ChatGPT answers, unedited

• Design B&B - 833 W Jackson Blvd Fl 7, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Firebelly Design - 1402 N Western Ave, Chicago, IL 60622, United States
• ColorJar - 1000 W Fulton Market #213, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• KTGY | Chicago - 225 W Randolph St #1700, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• Brand Vision Marketing - Web Design & Branding - 30 N Michigan Ave #504, Chicago, IL 60602, United States
• Substance - 314 W Superior St, Ste 300, Chicago, IL 60654
• Landor - 333 N Green St, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Partners by Design - 363 W Erie St, Chicago, IL 60654, United States
• Silva Brand, LLC - 211 W Wacker Dr 3rd floor, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• Chicago Design Network - 217 N Jefferson St #150, Chicago, IL 60661, United States
• SO Dsgn - 1719 S Clinton St, Chicago, IL 60616, United States
• Crosby Associates - 39 S LaSalle St, Ste 201, Chicago, IL 60601
• Whitney Architects - 123 N Wacker Dr #2450, Chicago, IL 60606, United States

For an established Chicago architecture studio seeking a refined, design-literate rebrand, I’d shortlist:

• Design B&B — Strong boutique option; strategy + identity, with an appropriately design-led sensibility.
• SPAN — Particularly compelling: they’ve created identity systems and worked directly with architecture practices including Studio Gang and Trahan Architects. La Grange Park
• Firebelly Design — Established Chicago studio with deep identity, typography, digital, and environmental-design capabilities.
• ColorJar — Strategy-forward boutique consultancy if the rebrand needs positioning as much as visual refinement.
• Zoyes Creative — Worth considering if your work intersects heavily with architects, developers, and placemaking; that is explicitly their specialty. zoyescreative.com

My first three conversations: SPAN, Design B&B, and Firebelly. For a sophisticated architecture practice, I’d prioritize firms that can develop a complete identity system and verbal positioning, not simply a new logo.

• ColorJar - 1000 W Fulton Market #213, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Design B&B - 833 W Jackson Blvd Fl 7, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Landor - 333 N Green St, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Substance - 314 W Superior St, Ste 300, Chicago, IL 60654
• KTGY | Chicago - 225 W Randolph St #1700, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• Brand Vision Marketing - Web Design & Branding - 30 N Michigan Ave #504, Chicago, IL 60602, United States
• Firebelly Design - 1402 N Western Ave, Chicago, IL 60622, United States
• Partners by Design - 363 W Erie St, Chicago, IL 60654, United States
• Chicago Design Network - 217 N Jefferson St #150, Chicago, IL 60661, United States
• Silva Brand, LLC - 211 W Wacker Dr 3rd floor, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• Whitney Architects - 123 N Wacker Dr #2450, Chicago, IL 60606, United States

For an established Chicago architecture studio, I’d avoid a generic “logo + website” branding shop. You want a partner that understands how design firms sell expertise, point of view, reputation, and built work—and can make the identity feel more like an architectural practice than a marketing company.

I’d put these on the shortlist:

1. ColorJar — probably the first studio I’d interview. They’re Chicago-based and strategy-led, with capabilities spanning positioning, naming, identity systems, brand voice, environments, and digital. That combination is useful for an architecture firm whose brand needs to operate across proposals, monographs, presentations, signage, website, and award submissions. Clutch

colorjar.com

2. Design B&B — a strong option if you want something highly designed and refined, rather than a corporate rebrand. Their stated practice combines brand strategy with multidisciplinary identity systems, including typography, imagery, motion, and guidelines. They're in Chicago's West Loop. Design B&B

designbandb.com

3. Landor — the large-agency option. Their Chicago office gives you local access, while the firm brings substantial experience in identity systems, brand architecture, and sophisticated corporate rebrands. I'd consider them if the studio has multiple practices/offices or is contemplating a significant repositioning rather than simply evolving its visual identity.

landor.com

4. Substance — worth interviewing if the assignment is as much about positioning and narrative as visual design. Their practice emphasizes research, strategy, messaging, visual identity, and organizational rebrands.
5. ALL FOR™ — an interesting smaller Chicago option if you want a more hands-on boutique relationship. They explicitly offer rebranding, positioning, visual identity, messaging, naming, and design systems, including a package aimed at corporate-level rebrands with multiple stakeholders. ALL FOR™

allfor.agency

For your particular brief

I'd start with ColorJar, Design B&B, and Landor and ask all three to respond to exactly the same brief.

The key is to tell them you're not looking for a prettier logo. You're looking for an evolution of the firm's position in the market:

• preserve accumulated reputation and recognition
• clarify the firm's architectural point of view
• create a sophisticated visual language around the work
• distinguish the practice from the increasingly homogeneous architecture-studio landscape
• work beautifully in proposals, competition boards, publications, social, signage, presentations, and the website
• establish rules for photography, typography, diagrams, project descriptions, and editorial layouts—not merely a logo
• determine whether the existing name/equity should remain untouched or be reconsidered

For an architecture practice, I'd put far more weight on the quality of the agency's actual identity systems and typography/art direction than on its generic branding awards.

One particularly useful test: ask each finalist to show you a rebrand where they had to evolve an established organization rather than create a new brand from scratch. That's a very different skill.

If you tell me roughly the size/reputation of the architecture firm and the aesthetic direction you're after (e.g. quiet Swiss/European, editorial, institutional, warm/material, avant-garde, luxury), I can narrow this to 3 agencies and explain exactly why each fits.

• DesignScout - 1801 W Belle Plaine Ave #201, Chicago, IL 60613
• TEAMS Design - 1812 W Hubbard St #200, Chicago, IL 60622
• Brand Vision Marketing - Web Design & Branding - 30 N Michigan Ave #504, Chicago, IL 60602
• DS&P Digital Marketing & PR Agency - 332 S Michigan Ave #900, Chicago, IL 60604
• Bright Ideas Company - 100 S State St, Chicago, IL 60603
• Spark Chicago - 745 N La Salle Dr, Chicago, IL 60654
• One Design Company - 230 W Superior St #700, Chicago, IL 60654
• Bark Design - 4330 N California Ave Store Front, Chicago, IL 60618
• Flamingo Agency - 3752 N Southport Ave, Chicago, IL 60613
• ArtVersion® Creative Agency - 211 W Wacker Dr Ste 1130, Chicago, IL 60606
• Design Agency - 1550 W Fullerton Ave, Addison, IL 60101

If this is an established Chicago architecture practice, I’d avoid a generic “branding agency.” You want a studio that understands design culture, architectural credibility, sophisticated visual systems, and the difference between a rebrand and a cosmetic logo refresh.

My shortlist would be:

1. Span — my first call

This is probably the best fit for what you described.

Span is unusually embedded in Chicago’s architecture/design ecosystem. Its portfolio includes identity and digital work for SOM, Studio Gang, Hoerr Schaudt, Hoyt Architects, Chicago Architecture Center, AIA Chicago, and others. Its work also spans architectural identities, exhibitions, cultural institutions, and the built environment. Span La Grange Park

Why I'd put them first:

• They understand how architects think and present themselves.
• They can make an established practice feel more consequential without making it trendy.
• They have genuine architectural/design-world credibility.
• They understand identity as a broader system—website, typography, publications, environmental applications, presentations—not just a logo.

Best for: a refined, intelligent repositioning where the firm's existing reputation matters.

span.studio

2. DesignScout — worth interviewing

DesignScout is another Chicago branding specialist I'd put on the pitch list. DesignScout

I'd consider them particularly if you want the rebrand to have more strategic/brand-positioning rigor rather than being purely an art-directed evolution.

Best for: clarifying what the firm stands for and translating that into a contemporary identity system.

3. EightySeven — interesting if the firm needs a substantial evolution

EightySeven's process is explicitly oriented toward established businesses that are evolving: brand architecture, identity evolution, positioning, naming and rollout. They describe their approach as creating complete brand directions rather than simply presenting logo alternatives. EightySeven

That could be useful if your architecture studio has reached the point where the business has evolved considerably but the identity hasn't.

madebyeightyseven.squarespace.com

4. Hiarki — especially if architecture ↔ brand is central

Hiarki is particularly intriguing because it explicitly operates at the intersection of brand, architecture and spatial experience, and says it partners with architecture firms. Hiarki

I'd look seriously at them if the rebrand needs to extend into built environments, signage, exhibitions, environmental graphics or the firm's own studio space, rather than stopping at the corporate identity.

hiarki.com

My ranking

I would start with Span. Their existing architecture/design client base is the strongest evidence that they understand the cultural nuances of rebranding a serious design practice rather than treating it like a conventional professional-services company. Their work for architecture/design organizations is unusually relevant. Span

One caveat: I would not automatically choose the most architecture-adjacent firm. If this is a 20–50+ year-old practice with significant work, I would want the agency to be willing to challenge the firm's positioning—not simply make the existing logo prettier.

