Translation and Alignment

We began identifying areas where the visual style no longer feels accurate or representative of Think. This surfaced clear opportunities for the visual system to evolve and better reflect the team and how they show up today.

• The brand feels flat, corporate, and overly safe.
• There is a lack of color, depth, motion, and dimensionality.
• The visual system leaves little room for expression (texture, movement, dynamic elements).
• The aesthetic does not reflect the energy, diversity, or personality of the team.

There was strong alignment that the way Think talks—about clients, the team, and the work—does not currently show up in the brand. The conversations in the room revealed more personality, confidence, and humanity than the existing messaging conveys.

• The brand does not reflect Think's lived reality.
• Messaging can feel too verbose and jargony, saying a lot without saying much.
• There is no clear stance, POV, or opinion, despite having incredible expertise.
• The tone feels polite and reserved where it could be more confident and human.

The team agreed that the work itself is not represented as strongly as it should be. Many of Think's strongest differentiators live in how the work unfolds—not just in the final outcomes—and those stories are not currently being told.

• Case studies should start to elevate the collaborative journey or transformation.
• The brand needs to demonstrate expertise, not just claim it.
• The most compelling parts of the work (ambiguity, decision-making, partnership) need to be represented.
• There is an opportunity to show the work differently, not just describe it.

At first, there were challenges in describing value using internal service language versus client problem language.

The team often defaulted to internal service and engagement language when talking about value. While accurate, this language is largely "for us" and doesn't naturally reflect how clients experience or describe their problems. We flagged this as an area to continue working on.

Clients come to Think for software and platform challenges, but the team acknowledged they consistently solve for what isn't being said yet.

This part of the conversation was especially interesting because it bridged internal language—like Design as Therapy—to real client problems expressed in client terms: workflow breakdowns, process issues, interpersonal dynamics, and misalignment around the true problem. These are challenges clients recognize, even if they can't always name them clearly.

Being platform-agnostic came up as an important qualifier for Think.

It isn't always the easiest thing to sell, but it keeps the work grounded in what's actually needed, rather than pushing a predetermined solution—a Think strength.

Client engagements are structured to meet clients where they are.

Various structures may get clients in the door and start small (Sprints), long-term partnership is the underlying goal.

Think understands that relationships are earned over time, and that the qualities and attributes identified in this session are what make those partnerships truly valuable for clients.

There is no front office or back office at Think. Clients work directly with the people doing the work, building trust through visibility and shared accountability.

Think sits in a middle space. More intimate and high-touch than large consultancies, but with the experience and scale that smaller boutiques can't offer.

Research was repeatedly framed as part of Think's standard for excellence. It's how clarity is built early and risk is reduced, ensuring outcomes succeed rather than fall flat.

This idea came up repeatedly—while much of Think's brand language is technically true, it doesn't need to be front and center or emphasized so heavily. Or explained to audiences.

Across materials and channels, the language often feels predictable or redundant. We spent time discussing how much should be implied rather than stated, and which ideas are actually worth leading with.

Internally, Think has a clear point of view. In the room, opinions and stories bring the company to life. In the brand, however, language often drifts toward being safe, neutral, or predictable, which flattens that POV.

There was consensus that much of the language across brand channels is too long, too jargony, or lacks a clear takeaway. In trying to say everything, the message loses focus—resulting in a lot of text but little clarity.

In the last session, the breakthrough happened. From there, Think was much more confident in seeing how the current brand language often asks the audience to do the interpreting: Where do I fit? Why should I care? What does this mean for me?

The team began to see how current language and messaging in the brand creates friction instead of clarity.

Process language is often used to explain how Think actually works. Instead of leading with how you think, how you work with clients, and what that changes, the brand tends to lead with how you do it.

We agreed the process is important, but it is not the first thing a client is looking for.

The team leaned into this, noting that process conversations often don't happen until Think has a better understanding of the client challenge and the actual need.

The team began to recognize there are clear opportunities to use the work to build credibility and trust instead of relying on broader claims.

We agreed that the most compelling moments of the work—the thinking, decisions, and turning points—could be shown more clearly and powerfully.

Across materials, we saw opportunities for tighter copy overall: fewer words, fewer slides, fewer blocks, and clearer takeaways.

Think's platform-agnostic approach is a true differentiator. The value lies in helping clients make good decisions, not selling a specific solution.

Working with Think is fun, and clients actually enjoy the time together.

Think should be seen as listening first and customizing their approaches and solutions based on need.

Personality and relationships matter (internally and externally), this needs to be elevated.

Think noticed the need to strike a balance between timeless design and staying modern.

There was a clear desire to avoid trends that will feel dated in five years.

The team discussed language that speaks directly to client problems and challenges. There's a clear opportunity to shift emphasis away from "we" and "us" and toward what clients are facing, feeling, and trying to solve.

Think has confidence and expertise, but wants to express POV without feeling cocky. The balance is being clear, assured, and opinionated without feeling arrogant.

The team gravitated toward language (and design) that eliminates long, verbose walls of text. There's interest in representing Think more effectively without over-explaining, and we're excited to explore what that equation looks like for Think.

POV and personality came up again as key to the new brand. This is a big theme that was consistent throughout every session.

The team agreed the brand voice needs more distinctiveness and shouldn't shy away from strong opinions or thought leadership. Case studies and work examples should do more of the heavy lifting here, reducing the need for explanation.

Humanity and realness need to be felt more clearly across the brand. The way Think actually shows up—with clients, with each other, and in the work—should be more visible.

This is twofold: elevating the personality, energy, and people behind Think, while also responding to the real world, where AI makes human presence and authenticity even more important.

This is worth mentioning again, as it was a core theme that surfaced consistently throughout our conversations. There's a clear opportunity to elevate personality, POV, people, and even physical spaces through imagery and design elements.

The brand needs to feel more confident, intentional, and human (human-ness)

There is clear interest in exploring design that increases engagement and feels more exploratory and innovative, but not at the expense of clarity.

Motion and animation should add energy and dimension—not confusion, distraction, or making any part of the brand feel overwhelming.

Strong typography is seen as a key lever for confidence and clarity.

We discussed how larger type, clearer hierarchy can make content more approachable, and elevate expertise without relying on excess copy.

The team felt the brand needed to explore opportunities for depth and texture so brand design feels less flat.

There are subtle design elements and touches that we need to explore in order to add more dimension to the entire system, and also make the brand feel more approachable and relatable (like the scotch tape example or the Polaroid effect) without feeling forced or superficial.

Think is open to exploring the color system with more intention.

It was clear that wherever we land, the palette needs to support the energy and expression of Think while remaining flexible.

Work, outcomes, and ROI should be clear and more prominent throughout the brand design system (across the website, social, and materials)

The system needs a strong, lasting foundation with enough flexibility to evolve.

The team was aligned on avoiding design approaches that feel overly trendy or time-bound.