting to every concern a customer raises. I think there will always be thoughtful consideration behind business decisions, whether they are reactions to customer feedback, sales, or changes in the economy. It may seem like customers complained and Tropicana switched, but I think there was much more at play than that.

It’s unfortunate, yes, that much of the way we connect with each other is through whining and complaining, and that it can lead to crowd-minded hatefests. I think you’re right in suggesting we be more careful, and think about the impact of our criticism. That’s good manners, and being professional, and acting with integrity. I guess, sometimes, we all just need a little reminder.

Still, I think there’s something unique about the way it seems to enhance some negative threads. I can’t quite put my finger on it, but the super low threshold to post, the feed-like nature of it’s display — it just seems to encourage the user to chime in with a quick opinion. Sometimes, the result can be a bit too ‘group-thinky’ for my tastes.

But hey, I do like Twitter. Like anything, it’s gonna have some annoying aspects to it, but that’s just life. It’s an interesting conversation, and I’m glad I joined it.

If the brand design was so distinctive though (as Keith notes) why was it being changed so dramatically anyway? Perhaps only a modest update was needed instead.

>>”After all, it’s just fucking orange juice.”

Yeah, I’m sort of with you on that, I mean it was only the packaging that changed right? The orange stuff in the box/bottle is still the same isn’t it?!!

As for the customer-led criticism on blogs, twitter, etc…I think any design company or individual needs to take negative feedback on the chin. If the original design decisions are sound then it just forces a reasoned and valid counter argument (I sometimes plan my answers in advance if I can, haha!). Of course, if the designers went very, VERY wrong (which they might have done with this particular effort) then they have to respect that and act fast and take responsibility.

As I haven’t seen the product in question, the re-design or the original design – then my comments are purely based on what you’ve written in this article.