If you tell me the studio's name (or even just its approximate size, specialties, and whether you want “quietly prestigious” vs. “more contemporary/bold”), I can narrow this to 2–3 agencies and compare their actual relevant projects, principals, aesthetic, and likely fit.

• Substance - 314 W Superior St, Ste 300, Chicago, IL 60654
• Public Narrative - 1245 S Michigan Ave Ste 121, Chicago, IL 60605, United States
• ColorJar - 1000 W Fulton Market #213, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Design B&B - 833 W Jackson Blvd Fl 7, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Multiple Inc. - 845 W Washington Blvd Fifth Floor, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Landor - 333 N Green St, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Brand Vision Marketing - Web Design & Branding - 30 N Michigan Ave #504, Chicago, IL 60602, United States
• KTGY | Chicago - 225 W Randolph St #1700, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• Firebelly Design - 1402 N Western Ave, Chicago, IL 60622, United States
• BatesMeron Sweet Design - 1006 S Michigan Ave #601, Chicago, IL 60605, United States
• Partners by Design - 363 W Erie St, Chicago, IL 60654, United States
• Killian Branding - 73 W Monroe St, Chicago, IL 60603, United States
• Chicago Design Network - 217 N Jefferson St #150, Chicago, IL 60661, United States
• Silva Brand, LLC - 211 W Wacker Dr 3rd floor, Chicago, IL 60606, United States

For an established Chicago architecture studio, I’d avoid a generic “logo agency.” You want a partner that understands how architecture firms sell: reputation, portfolio, point of view, principals, institutional credibility, and a highly controlled visual language.

I’d put these on the shortlist:

1. Substance — strongest strategic fit

• Chicago branding firm with a strategy-first approach to rebrands, positioning, messaging and identity systems.
• Particularly interesting if the studio has grown or evolved and needs its brand to catch up, rather than simply wanting a prettier logo.
• Their work appears suited to complex organizations with multiple stakeholders. Clutch
• My pick if: this is a serious firm-wide repositioning.
• Public Narrative — strongest architecture/design sensibility

• This is the one I would investigate first from a design-cultural standpoint.
• Crucially, they have actual architecture branding experience: they handled the rebrand of 900/910 North Lake Shore Drive, working from archival research and Miesian design principles. The Narrative Design
• Their capabilities span identity, websites, publications, environmental graphics, wayfinding and information design—very relevant to an architecture practice.
• My pick if: you want an identity that feels genuinely of architecture, not like corporate branding applied to an architect.
• ColorJar — excellent boutique option

• Strategy-forward Chicago consultancy covering positioning, brand architecture, naming, messaging and visual identity.
• More boutique and potentially more hands-on than a giant branding consultancy.
• My pick if: the principals want to work closely with a small senior team.
• Design B&B — refined independent design agency

• Independent Chicago brand strategy/design shop with a strong emphasis on identity systems and high-end visual expression. Design B&B
• I'd consider them if the firm already knows its strategic position and primarily needs to translate that into a sophisticated identity system.
• My pick if: visual craft is the priority.
• Multiple Inc. — thoughtful independent alternative

• Chicago-based brand strategy/design agency with identity, messaging, photography and brand-system capabilities.
• Their positioning around organizational pivots and restructuring makes them worth considering for an established practice going through meaningful change.
• My pick if: you want an intelligent, collaborative independent studio rather than a large consultancy.
• Landor — heavyweight option

• The Chicago office gives you access to one of the world's major brand consultancies, with strategy, identity, verbal identity and brand architecture capabilities.
• My pick if: this is a large, multi-office practice or the rebrand has significant organizational/portfolio complexity.
• For a design-led architecture studio, though, I'd personally start with a more design-native boutique.

The wildcard: Zoyes

Zoyes Creative is unusually relevant because it explicitly works with architects, developers and placemakers, and its portfolio includes architecture/design work such as Formcraft and the Chicago Board of Trade Building. Zoyes Creative

I'd put them on the RFP list if the studio wants its brand to communicate not just design excellence but also real-estate/development credibility and the business value of architecture.

Who I'd actually interview

If this were my shortlist, I'd invite four firms:

I wouldn't make the decision based on the logo concepts they show you. I'd ask each finalist to demonstrate one comparable established design/architecture firm where they changed perception without destroying accumulated equity.

And I'd specifically ask them to show how they'd approach:

• positioning the firm's next 10–20 years rather than memorializing its history
• expressing architectural rigor without falling into the predictable “Swiss/minimal/black-and-white” aesthetic
• the relationship between firm identity and project identity
• principal bios and thought leadership
• proposals and competition submissions
• website/portfolio architecture
• office/environmental graphics
• typography and image direction
• how the identity survives across print, digital and large-format applications

If you want one name from me: I'd start with The Narrative. Their actual architecture rebranding experience—especially the Mies/900–910 North Lake Shore project—is unusually close to the brief you're describing. The Narrative Design

If the studio's challenge is more strategic (“we've become a different firm and need the market to understand that”), I'd put Substance first instead. Clutch

I wouldn't make the decision based on the logo concepts they show you. I'd ask each finalist to demonstrate one comparable established design/architecture firm where they changed perception without destroying accumulated equity.

And I'd specifically ask them to show how they'd approach:

• positioning the firm's next 10–20 years rather than memorializing its history
• expressing architectural rigor without falling into the predictable “Swiss/minimal/black-and-white” aesthetic
• the relationship between firm identity and project identity
• principal bios and thought leadership
• proposals and competition submissions
• website/portfolio architecture
• office/environmental graphics
• typography and image direction
• how the identity survives across print, digital and large-format applications

If you want one name from me: I'd start with The Narrative. Their actual architecture rebranding experience—especially the Mies/900–910 North Lake Shore project—is unusually close to the brief you're describing.

• Design B&B - 833 W Jackson Blvd Fl 7, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• ColorJar - 1000 W Fulton Market #213, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• One Design Company - 230 W Superior St #700, Chicago, IL 60654, United States
• Substance - 314 W Superior St, Ste 300, Chicago, IL 60654
• Brand Vision Marketing - Web Design & Branding - 30 N Michigan Ave #504, Chicago, IL 60602, United States
• KTGY | Chicago - 225 W Randolph St #1700, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• BatesMeron Sweet Design - 1006 S Michigan Ave #601, Chicago, IL 60605, United States
• Landor - 333 N Green St, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Multiple Inc. - 845 W Washington Blvd Fifth Floor, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Killian Branding - 73 W Monroe St, Chicago, IL 60603, United States
• Partners by Design - 363 W Erie St, Chicago, IL 60654, United States
• ArtVersion® Creative Agency - 211 W Wacker Dr Ste 1130, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• NELSON - 30 W Monroe St Ste 1710, Chicago, IL 60603, United States
• Whitney Architects - 123 N Wacker Dr #2450, Chicago, IL 60606, United States

For an established Chicago architecture studio, I would not hire a generic “logo agency.” You want a partner that understands design culture, architectural portfolios, principals/stakeholders, legacy, and the difference between an identity system and a cosmetic refresh.

My shortlist would be:

1. Design B&B — my first call

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-753-3037)

This is probably the strongest fit if the goal is a refined, design-literate rebrand rather than a conventional corporate makeover. They describe their work around brand strategy, identity systems, brand architecture and design, and they're an independent Chicago studio. BSpoke Brands

Why I'd shortlist them: They feel close enough to the design world to understand that an architecture firm's identity needs to behave more like a visual language than a marketing package.

Best for: sophisticated identity, typography, brand system, positioning, website/portfolio.

2. The Narrative — especially strong for architecture

I'd put this one very high on the pitch list. Their Chicago work includes the rebrand of 900/910 North Lake Shore Drive, the Mies van der Rohe buildings, where they used archival research, interviews and the architecture itself as the basis for the identity. The Narrative Design

That's exactly the kind of precedent I'd want to see for an established architecture practice: respect the history, extract the underlying idea, then make it contemporary.

Best for: architectural heritage, editorial identity, cultural positioning, restrained/refined aesthetics.

3. ColorJar — best strategic option

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-448-8192)

ColorJar is more strategy-forward: positioning, brand architecture, naming, messaging, identity systems, digital and brand experience. Zoyes Creative

I'd consider them if the rebrand is really about changing how the firm is perceived in the market—for example, moving from “established regional architecture firm” to “high-design national practice.”

Best for: repositioning + identity, especially if the business strategy is changing alongside the aesthetics.

4. One Design Company — strong all-around contender

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-602-3335)

One Design combines research/strategy, branding, digital design and development. Their strength would be taking the identity all the way through to a serious portfolio website and digital experience, rather than treating the website as an afterthought.

Best for: identity + website + digital portfolio as one integrated project.

