How an iconic brand pivots toward a new reality
We’ve all seen the headlines, the hot takes and the visceral response to Jaguar’s recent rebranding efforts from the media community. According to Oscar Wilde’s famous measure of success, “There is only one thing worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about,” Jaguar’s new brand direction has been a smashing success. While the media reaction and commentary from the general public has been near-universally negative, on a deeper level, Jaguar’s rebrand may be a watershed moment for the 100-year-classic car company’s future.
Ultimately, a great brand can weather any media storm if it can accomplish something more meaningful – bringing its customers along for the journey. Jaguar’s controversial rebrand efforts set out to do something different from traditional auto marketing. As Jaguar’s Managing Director Rawdon Glover said, “If we play in the same way that everybody else does, we'll just get drowned out. So we shouldn't turn up like an auto brand.” Swayable set out to test this hypothesis and uncover the impact of the innovative rebrand on potential buyers through a real-time experiment.
Generally, the new brand mark performed equally or slightly better than the classic mark among core target segments in our test. Across all segments tested, our experiment did not pick up any significant negatives with the new brand mark. Notably, Swayable conducted this test during the media firestorm, adding credibility to the notion that Jaguar has not accrued negative sentiment with their new brand redesign.
Swayable tested two creative executions to gain insights and reactions to the new Jaguar brand mark among an audience of over 7,000 consumers. Our experiment, conducted through a randomized controlled trial (RCT), displayed two versions of static vehicle creative featuring the classic Jaguar branding and the new brand mark to measure the impact on critical measures of marketing success (brand favorability, purchase internet, and brand affinity) among key buying communities. Our testing methodology allowed us to hone in on the impact of the brand mark with the consumers Jaguar really cares about – highly affluent buyers who have purchased a Jaguar in the past (retention play) or would consume one in the future (growth play). While our test focused explicitly on the brand mark (“before and after”), we know this is one element of Jaguar's strategy to reposition their whole business for a new audience. By isolating our test to the branding mark in this stage of the rebranding campaign, we focused on the most visible and long-lasting change the company is making.
From our research experiment, let’s dig deeper into key segments and brand KPIs.
Using randomized controlled trials (RCTs), Swayable tested how the new and classic branding impacted brand perception and purchase consideration. Four groups of participants were shown different creative assets created from existing Jaguar product images: two featuring Jaguar’s previous branding and another two showcasing the new branding. While Jaguar has been pivoting towards a simpler brand mark treatment without the “Leaper” over the past few years, our test focused on comparing the traditional logo with the new logo to isolate the effect of the redesign.
This RCT test included responses from 7,186 U.S. consumers; approximately 2,336 saw a control asset and 4,850 saw a version of the Jaguar branding. The primary metrics were Brand Favorability, Brand Consideration, and agreement with Jaguar’s core brand attributes.
When the data is segmented into current and past Jaguar owners, the data reveals a subtle yet meaningful trend: the new branding assets outperformed expectations, delivering a noticeable lift in agreement that the phases “copy nothing” and “a symbol of change” represent Jaguar across both groups. This suggests that while the rebrand’s impact may not be dramatic, it successfully shifts perceptions among Jaguar’s most critical audiences.
As younger generations, such as Gen Z and Millennials, consider purchasing from luxury car brands, it’s key for Jaguar to understand their brand’s impact on these potential customers.
Our data shows that Gen Z and Millennials demonstrated a higher degree of Brand Consideration towards the new branding than Gen X, in addition to higher baseline Jaguar brand consideration. This suggests the new branding may have a solid appeal to younger, trend-conscious consumers attracted to modern design.
Gen X also demonstrates a higher Brand Consideration preference towards the new branding, just less dramatically than Gen Z and Millennials.
However, Gen X’ers are more likely than Gen Z or Millennials to recommend the new Jaguar branding to a friend or family member in the market for a new car.
Our findings remain consistent among Jaguar’s key demographic—affluent, high-income consumers earning over $100,000 annually. This group’s steady reception underscores the rebrand’s ability to resonate without alienating the brand’s core audience and is counterintuitive to the dominant story in the media and on social media platforms since the new branding announcement.
When those making over $100K/year were asked whether Jaguar’s brand represented a symbol of change (in the luxury car space, auto brand market, in general, etc.), respondents were clear that the new branding represented change more so than the classic branding.
Meanwhile, college-educated and postgrad respondents demonstrated little favorability difference between the classic and new branding, with a slight skew in favorability towards the new.
As Jaguar continues to evolve its brand to capture the attention of new audiences, it must consider whether new potential customers feel as though “people like them” also resonate with the brand. We asked all respondents if they believed that “Jaguar is a brand for people like me.”
Among all demographics in this survey, the new branding made respondents feel that Jaguar was for people like them.
Among audiences 18-34, it’s clear that among the “summer images,” they feel like the new branding resonates with people like them.
Across all age groups, this feeling persisted with the new branding versus the classic.
There’s a strong sense among women that the new branding represents people like them, compared to the classic branding.
Current and past owners demonstrated a stronger “people like me” measure regarding the new branding than the classic, especially compared to those who currently do not own a Jaguar or haven’t in the past.
Brand favorability, particularly regarding favorable opinions and Net Promoter Score (NPS), showed steady performance across all Jaguar assets, both new and classic brandings. This suggests that the rebrand did not significantly disrupt consumers' favorability towards Jaguar or their likelihood to recommend the brand, maintaining a consistent and generally positive perception overall.
Leverage Youth Appeal: Marketing strategies should focus on Gen Z and Millennials to capitalize on the new branding’s appeal.
Attribute Alignment: Promote attributes like sleekness, authenticity, and originality in branding materials to align with audience perceptions.
Owner Engagement: Target current and past owners with messaging that reinforces the new branding as a symbol of evolution and innovation.
Explore Demographic Nuances: Tailor campaigns based on gender and education segments to maximize branding perception.
Contrary to media narratives, our data suggests Jaguar’s new branding is far from a failure. While it hasn’t caused a dramatic surge in interest, it has not harmed the brand’s reputation or ability to attract its target audience.
Rebranding is always risky, especially for legacy brands with passionate followings. Jaguar’s approach may have divided opinion, but data shows the rebrand neither alienated existing customers nor deterred prospective buyers. The real story? This change was not a misstep—and may prove to be a strategic win as Jaguar reinvents itself in the age of electric vehicles.
This monadic RCT survey experiment was conducted on Swayable over 12 hours between November 25 and 26 with responses from 7,186 U.S. consumers aged 21+. Questions were asked of a general population sample aged 21+ using Swayable’s proprietary online platform.
The sample frame is U.S. smartphone users in all 50 states with active internet connections who are users of popular mobile and web apps that make up Swayable’s network of respondent partners. Respondents are solicited from partner apps with non-monetary reward offers for their participation. Respondents were recruited with an approximately even ratio of men and women imposed via separate quotas for each. This is a “non-probability sample” (in the conventional terminology of public opinion research, although this team believes this concept is not meaningful since truly random sampling of the population is not possible via any methodology). To correct for over/under-sampling, all samples are post-stratified to the general U.S. population using cross-tabulations accounting for factors including age, ethnicity, gender, educational attainment, and geography, based on the latest available data from the U.S. Census Bureau and Swayable’s proprietary population modeling. Margins of error quoted are based on response distribution statistics and sample sizes and are calculated independently for each result.
This research was conducted and self-funded by Swayable.