Buc-ee’s Thinks It’s Defending a Trademark. Beavercreek, Ohio Thinks It’s Defending Its Identity
The backlash to the gas station chain’s latest lawsuit proves the emotional power of logos and symbolism.
EXPERT OPINION BY SCOTT HUTCHESON, AUTHOR, BIOHACKING LEADERSHIP
Buc-ee’s in Luling, Texas. Photo:
Buc-ee’s says it is simply protecting its trademarked beaver logo in a contentious new lawsuit. Many residents of Beavercreek, Ohio, believe they are protecting something of their own. That difference reveals why leaders should never dismiss a logo, mascot, name, or other familiar symbol as merely a branding detail.
The Texas-based travel-center chain has sued Beaver’s Mini Mart, a small convenience store in Beavercreek, arguing that its smiling beaver logo is too similar to Buc-ee’s famous buck-toothed mascot. The case follows another Ohio trademark dispute involving Buc-ee’s and a smiling moose. Buc-ee’s maintains that protecting its intellectual property is necessary to preserve a brand it has spent decades building. Local residents see a national company targeting a neighborhood business whose name and mascot reflect the community where it operates.
The reaction has been fierce. Customers have rallied around the mini mart, local businesses have incorporated beavers into their own logos in solidarity, and a fundraising campaign has attracted tens of thousands of dollars for legal expenses. Even Ohio Governor Mike DeWine has called the lawsuit “absurd.” Beavercreek’s city council responded by formally recognizing the beaver as part of the city’s more than 200-year history.
A symbol can become part of who people are
The legal dispute will turn on questions such as trademark protection and the likelihood of consumer confusion. The leadership issue is different. Buc-ee’s sees a symbol it owns. The people of Beavercreek see a symbol connected to place, history, local relationships, and a business they regard as part of their community.
Refreshed leadership advice from CEO Stephanie Mehta
An Inc.com Featured Presentation
This distinction matters because symbols accumulate meaning. A logo may begin as a graphic chosen by a designer, but repeated experiences gradually attach memories and emotions to it. Customers connect it with products they trust. Employees associate it with colleagues, accomplishments, and professional identity. Communities may see it as evidence that a familiar institution belongs to them.
Research helps explain why reactions to these symbols can be unexpectedly intense. In a study involving adidas and New Balance, researchers Michael Walsh, Karen Winterich, and Vikas Mittal found that consumers with the strongest commitment to a brand reacted more negatively to substantial logo changes than less committed consumers did. The people most likely to care deeply about a brand may also be the people most likely to experience a visual change as a loss.
Preserving identity during change
I recently studied the integration of two long-established organizations. The leaders faced all the difficult structural questions that accompany a major merger, including governance, operations, leadership responsibilities, and the name of the combined enterprise. Yet one of their most revealing decisions involved a familiar character associated with one of the organizations.
Source: www.inc.com