5. Substance — if the rebrand is organizational

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+13124773457)

Substance is particularly interesting if you have multiple principals, practices, offices, disciplines or stakeholder groups to reconcile. Their approach is strategy-first, with research, positioning, messaging, visual identity and rollout.

Best for: a complicated established firm that needs to clarify who it is now, not merely look newer.

Wild card: TERAMOK

If you want the rebrand to include architecture-specific photography/film and a new portfolio presence, TERAMOK is worth talking to. They explicitly work with architecture and design firms in Chicago and offer studio identity, websites, architectural films and portfolio production. Teramok

I wouldn't necessarily make them the lead branding agency without seeing more identity work, but they could be an excellent brand + architectural storytelling partner.

Who I'd actually invite to pitch

I'd narrow it to three:

1. The Narrative — if the studio has significant history/legacy and you want something intellectually grounded and architectural.
2. Design B&B — if you want the most elegant, design-forward identity system.
3. ColorJar — if this is a genuine strategic repositioning, not simply a visual rebrand.

And I'd make the brief deliberately demanding: “We don't want to look like a newly launched architecture firm. We want to look like the same great firm after its next 25 years.”

That distinction should separate the good agencies from the ones who will just give you a prettier logo.

If you tell me the studio's approximate size, architectural specialty (civic/commercial/residential/etc.), age/legacy, and the aesthetic direction you're drawn to (Mies/minimal, editorial, institutional, expressive, etc.), I can narrow this to the one agency I'd hire and two backups, with relevant comparable projects.

Best for: repositioning + identity, especially if the business strategy is changing alongside the aesthetics.

4. One Design Company — strong all-around contender

One Design combines research/strategy, branding, digital design and development. Their strength would be taking the identity all the way through to a serious portfolio website and digital experience, rather than treating the website as an afterthought.

Best for: identity + website + digital portfolio as one integrated project.

5. Substance — if the rebrand is organizational

Substance is particularly interesting if you have multiple principals, practices, offices, disciplines or stakeholder groups to reconcile. Their approach is strategy-first, with research, positioning, messaging, visual identity and rollout.

Best for: a complicated established firm that needs to clarify who it is now, not merely look newer.

Wild card: TERAMOK

If you want the rebrand to include architecture-specific photography/film and a new portfolio presence, TERAMOK is worth talking to. They explicitly work with architecture and design firms in Chicago and offer studio identity, websites, architectural films and portfolio production. teramok.us

I wouldn't necessarily make them the lead branding agency without seeing more identity work, but they could be an excellent brand + architectural storytelling partner.

Who I'd actually invite to pitch

• 900/910 Lake Shore Drive - 900-910 N Lake Shore Dr, Chicago, IL 60611, United States
• Brand Vision Marketing - Web Design & Branding - 30 N Michigan Ave #504, Chicago, IL 60602, United States
• Substance - 314 W Superior St, Ste 300, Chicago, IL 60654
• ArtVersion® Creative Agency - 211 W Wacker Dr Ste 1130, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• Jayne Agency, LLC - 400 N State St #420, Chicago, IL 60654, United States
• Design B&B - 833 W Jackson Blvd Fl 7, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Design In Chicago - 159 N Sangamon St Suite 200, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• ColorJar - 1000 W Fulton Market #213, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Firebelly Design - 1402 N Western Ave, Chicago, IL 60622, United States
• BatesMeron Sweet Design - 1006 S Michigan Ave #601, Chicago, IL 60605, United States
• Multiple Inc. - 845 W Washington Blvd Fifth Floor, Chicago, IL 60607, United States

For an established downtown Chicago architecture studio, I would not hire a generalist “logo shop.” You want a partner that understands design culture, architectural audiences, legacy equity, principals/partners, institutional clients, and the difference between refinement and reinvention.

The best candidates are agencies that can create a quiet, intelligent identity system—not a trendy startup brand.

My shortlist

1. The Narrative Design — strongest fit for architecture/cultural positioning

The Narrative DesignWhy I’d put them near the top: They appear to understand architecture as a cultural discipline rather than just a business category. Their work includes identity development tied to significant Chicago architectural heritage, including a rebrand of the 900/910 Lake Shore Drive with a research-led approach. The Narrative Design

Best for:

• Established firms with reputation equity
• Modernist/minimal identities
• Firms wanting intellectual depth
• Positioning around design excellence rather than marketing language

Potential concern: They may be more “cultural institution/editorial” than “AEC growth strategy,” depending on your goals.

2. Substance — strongest strategic rebrand partner

Why consider them: For a mature architecture practice, the biggest challenge is often not the logo—it is articulating:

• Why the firm exists now
• What differentiates it from competitors
• How to honor the founders while signaling the next generation

Substance positions itself around research, strategy, naming, and visual identity systems.

Best for:

• Leadership transition
• Merger/expansion
• Repositioning from “good local architect” to “recognized design practice”

3. AVEC — strongest AEC-specific option

AVECWhy consider them: They explicitly focus on AEC branding and understand that architecture firms sell trust, expertise, process, and vision—not consumer products. AVEC

Best for:

• Architecture + engineering firms
• Website modernization
• Proposal/pursuit materials
• Aligning brand with business development

Potential concern: If you want something very high-design/editorial, I would compare their aesthetic range carefully against your aspirations.

4. Multiple Inc. — sophisticated independent studio option

Why consider them: They are a Chicago independent brand strategy/design firm with experience building cohesive identities rather than isolated graphics.

Best for:

• Firms wanting a contemporary but restrained identity
• Strong typography, systems, digital experience

5. ColorJar — polished strategic branding

Why consider them: They combine strategy, identity, voice, and activation.

Best for:

• Firms needing brand strategy plus rollout
• A more business-oriented repositioning

Also worth a conversation

• Andiamo Creative — has documented architecture firm branding work, including a rebrand and website for Chicago architecture firm RADA Architects. Andiamo Creative
• Fairbuilt Design Studio — specifically focuses on architecture/AEC rebrands and emphasizes strategy before identity design. Builtfair
• Design B&B — a broader branding/design studio with strategy and identity capabilities.

If this were my shortlist for an established Chicago architecture practice

I would invite three agencies to pitch:

1. The Narrative Design — for the most refined architectural/cultural identity direction
2. Substance — for strategic repositioning and legacy management
3. AVEC — for AEC expertise and practical firm-growth needs

Then I’d evaluate them less on their portfolio and more on whether they ask the right questions:

• “What should remain sacred about your legacy?”
• “What kind of projects do you want more of in five years?”
• “Who are you competing against now—not 15 years ago?”
• “What should a prospective client feel within 10 seconds of seeing your website?”
• “How do we make the firm look inevitable, not newly invented?”

For a respected architecture studio, the winning identity is usually less about announcing change and more about revealing the quality that was already there.

• Substance - 314 W Superior St, Ste 300, Chicago, IL 60654
• Design B&B - 833 W Jackson Blvd Fl 7, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Multiple Inc. - 845 W Washington Blvd Fifth Floor, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Landor - 333 N Green St, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• KTGY | Chicago - 225 W Randolph St #1700, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• Brand Vision Marketing - Web Design & Branding - 30 N Michigan Ave #504, Chicago, IL 60602, United States
• ColorJar - 1000 W Fulton Market #213, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Firebelly Design - 1402 N Western Ave, Chicago, IL 60622, United States
• Partners by Design - 363 W Erie St, Chicago, IL 60654, United States
• Killian Branding - 73 W Monroe St, Chicago, IL 60603, United States
• Silva Brand, LLC - 211 W Wacker Dr 3rd floor, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• Concentric Design - 3130 N Rockwell St, Chicago, IL 60618, United States
• Chicago Design Network - 217 N Jefferson St #150, Chicago, IL 60661, United States
• SO Dsgn - 1719 S Clinton St, Chicago, IL 60616, United States

For an established Chicago architecture practice, I’d avoid generic “logo agencies.” You want a partner that understands how design firms sell expertise, authorship, reputation, and a body of work—and can make the identity feel quietly sophisticated rather than trendy.

My shortlist:

1. Substance — my first call

• Chicago-based and strategy-led, with experience in organizational rebrands, messaging, visual identity, and digital systems.
• Particularly appropriate if this is a true repositioning, not simply a new logo.
• Their approach appears more intellectually grounded than campaign/marketing driven. BSpoke Brands
• Best for: a mature firm that wants to clarify its point of view and build an identity system around it.
• Design B&B — strongest design-forward option

• Independent Chicago brand strategy/design agency with explicit capabilities in positioning, identity, verbal identity, brand architecture, and guidelines. Design B&B
• I'd look closely at them if the goal is an identity that feels editorial, cultured, and highly designed rather than corporate.
• Best for: a visually ambitious architecture studio that wants the brand itself to demonstrate design intelligence.
• The Narrative — particularly interesting for architecture

• This is the one I'd put on the shortlist specifically because they've done unusually relevant work around Chicago architecture and architectural heritage.
• Their rebrand of 900–910 N. Lake Shore Drive, Mies van der Rohe's landmark buildings, involved archival research, interviews, and an identity derived from the architecture itself. The Narrative Design
• Best for: a firm where architectural authorship, history, materiality, and intellectual rigor are central to the brand.
• Multiple Inc. — sophisticated independent alternative

• Chicago-based independent brand strategy/design agency with identity, digital, photography, and brand architecture capabilities.
• More boutique than a huge global consultancy, which could make for a closer principal-level relationship.
• Best for: an established studio wanting a comprehensive but relatively intimate rebrand.
• Landor — if the ambition is substantial

• The Chicago office gives you access to a major global branding consultancy with deep capabilities in strategy, identity, naming, architecture, and experience.
• I'd consider them if the firm is undergoing a major repositioning, merger, geographic expansion, or generational transition.
• For a relatively straightforward architecture-firm rebrand, however, they may be more agency than you need.

