Amid a profound transformation of intermediary bodies, representative associations—from trade unions to employers’ organizations—are now redefining their role. In this context, Inarea has consistently supported—and interpreted—the evolution of brand identity in the sector, from one of the earliest emblematic cases, CGIL in 1984, to the recent rebranding of Confcommercio.
It can be said that today representative associations need to rethink their role. Antonio Romano, why is brand identity becoming central for these organizations?
Because we live in an age of disintermediation and of the “liquid society” theorized by Zygmunt Bauman. Major contemporary players such as platforms like Google and Amazon have redefined direct relationships with people, hollowing out the traditional role of intermediary bodies. This does not mean that the need for representation has disappeared, but rather that it has transformed: it is as if we have moved from representation to representation as expression. In this shift, the brand becomes a fundamental—almost defensive—tool, as it enables organizations to be visible and to make collective values relevant within a fragmented and individualistic system.
How important is it to recognize yourself in a name?
Very much. A name is the first element of identity, but it must be consistent with what it represents. If an organization needs half an hour to be explained, then there’s a problem. A brand, by definition, is something that does not require explanation. In a context where people belong to multiple communities—often fluid and temporary—immediate recognition becomes essential. Today, community is the real glue between people and associations, even more than the services themselves. What brings people together is the ability to express a shared purpose, a set of common goals.If an association can understand itself as a community—not just as a service structure—then it can become attractive again. The point is no longer “what do I do,” but “why do I exist.”
The CGIL project was pioneering in this respect.
It anticipated several design principles that have since become fundamental. In the 1980s, we introduced a monolithic brand architecture system. The red square—still a defining element of the logo today—became the symbolic and identity container of the Confederation, capable of bringing together a wide range of sectors and local entities. It was a response to a fragmentation that was already evident at the time. Today, this principle is even more relevant: converging under a shared sign is more effective than multiplying identities that ultimately become weak. The more you fragment, the more you lose recognizability. Our work has always been about building systems that can hold differences together—enhancing what unites them and, in doing so, creating strong identities.
A principle that we also find in more recent projects, such as the one for Confcommercio.
Confcommercio represents six different areas—commerce, tourism, services, transport, professions, and culture—yet its name still evokes only one. The rebranding therefore pursued a dual objective: on the one hand, to overcome misunderstandings; on the other, to build a more inclusive identity. For this reason, we worked on the name “ConfCom,” which conveys the idea of community and network. It was not just a formal intervention, but one that reshaped how the organization presents and positions itself—embracing the plurality of the sectors it represents without implicit hierarchies, and highlighting connections and interdependencies. The innovative aspect also lies in the introduction of a more flexible and modular language, designed to adapt to different contexts, touchpoints, and audiences. The rebranding reflects a broader shift in the role of representation: no longer solely a protective function, but a platform for connection and a catalyst for relationships.
When does rebranding become necessary?
When the brand is no longer aligned with the time it lives in. Organizations accumulate layers, bureaucracies, and misunderstandings. At a certain point, it becomes necessary to stop and ask: are we still contemporary?Rebranding is a bit like moving house—disruptive at first, but necessary to build new habits. Above all, it is a measure of change, not its cause.