Blogs and web sites have been all a flutter over the past few weeks with the announcement of the rebranding effort by Siegel+Gale for the YMCA. It’s the first brand update in over 40 years for the organization, which was founded in 1844. Opinions, both positive and negative, are coming from citizens and communities to designers and strategists.

So, why do this now? Howard Belk, Co-President, CEO, and Chief Creative Officer explains it this way, “The underlying reason for change was simple. The mission of the Y has broadened dramatically over the past 20 years and the organization’s brand—its story—needs to better express its highest order impact on our world. The new identity is that of an organization that strengthens the essential foundations of community.”

Based on the strategic work performed, and how the organization has migrated to add to its social agenda and overall outreach, I think it was good timing, and a good move. If anything, they should have done it sooner. The friendly logo-mark, and the youthful colors all work for me. And as far as officially calling it “the Y,” it’s always been “the Y” for me. My first away-from-home camp experience was Y camp, many years ago.

However, among the concerns being expressed is whether the organization is moving away from its Christian value roots, even though it still remains as part of the mission statement, and everything it does seems to center around building “a healthy mind, spirit, and body for all…”

Time will tell on this point, as the new brand engages with the market through communications and experiences. But this “voiced” concern does give me the opportunity to highlight a vital issue that should always be examined before embarking on any rebranding effort. And that is:

What is your brand’s existing equity in the hearts and minds of your customer, and where in particular does that equity create the most meaning, importance and value?

In this case, how much of the brand’s positive equity that creates preference with its customers, is based on it being a Christian-based organization? If the meaning and value of this foundational brand pillar is no longer as relevant, then it is the task of the leadership team to weigh the level of its outward portrayal against the importance of the organization’s original vision. But, if it is still just as important, then the decision to minimize its presence should be weighed very carefully.

A well-conceived and implemented brand identity is based on foundational elements—the pillars of the brand—that are created from the truth inherent in the brand. They are the few key attributes that make the brand distinctive and meaningful. And this is the platform from which a strong strategy can be built and a market proposition of high value delivered.

So, when considering a rebrand, check the foundation first. Is it still solid with only a face lift needed, or has there been a fundamental and significant change in the truth of the brand that warrants a transformational change?

Which leads me back to “the Y.” I’m sure they did their homework. But what do you think?

Oh, and whatever happened to the YWCA?