One specialist worth adding

Andiamo Creative has directly branded Chicago architecture firms, including a rebrand and website for RADA Architects. Andiamo Creative That's meaningful category experience, although I'd rank the firms above higher if your brief emphasizes refined, design-literate positioning over simply having AEC experience.

Who I'd actually invite to pitch

I'd make the initial RFP three agencies:

I would not make this a 6–8 agency beauty contest. Three serious conversations should tell you a lot.

And I'd give all three essentially the same brief: “We are not looking for a prettier logo. We want to understand what the next chapter of this practice should mean, then build a restrained identity that can carry that idea for the next 10–15 years.”

That framing should quickly distinguish the agencies capable of working at an architecture firm's level from those primarily selling logo packages.

If you tell me the firm's approximate size, reputation/style (e.g. modernist, preservation, civic, hospitality, residential), and whether you want the rebrand to feel more Chicago/architectural or more international, I can narrow this to the 2–3 agencies I'd seriously hire and explain exactly why.

• Design B&B - 833 W Jackson Blvd Fl 7, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Substance - 314 W Superior St, Ste 300, Chicago, IL 60654
• ColorJar - 1000 W Fulton Market #213, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Silva Brand, LLC - 211 W Wacker Dr 3rd floor, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• Landor - 333 N Green St, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Brand Vision Marketing - Web Design & Branding - 30 N Michigan Ave #504, Chicago, IL 60602, United States
• Firebelly Design - 1402 N Western Ave, Chicago, IL 60622, United States
• KTGY | Chicago - 225 W Randolph St #1700, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• Multiple Inc. - 845 W Washington Blvd Fifth Floor, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• SO Dsgn - 1719 S Clinton St, Chicago, IL 60616, United States
• Partners by Design - 363 W Erie St, Chicago, IL 60654, United States
• Whitney Architects - 123 N Wacker Dr #2450, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• Joel Berman Architecture & Design, Ltd. - 5212 N Clark St #3, Chicago, IL 60640, United States
• NELSON - 30 W Monroe St Ste 1710, Chicago, IL 60603, United States
• Collective Office, PC. - 9 E 24th St, Chicago, IL 60616, United States

Yes. For an established architecture practice, I would not hire a generic “Chicago branding agency.” You want a studio that understands design culture, architectural portfolios, sophisticated typography, institutional credibility, and the difference between a rebrand and a cosmetic logo refresh.

I’d put these on the shortlist:

My top 5

1. Design B&B — strongest overall fit

• Chicago-based independent brand strategy/design agency.
• Particularly compelling for a mature architecture practice because they work across brand identity, brand architecture, visual systems, tone of voice and experiential design.
• Their work feels closer to a design-led practice than a conventional marketing agency.
• My first call if the goal is refined, intelligent and contemporary without becoming trendy. Toimi
• Substance — best for a serious institutional repositioning

• Chicago branding/visual communications firm with a strategy-first orientation.
• Stronger candidate if the rebrand needs to address positioning, messaging, stakeholder alignment and organizational change, not merely the visual identity.
• This is the one I'd consider if you're an established firm with partners/principals who need to reach consensus around what the firm has become.
• ColorJar — best boutique/strategic option

• Independent Chicago brand strategy and design consultancy.
• Offers positioning, brand architecture, naming, messaging and identity systems, so they can tackle the underlying brand rather than just the graphics.
• I'd investigate them if you want something highly considered and boutique, rather than a large agency process.
• Ummo — particularly interesting for architecture

• This is the wildcard I'd absolutely include in the pitch process.
• Ummo actually has a published case study for ParkFowler Plus, a Chicago architecture practice. They developed its identity and naming while deliberately balancing Chicago's modernist heritage with a new-generation point of view. Ummo
• That's unusually relevant to your brief: they understand that an architecture firm's identity has to operate as an extension of its design thinking.
• Silva Brand, LLC — best AEC-specific candidate

• Downtown Chicago, and notably their client focus includes AEC organizations, commercial real estate developers and building-science organizations.
• That makes them worth interviewing if the firm's rebrand needs to work particularly well with developers, institutional clients and other sophisticated B2B audiences.
• I would expect them to be more strategic/market-oriented than purely art-directed.

The one I'd hire

I'd start with Design B&B and Ummo.

They represent two different interpretations of what you're asking for:

If your firm is already highly respected and the problem is “our identity no longer reflects the caliber of our work,” I'd lean Ummo.

If the problem is “the firm has evolved substantially and we need to redefine our positioning, story, identity and digital presence,” I'd lean Design B&B.

There's also a useful third benchmark: Landor. It's a much larger/global operation, so I'd only bring them in if you're contemplating a genuinely significant repositioning with substantial stakeholder complexity. Their Chicago practice covers strategy, positioning, brand architecture and identity systems. Toimi

One important caution

I would not make the RFP primarily about a new logo.

For an established architecture studio, I'd ask each agency to show how they'd approach:

• positioning and differentiation
• firm narrative / point of view
• naming conventions and partner structure
• typography and identity system
• project portfolio architecture
• photography/art direction
• website and digital portfolio
• proposals and credentials
• social/editorial presence
• awards and press materials
• environmental/signage applications
• transition from the existing identity without destroying accumulated equity

The strongest agency should be able to talk about how the brand expresses the firm's architecture, rather than showing you a collection of attractive logos.

If you tell me the firm's approximate size, architectural niche (cultural, commercial, residential, institutional, etc.), and 3–5 firms whose identities you admire, I can narrow this to 3 agencies I'd actually invite to pitch, including what I'd ask each one to demonstrate.

There's also a useful third benchmark: Landor. It's a much larger/global operation, so I'd only bring them in if you're contemplating a genuinely significant repositioning with substantial stakeholder complexity. Their Chicago practice covers strategy, positioning, brand architecture and identity systems.

One important caution

I would not make the RFP primarily about a new logo.

• Substance - 314 W Superior St, Ste 300, Chicago, IL 60654
• Silva Brand, LLC - 211 W Wacker Dr 3rd floor, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• Design B&B - 833 W Jackson Blvd Fl 7, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• KTGY | Chicago - 225 W Randolph St #1700, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• Brand Vision Marketing - Web Design & Branding - 30 N Michigan Ave #504, Chicago, IL 60602, United States
• Landor - 333 N Green St, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• ColorJar - 1000 W Fulton Market #213, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Multiple Inc. - 845 W Washington Blvd Fifth Floor, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Killian Branding - 73 W Monroe St, Chicago, IL 60603, United States
• Concentric Design - 3130 N Rockwell St, Chicago, IL 60618, United States
• Partners by Design - 363 W Erie St, Chicago, IL 60654, United States
• ArtVersion® Creative Agency - 211 W Wacker Dr Ste 1130, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• NELSON - 30 W Monroe St Ste 1710, Chicago, IL 60603, United States

For an established Chicago architecture practice, I’d avoid a generic “Chicago branding agency” search. You want a team that understands that an architecture firm’s identity has to sit quietly behind the work—typography, editorial systems, project photography, proposals, monographs, website, signage—not compete with it.

I’d put these on the shortlist:

My top 4

1. Substance — best overall fit

• Chicago-based, strategy-led brand firm with experience in organizational rebrands.
• Particularly attractive if this is a serious repositioning of an established practice, rather than a logo refresh.
• Their emphasis on research, positioning, messaging and identity systems is the right sequence for an architecture firm. Purpose Brand
• Why I'd interview them: they seem more likely to protect the firm's institutional credibility while making it feel contemporary.
• The Narrative — best for sophisticated, design-literate identity

• This is probably the most interesting option if your priority is refined visual culture and an identity with architectural intelligence.
• They did the rebrand of Chicago's 900/910 N. Lake Shore Drive, the Mies buildings, using archival research, interviews and the building's geometry as the basis for the identity. The Narrative Design
• Their capabilities extend well beyond logos into editorial design, websites, signage, exhibitions, books and information design.
• My pick if the partners care deeply about design craft.
• Silva Brand, LLC — best for AEC/business credibility

• Particularly relevant because they explicitly work with AEC organizations, commercial real estate and other professional-services organizations.
• They combine positioning, messaging, visual identity and rollout systems.
• Why I'd interview them: less risk of an agency treating an architecture firm like a consumer brand.
• Design B&B — best independent Chicago design-agency option

• Boutique, strategy-forward, and capable of full identity systems rather than simply a new mark.
• Their scope includes positioning, competitive analysis, identity, verbal identity, naming and brand architecture.
• Why I'd interview them: good middle ground between a highly strategic consultancy and a pure graphic-design studio.

One specialist worth considering

Fairbuilt is unusually specific to this problem. Its practice is explicitly focused on architecture/AEC branding, and its founder has an architecture background. It works through discovery → positioning → identity → website → rollout, and has published architecture-firm rebrand case studies. Builtfair Builtfair

That makes them potentially the lowest-risk choice if industry fluency is your first criterion. The tradeoff is that I'd want to compare their aesthetic ambition against The Narrative or a more design-led Chicago studio.

builtfair.com

Who I'd actually hire

If this were my shortlist, I'd invite The Narrative, Substance, Silva Brand, and Fairbuilt to pitch.

I'd weight them roughly like this:

My personal first call would be The Narrative if the studio is already architecturally respected and wants the new identity to feel quiet, exacting and intellectually confident. Their 900/910 Lake Shore Drive work is particularly strong evidence that they understand the relationship between architecture, history and identity. The Narrative Design

If, however, the rebrand involves new leadership, a change in market positioning, renaming, or a major shift in the firm's business strategy, I'd put Substance or Fairbuilt ahead of them.

One thing I'd insist on in the RFP: don't ask for “three logo concepts.” Ask each agency to demonstrate how they would translate the firm's architectural point of view into a complete identity system—type, grid, color, image treatment, project naming, proposals, website, social, presentations, signage and publications. That's where you'll see the difference between a branding shop and a partner who actually understands a design practice. AVEC

For an established Chicago architecture practice, I would not hire a generic “branding agency.” You want a team that understands architectural culture—portfolio-driven businesses, principals/stakeholders, reputation, legacy, proposals, monographs, websites, and the difference between quietly sophisticated and merely minimalist.

I’d put these on the shortlist:

My top 5

1. The Narrative — strongest fit for a refined architecture-led identity

This is the one I would interview first. Their Chicago work includes the rebrand of 900–910 N. Lake Shore Drive, the iconic Mies van der Rohe buildings. The project involved archival research, interviews, a rational visual language, and a very restrained identity system—exactly the sensibility I'd want for a serious architecture practice. The Narrative Design

Best for: sophisticated, architectural, editorial, culturally literate branding.

2. Multiple, Inc. — strongest strategy + identity option

A Chicago independent that approaches identity through strategy, positioning, narrative, visual systems, and digital experience. That makes them interesting if the rebrand needs to clarify what the firm is becoming, not simply make the existing logo prettier.

Best for: an established firm undergoing a meaningful repositioning or leadership evolution.

3. Design B&B — strongest pure design candidate

They're an independent Chicago brand strategy/design agency with capabilities spanning identity, brand architecture, verbal identity and broader creative systems. Design B&B

Best for: a highly considered visual identity with enough strategic rigor behind it.

4. Third & Arch — strongest architecture/AEC specialist

This is the specialist choice. They explicitly focus on architecture, engineering and construction firms and have experience reimagining established architecture practices, including brand strategy, identity, naming and websites. Third & Arch

Best for: if you want someone who already understands how architecture firms sell work and communicate portfolios.

5. Fairbuilt Design Studio — intriguing specialist

Fairbuilt is unusually specific about architecture-firm branding and says its founder actually practiced architecture before moving into branding. Its offering covers positioning, identity, messaging and architecture-specific websites. Fairbuilt

Best for: a firm that wants deep architectural-industry fluency rather than a broad consumer-brand agency.

Who I'd actually invite to pitch

If this were my firm, I'd narrow it to three very different conversations:

I'd probably make The Narrative the favorite if your ambition is something along the lines of “established Chicago architecture firm, but more distinguished, contemporary and culturally significant.”

The 900/910 Lake Shore Drive work is particularly compelling because it demonstrates an ability to respect architectural history without turning the brand into nostalgia. The Narrative Design

One important distinction

I would not automatically choose the biggest agency. For an architecture studio, you need the senior creative director/partner actually shaping the identity—not a large agency selling you a strategy deck and handing the design to a junior team.

In the first meeting, I'd ask each agency:

• “Show us three architecture/design practices you've branded.”
• “Who specifically will design our identity?”
• “What would you investigate before designing anything?”
• “How would you differentiate us from Chicago's other established architecture firms?”
• “Show us an identity you've made that has restraint, rather than one that simply looks fashionable.”
• “How do you translate the identity into proposals, competitions, website, signage, monographs and presentations?”
• “What do you think is wrong with our current brand after looking at our work?”

That last question is especially revealing.

My ranking for your brief: The Narrative → Multiple → Design B&B → Third & Arch → Fairbuilt.

If you tell me the architecture firm's name, I can do a much deeper competitive review—look at its current identity, compare it against Chicago peers, examine each agency's relevant case studies, and recommend which 2–3 agencies I'd actually send an RFP to, including what I think each could do with the brand.

I would not automatically choose the biggest agency. For an architecture studio, you need the senior creative director/partner actually shaping the identity—not a large agency selling you a strategy deck and handing the design to a junior team.

In the first meeting, I'd ask each agency:

• “Show us three architecture/design practices you've branded.”
• “Who specifically will design our identity?”
• “What would you investigate before designing anything?”
• “How would you differentiate us from Chicago's other established architecture firms?”
• “Show us an identity you've made that has restraint, rather than one that simply looks fashionable.”
• “How do you translate the identity into proposals, competitions, website, signage, monographs and presentations?”
• “What do you think is wrong with our current brand after looking at our work?”

That last question is especially revealing.

My ranking for your brief: The Narrative → Multiple → Design B&B → Third & Arch → Fairbuilt.

• Public Narrative - 1245 S Michigan Ave Ste 121, Chicago, IL 60605, United States
• Crosby Associates - 39 S LaSalle St, Ste 201, Chicago, IL 60601
• Design B&B - 833 W Jackson Blvd Fl 7, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Multiple Inc. - 845 W Washington Blvd Fifth Floor, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• KTGY | Chicago - 225 W Randolph St #1700, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• Brand Vision Marketing - Web Design & Branding - 30 N Michigan Ave #504, Chicago, IL 60602, United States
• Substance - 314 W Superior St, Ste 300, Chicago, IL 60654
• Landor - 333 N Green St, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Partners by Design - 363 W Erie St, Chicago, IL 60654, United States
• ColorJar - 1000 W Fulton Market #213, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Whitney Architects - 123 N Wacker Dr #2450, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• Silva Brand, LLC - 211 W Wacker Dr 3rd floor, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• NELSON - 30 W Monroe St Ste 1710, Chicago, IL 60603, United States
• SO Dsgn - 1719 S Clinton St, Chicago, IL 60616, United States

For an established Chicago architecture practice, I’d avoid generic “branding agencies.” You want a partner that understands that architecture firms sell design intelligence, reputation, point of view, and trust—and can build an identity sophisticated enough not to compete with the work.

My shortlist would be:

1. The Narrative — my first call

Public Narrative

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-878-5621)

This is the one I’d investigate first. Their work is unusually close to what you’re describing: they have actually rebranded 900 N/910 N Lake Shore Drive, the iconic Mies van der Rohe buildings, using archival research, interviews and a restrained identity derived from the architecture itself. The Narrative Design

That suggests a strong instinct for architectural culture rather than marketing aesthetics. Their capabilities also extend into brand strategy, positioning, identity, websites, publications, signage and environmental graphics. The Narrative Design

Best for: a refined, intellectual, distinctly Chicago identity with a strong connection to architectural heritage.

2. Crosby Associates — sleeper choice with real architecture pedigree

Crosby Associates

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+13123462900)

Crosby is particularly interesting because it has been doing identity work since 1979, and its portfolio specifically includes work for Wheeler Kearns Architects. Its approach is centered on identity planning, design and orchestration rather than simply making a new logo. Adcetera

For an established practice, that longevity could be valuable: they should understand how to evolve an existing reputation without throwing away accumulated equity.

Best for: a mature firm that wants evolution, credibility and typographic/design sophistication rather than a flashy “relaunch.”

3. Design B&B — strong independent Chicago option

Design B&B

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-753-3037)

They combine brand strategy and identity design, including identity systems, brand architecture, tone of voice and experiential work. Toimi

I’d put them on the pitch list if you want something contemporary and highly designed, while retaining a serious strategic foundation.

Best for: a firm wanting to look more distinctive and contemporary without becoming trendy.

4. Multiple, Inc. — sophisticated strategy + design

Multiple Inc.

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-846-6944)

Multiple is another serious candidate. Its work encompasses positioning, narrative, brand voice, identity systems and digital/brand implementation, and it appears comfortable with complex organizations and multiple stakeholders. Expertise

Best for: a larger established studio where the rebrand involves principals, multiple practice areas, business development and a substantial digital presence.

5. Fairbuilt — if you want someone who really understands architecture firms

Fairbuilt is different from the others because it explicitly specializes in architecture-firm branding. Its founder came from architecture practice and the studio focuses on positioning, identity and websites specifically for architecture practices. Fairbuilt

That domain expertise is compelling. The tradeoff is that I would scrutinize the level of visual sophistication and ambition against the first three candidates.

Best for: a firm where understanding how architects actually win work—RFPs, portfolios, principals, sectors, succession, recruiting—is more important than hiring a famous generalist agency.

My ranking for your particular brief

If it were my firm

I'd issue the RFP to three agencies: The Narrative, Crosby Associates, and Design B&B.

And I'd make the brief deliberately narrow: “We are not looking for a new logo. We are looking for a new expression of the practice.”

Ask each to demonstrate:

• How they would preserve the firm's existing equity while making it feel newly relevant.
• Their thinking about positioning before visual identity.
• How the identity would behave on a monograph, competition board, proposal, website and project photography—not just a business card.
• How they would express the firm's architectural point of view, rather than simply make it look premium.
• Who specifically will do the work—not just who pitches it.
• Three examples of sophisticated professional/design/cultural brands they've evolved.

One particularly important distinction: don't let the agencies show you only beautiful identity work. Ask them to show you the strategic problem, rejected directions, and final system in use. For an architecture practice, the quality of the thinking should be as impressive as the typography.

If you want, I can also narrow this to the 3–5 agencies whose portfolios most closely resemble the aesthetic of your firm—e.g. Miesian/minimal, editorial, institutional, contemporary, luxury, or avant-garde—and compare their actual work and likely fit.

Best for: a mature firm that wants evolution, credibility and typographic/design sophistication rather than a flashy “relaunch.”

3. Design B&B — strong independent Chicago option

Design B&B

They combine brand strategy and identity design, including identity systems, brand architecture, tone of voice and experiential work. Toimi

I’d put them on the pitch list if you want something contemporary and highly designed, while retaining a serious strategic foundation.

Best for: a firm wanting to look more distinctive and contemporary without becoming trendy.

4. Multiple, Inc. — sophisticated strategy + design

Multiple Inc.

Multiple is another serious candidate. Its work encompasses positioning, narrative, brand voice, identity systems and digital/brand implementation, and it appears comfortable with complex organizations and multiple stakeholders. Expertise

Best for: a larger established studio where the rebrand involves principals, multiple practice areas, business development and a substantial digital presence.

5. Fairbuilt — if you want someone who really understands architecture firms

Fairbuilt is different from the others because it explicitly specializes in architecture-firm branding. Its founder came from architecture practice and the studio focuses on positioning, identity and websites specifically for architecture practices. Fairbuilt

That domain expertise is compelling. The tradeoff is that I would scrutinize the level of visual sophistication and ambition against the first three candidates.

Best for: a firm where understanding how architects actually win work—RFPs, portfolios, principals, sectors, succession, recruiting—is more important than hiring a famous generalist agency.

My ranking for your particular brief

If it were my firm

I'd issue the RFP to three agencies: The Narrative, Crosby Associates, and Design B&B.

And I'd make the brief deliberately narrow: “We are not looking for a new logo. We are looking for a new expression of the practice.”

Ask each to demonstrate:

• How they would preserve the firm's existing equity while making it feel newly relevant.
• Their thinking about positioning before visual identity.
• How the identity would behave on a monograph, competition board, proposal, website and project photography—not just a business card.
• How they would express the firm's architectural point of view, rather than simply make it look premium.
• Who specifically will do the work—not just who pitches it.
• Three examples of sophisticated professional/design/cultural brands they've evolved.

One particularly important distinction: don't let the agencies show you only beautiful identity work. Ask them to show you the strategic problem, rejected directions, and final system in use. For an architecture practice, the quality of the thinking should be as impressive as the typography.

• Public Narrative - 1245 S Michigan Ave Ste 121, Chicago, IL 60605, United States
• Zoyes Creative - Brand Studio - 2111 Woodward Ave Ste 400, Detroit, MI 48201, United States
• Design B&B - 833 W Jackson Blvd Fl 7, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Otherwise Incorporated - 900 N Western Ave, Chicago, IL 60622, United States
• ColorJar - 1000 W Fulton Market #213, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• ArtVersion® Creative Agency - 211 W Wacker Dr Ste 1130, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• Brand Vision Marketing - Web Design & Branding - 30 N Michigan Ave #504, Chicago, IL 60602, United States
• Substance - 314 W Superior St, Ste 300, Chicago, IL 60654
• Multiple Inc. - 845 W Washington Blvd Fifth Floor, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Landor - 333 N Green St, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• SO Dsgn - 1719 S Clinton St, Chicago, IL 60616, United States
• KTGY | Chicago - 225 W Randolph St #1700, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• Concentric Design - 3130 N Rockwell St, Chicago, IL 60618, United States
• Magic Eight Co. - 2057 N Western Ave, Chicago, IL 60647, United States
• Gensler - 11 E Madison St, Chicago, IL 60602, United States
• Partners by Design - 363 W Erie St, Chicago, IL 60654, United States

For an established Chicago architecture studio, I would not hire a generic “branding agency.” You want a team that understands design culture, architectural portfolios, institutional credibility, and how to modernize a respected name without making it feel trendy.

My shortlist would be:

1. Public Narrative — my first call

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-878-5621)

The strongest fit I found for what you're describing.

The Narrative has unusually relevant architecture/design experience. They handled the first rebrand since the 1970s for Chicago's 900/910 N. Lake Shore Drive, using archival research, interviews, and the architecture itself as the basis for the identity. Their services span positioning, identity, website, publications, environmental graphics and wayfinding. The Narrative Design

Why I'd call them: They seem to understand that an architecture firm's brand should feel like an extension of its design thinking—not a marketing wrapper.

Best for: A sophisticated, editorial, culturally literate rebrand with real intellectual depth.

2. Zoyes Creative - Brand Studio — best AEC/placemaking specialist

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 248-584-3300)

Zoyes explicitly positions itself around architects, developers and placemakers, and its portfolio includes architectural/design clients as well as the Chicago Board of Trade Building. Its capabilities cover brand strategy, brand design and digital. Zoyes Creative

Why I'd call them: They understand the ecosystem your firm operates in—architecture, real estate, development, place and built environment—rather than approaching you like a consumer brand.

Best for: A firm wanting its new identity to strengthen business development with developers, institutions and real-estate clients.

3. Design B&B — best independent design-led option

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-753-3037)

Design B&B is an independent Chicago brand strategy/design agency with capabilities in positioning, identity, brand architecture and verbal identity. Their work is explicitly multidisciplinary and design-driven. Design B&B

Why I'd call them: If you want the rebrand to feel beautiful, contemporary and highly designed, rather than like a corporate identity exercise, they're worth putting in the pitch.

Best for: A visually ambitious studio that wants a distinctive identity and strong portfolio/website expression.

4. Otherwise Incorporated — best for a larger, more established branding partner

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-399-9822)

Otherwise has been operating as a Chicago strategic branding/design firm since 1992. Its work includes the branding of 1000M, the ultra-luxury Chicago residential tower, including strategy, naming, tagline, identity and implementation. Otherwise Incorporated Chicago

Why I'd call them: They know how to make a brand feel premium and substantial, and they have direct experience translating architecture into a sophisticated identity.

Best for: An established practice that wants a major repositioning, potentially involving naming, messaging and a new digital presence.

5. ColorJar — best strategy + identity boutique

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-448-8192)

ColorJar is a Chicago boutique focused on brand strategy and design, including positioning, identity systems, brand voice, guidelines, websites and experiential work.

Why I'd call them: Good candidate if the problem isn't simply “our logo looks dated,” but “our reputation and quality have evolved, but our brand doesn't communicate where we are now.”

One wildcard: ArtVersion® Creative Agency

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-837-7466)

They're downtown and have been around since 1999, with branding, visual design, UX and web capabilities. ArtVersion® Creative Agency

I'd consider them particularly if website/portfolio transformation is as important as the identity itself.

Who I'd actually invite to pitch

I'd narrow it to three:

And I'd add Otherwise if you're contemplating a deeper strategic repositioning rather than primarily an identity evolution.

The key distinction is important: I wouldn't ask these firms to “refresh our logo.” I'd brief them to answer:

How should an established Chicago architecture practice present itself for the next 20 years while preserving the authority and recognition it has accumulated over the last several decades?

That framing should produce much better work.

If you give me the name of the architecture studio, I can go one level deeper and compare these agencies against its actual aesthetic, project type, reputation and competitors—and tell you which 3 I'd shortlist, what I would ask each to pitch, and who I'd hire.

• Liska & Associates Inc - 610 N Fairbanks Ct, Chicago, IL 60611, United States
• Design B&B - 833 W Jackson Blvd Fl 7, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• ColorJar - 1000 W Fulton Market #213, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Multiple Inc. - 845 W Washington Blvd Fifth Floor, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Silva Brand, LLC - 211 W Wacker Dr 3rd floor, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• KTGY | Chicago - 225 W Randolph St #1700, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• Brand Vision Marketing - Web Design & Branding - 30 N Michigan Ave #504, Chicago, IL 60602, United States
• Substance - 314 W Superior St, Ste 300, Chicago, IL 60654
• Landor - 333 N Green St, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Hartford Design - 651 W Washington Blvd, Ste 503, Chicago, IL 60661
• Gensler - 11 E Madison St, Chicago, IL 60602, United States
• Whitney Architects - 123 N Wacker Dr #2450, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• Avery Architecture Identity Design - 6355 N Broadway, Chicago, IL 60660, United States
• Studio/lab - 860 N Lake Shore Dr #24L, Chicago, IL 60611, United States
• Collective Office, PC. - 9 E 24th St, Chicago, IL 60616, United States

For an established Chicago architecture practice, I would not hire a generic “branding agency.” You want a team that understands design culture, architectural portfolios, sophisticated B2B audiences, and the difference between evolving a respected legacy and simply making a firm look fashionable.

My shortlist:

1. Liska & Associates Inc — my first call

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-867-1111)

This is probably the best fit for your brief. Liska is a long-established Chicago communication-design and branding firm with experience spanning architecture/design, arts and culture, hospitality, education and professional organizations. Its work is strategy-led rather than logo-led. Expertise

Why I'd shortlist them: They should understand the visual restraint and intellectual credibility an architecture practice needs. I would expect a more nuanced identity—typography, grid, image treatment, proposals, publications, website—rather than a trendy startup-style rebrand.

Best for: A sophisticated, enduring Chicago architecture identity.

2. Design B&B — strongest boutique alternative

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-753-3037)

Design B&B is an independent Chicago brand strategy/design agency with capabilities in identity systems, brand architecture, visual identity and guidelines. Their positioning is particularly relevant if the studio has multiple practice areas, principals, or a complicated legacy to organize.

Why I'd shortlist them: They look like the right scale for an established architecture studio that wants high-touch strategic and design thinking, rather than a giant corporate branding machine.

Best for: A refined identity system with strong design craft.

3. The Narrative — very interesting architecture-specific choice

thenarrative.design has an unusually relevant Chicago architecture credential: it led the rebrand of 900/910 North Lake Shore Drive, the Mies van der Rohe buildings, using archival research, interviews and a visual system derived from the architecture itself. Its services include brand strategy, positioning, identity, websites, publications, wayfinding and environmental graphics. The Narrative Design

This is the one I'd investigate if your ambition is “make the identity feel like architecture” rather than “make our architecture firm look more professional.”

Best for: An intellectually rigorous, design-led identity with Chicago architectural DNA.

4. ColorJar — strategy-forward option

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-448-8192)

ColorJar is a Chicago boutique consultancy covering positioning, brand architecture, naming, messaging, identity systems, environments and digital.

I'd consider them if the rebrand is partly about business repositioning—for example, moving upmarket, entering new sectors, clarifying a multidisciplinary practice, or changing how developers/institutions perceive the firm.

Best for: Strategy + identity, especially if the firm itself is evolving.

5. Multiple Inc. — good larger independent option

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-846-6944)

Multiple is another Chicago independent brand strategy/design agency, with capabilities spanning positioning, narrative, visual identity, digital and implementation. Its portfolio suggests comfort with complex organizations and multiple stakeholders.

Best for: A more comprehensive transformation where brand, website, communications and organizational alignment all need to move together.

One wildcard: Silva Brand, LLC

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 847-778-9628)

Silva is particularly interesting because its work includes AEC (architecture/engineering/construction), commercial real estate and professional organizations. It's downtown at 211 W Wacker.

That sector knowledge could be valuable if your studio's rebrand is heavily tied to business development and positioning within the Chicago AEC ecosystem.

Who I'd actually invite to pitch

If this were my project, I'd make the RFP three agencies, not ten:

I would not start with a huge global agency unless you're talking about a major repositioning, merger, multi-office expansion, or complex brand architecture. Chicago has plenty of heavyweight branding firms, but for an architecture practice, the danger is getting an identity that is strategically impressive but aesthetically generic.

What I'd ask them to show you

Don't ask for “branding examples.” Ask each candidate:

• 3 examples of architecture, design, real estate, cultural or similarly design-sensitive clients
• One example where they evolved an established identity rather than replaced it
• How they'd handle the portfolio as the hero, rather than letting branding compete with the work
• Examples of proposal/RFP systems, presentations and publications
• Their approach to website + identity as one system
• Who actually does the design work—the senior people you meet or a junior team
• How they'd translate the identity into project signage, environmental graphics and events
• Their thinking on firm name, monogram/wordmark, typography and image direction
• A realistic budget and timeline for a full rebrand, not just a logo project

The key phrase I'd use in the brief is: “We are not looking for a new logo. We are looking for a contemporary identity that preserves the authority we've built while expressing where the practice is going.”

That will immediately separate the serious candidates from the logo shops.

My vote: start with Liska, The Narrative, and Design B&B. If the firm's strategic positioning is changing substantially, swap ColorJar into that three-agency group. The Narrative Design

4. ColorJar — strategy-forward option

ColorJar is a Chicago boutique consultancy covering positioning, brand architecture, naming, messaging, identity systems, environments and digital.

I'd consider them if the rebrand is partly about business repositioning—for example, moving upmarket, entering new sectors, clarifying a multidisciplinary practice, or changing how developers/institutions perceive the firm.

Best for: Strategy + identity, especially if the firm itself is evolving.

5. Multiple Inc. — good larger independent option

Multiple is another Chicago independent brand strategy/design agency, with capabilities spanning positioning, narrative, visual identity, digital and implementation. Its portfolio suggests comfort with complex organizations and multiple stakeholders.

Best for: A more comprehensive transformation where brand, website, communications and organizational alignment all need to move together.

One wildcard: Silva Brand, LLC

Silva is particularly interesting because its work includes AEC (architecture/engineering/construction), commercial real estate and professional organizations. It's downtown at 211 W Wacker.

That sector knowledge could be valuable if your studio's rebrand is heavily tied to business development and positioning within the Chicago AEC ecosystem.

Who I'd actually invite to pitch

If this were my project, I'd make the RFP three agencies, not ten:

I would not start with a huge global agency unless you're talking about a major repositioning, merger, multi-office expansion, or complex brand architecture. Chicago has plenty of heavyweight branding firms, but for an architecture practice, the danger is getting an identity that is strategically impressive but aesthetically generic.

What I'd ask them to show you

Don't ask for “branding examples.” Ask each candidate:

• 3 examples of architecture, design, real estate, cultural or similarly design-sensitive clients
• One example where they evolved an established identity rather than replaced it
• How they'd handle the portfolio as the hero, rather than letting branding compete with the work
• Examples of proposal/RFP systems, presentations and publications
• Their approach to website + identity as one system
• Who actually does the design work—the senior people you meet or a junior team
• How they'd translate the identity into project signage, environmental graphics and events
• Their thinking on firm name, monogram/wordmark, typography and image direction
• A realistic budget and timeline for a full rebrand, not just a logo project

The key phrase I'd use in the brief is: “We are not looking for a new logo. We are looking for a contemporary identity that preserves the authority we've built while expressing where the practice is going.”

That will immediately separate the serious candidates from the logo shops.

• Liska & Associates Inc - 610 N Fairbanks Ct, Chicago, IL 60611, United States
• ColorJar - 1000 W Fulton Market #213, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Silva Brand, LLC - 211 W Wacker Dr 3rd floor, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• Landor - 333 N Green St, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• KTGY | Chicago - 225 W Randolph St #1700, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• Brand Vision Marketing - Web Design & Branding - 30 N Michigan Ave #504, Chicago, IL 60602, United States
• Substance - 314 W Superior St, Ste 300, Chicago, IL 60654
• Design B&B - 833 W Jackson Blvd Fl 7, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Multiple Inc. - 845 W Washington Blvd Fifth Floor, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Hartford Design - 651 W Washington Blvd, Ste 503, Chicago, IL 60661
• NELSON - 30 W Monroe St Ste 1710, Chicago, IL 60603, United States
• Whitney Architects - 123 N Wacker Dr #2450, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• Galambos + Associates - 33 W Jackson Blvd Fl 4, Chicago, IL 60604, United States
• Dr. John S. Lippincott, DDS - 1642 E 56th St, Chicago, IL 60637, United States

For an established Chicago architecture studio, I would not hire a generic “branding agency.” You want a partner that understands that the work itself is the brand: restraint, authorship, materiality, editorial presentation, reputation, and decades of accumulated equity.

I’d shortlist these:

My top 5

1. Liska & Associates Inc — my first call

This is probably the closest fit to what you're describing. Liska has a long Chicago history and explicitly works across architecture/design, arts & culture, hospitality and other sophisticated professional sectors. Its approach is strategy-led identity and communications rather than simply producing a new logo. Toimi

Why I'd call them: They should understand the difference between refreshing an established design practice and making an established firm look like a startup.

2. The Narrative — strongest architecture-specific creative fit

The Narrative is especially interesting because it has done identity work directly in Chicago's architectural/cultural landscape. Its rebrand of 900–910 N. Lake Shore Drive, the Mies van der Rohe buildings, involved archival research, interviews and an identity derived from the architecture itself. The Narrative Design

Why I'd call them: If you want the new identity to feel architectural without resorting to clichés—grid, monogram, Swiss typography, etc.—this is the one I'd investigate hardest.

3. ColorJar — best boutique strategy/design alternative

ColorJar is a smaller Chicago consultancy that combines positioning, naming, messaging and visual identity with environments, digital and experiential work.

Why I'd call them: Potentially a good balance between strategic rigor and the intimacy of a boutique studio. I'd ask specifically for examples involving sophisticated B2B/professional-services brands rather than consumer work.

4. Silva Brand, LLC — sleeper pick for AEC

This one deserves more attention than its profile might initially suggest. Silva specifically lists AEC, architecture/engineering/construction, building-science organizations and commercial real estate among its experience. It's also downtown, on Wacker.

Why I'd call them: They may understand the peculiarities of selling architectural expertise to developers, institutions and sophisticated clients better than a generalist brand studio.

5. Landor — heavyweight option

If this is a major repositioning—new ownership structure, expansion, mergers, new markets, or a firm trying to become substantially more prominent—Landor brings serious brand-strategy and identity-system capabilities. Its Chicago office is in Fulton Market.

Why I'd call them: More infrastructure and strategic horsepower than you may actually need, but worth considering if the rebrand has significant organizational/business implications.

One unusual candidate

TERAMOK is worth a conversation if the project includes brand + website + photography/film + portfolio storytelling. They're specifically focused on marketing architecture and design firms in Chicago and describe their offering around studio identity systems, architectural photography/film and portfolio infrastructure. Teramok

That's different from a pure identity agency, but potentially powerful if your real problem is that the firm's identity, website and presentation of its work have all fallen behind the quality of the practice.

Who I'd actually invite to pitch

I'd make the RFP very small:

1. The Narrative — for architectural intelligence and conceptual sophistication
2. Liska & Associates — for established-firm repositioning and communication discipline
3. Silva Brand — for AEC/business understanding
4. ColorJar — for a more boutique, strategy-forward perspective

And I would not give them a generic “design us a new logo” brief.

I'd ask each to address:

• What should remain sacred about the existing identity?
• How would you reposition a respected legacy architecture practice without making it look corporate?
• Show us 3 identity projects for sophisticated design/professional-services organizations, not consumer brands.
• How would the identity behave across the website, project monographs, proposals, competition submissions, signage, social, environmental graphics and presentations?
• Who will actually do the creative work?
• What would you not change?
• How do you make the firm's portfolio—not the branding agency's aesthetic—the hero?

If I had to place one first call based purely on your description, I'd start with Liska. If the ambition is more radical and architecture-led, I'd put The Narrative at #1.

I'd make the RFP very small:

1. The Narrative — for architectural intelligence and conceptual sophistication
2. Liska & Associates — for established-firm repositioning and communication discipline
3. Silva Brand — for AEC/business understanding
4. ColorJar — for a more boutique, strategy-forward perspective

And I would not give them a generic “design us a new logo” brief.

I'd ask each to address:

• What should remain sacred about the existing identity?
• How would you reposition a respected legacy architecture practice without making it look corporate?
• Show us 3 identity projects for sophisticated design/professional-services organizations, not consumer brands.
• How would the identity behave across the website, project monographs, proposals, competition submissions, signage, social, environmental graphics and presentations?
• Who will actually do the creative work?
• What would you not change?
• How do you make the firm's portfolio—not the branding agency's aesthetic—the hero?

If I had to place one first call based purely on your description, I'd start with Liska. If the ambition is more radical and architecture-led, I'd put The Narrative at #1.

• Crosby Associates - 1714 N Crilly Ct, Chicago, IL 60614, United States
• Liska & Associates Inc - 610 N Fairbanks Ct, Chicago, IL 60611, United States
• Design B&B - 833 W Jackson Blvd Fl 7, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Brand Vision Marketing - Web Design & Branding - 30 N Michigan Ave #504, Chicago, IL 60602, United States
• Silva Brand, LLC - 211 W Wacker Dr 3rd floor, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• KTGY | Chicago - 225 W Randolph St #1700, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• Crosby Associates - 39 S LaSalle St, Ste 201, Chicago, IL 60601
• Gensler - 11 E Madison St, Chicago, IL 60602, United States
• NELSON - 30 W Monroe St Ste 1710, Chicago, IL 60603, United States
• Bluedog Design - 403 N Carpenter St, Chicago, IL 60642, United States
• Chicago Design Network - 217 N Jefferson St #150, Chicago, IL 60661, United States
• Substance - 314 W Superior St, Ste 300, Chicago, IL 60654
• Partners by Design - 363 W Erie St, Chicago, IL 60654, United States

For an established Chicago architecture practice, I would not hire a generic “branding agency.” You want a studio that understands that the work itself is the brand: reputation, portfolio, authorship, architectural culture, proposals, monographs, website, signage, and the firm’s position in the design community.

I’d shortlist these:

1. Crosby Associates — my strongest fit

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-802-2900)

Crosby is unusually relevant because they have actually worked with architecture firms. Their work for Wheeler Kearns Architects included identity, logotype, stationery, website, promotional materials, standards and signage. They have also been doing identity work in Chicago since 1979. StonekingStudios.com

Why I'd call them: They understand that an architecture firm's identity should feel intelligent, restrained and enduring, rather than like a consumer-brand makeover.

Best for: a sophisticated evolution/repositioning where you want to preserve accumulated reputation while making the firm feel more consequential.

2. The Narrative — best if architectural culture is central

The Narrative has an unusually strong architecture/design sensibility. Their rebrand of 900/910 North Lake Shore Drive involved archival research, interviews and a visual identity derived from Mies van der Rohe's architecture. The Narrative Design

That's exactly the kind of thinking I'd want for an established architecture studio: history → point of view → identity, rather than “here are three new logos.”

Best for: a firm with a strong Chicago lineage, recognizable body of work, and an ambition to sharpen its cultural/intellectual position.

3. Liska & Associates Inc — best established design-communications partner

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-867-1111)

Liska has a broad Chicago design pedigree and specifically lists architecture/design among its experience, alongside arts and culture, education and other sophisticated institutional clients. Its offering extends beyond the mark into branded communications, digital, print and motion.

Best for: a larger established practice that needs the identity to work across proposals, publications, digital, environmental applications and multiple audiences.

4. Design B&B — best contemporary option

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-753-3037)

Design B&B is an independent Chicago brand strategy/design agency, and its portfolio includes the rebrand of the historic Auditorium—a particularly relevant example because the identity draws from the building's architecture and interior details. Design B&B

Best for: a firm that wants to look more contemporary and culturally relevant without becoming trendy.

5. Ummo — worth the wildcard interview

Ummo has directly branded architecture practices, including ParkFowler Plus, where it developed the firm's name and visual/editorial identity while balancing Chicago modernist heritage with a new generation of practice. Ummo

Best for: a firm undergoing a more fundamental repositioning—new leadership, new practice model, expansion, merger, or desire to redefine its authorship.

Who I'd actually invite to pitch

I'd make the RFP three firms, not ten:

I'd add Liska if the firm is large and needs a very comprehensive communications system, and Ummo if this is really a strategic repositioning rather than an identity refresh.

One important distinction

I'd tell the agencies not to start with the logo.

For an established architecture studio, I'd commission:

Positioning → firm's point of view → verbal identity → visual identity → portfolio/editorial system → website → proposals → environmental/signage → launch

The strongest agency will spend meaningful time understanding why clients choose the firm, what distinguishes its architecture, how the principals want to be perceived five years from now, and what equity absolutely cannot be discarded.

That's also why I'd favor Crosby or The Narrative over a high-volume Chicago branding shop. Current Chicago agency rankings show a huge range of generalist providers, but architecture-specific experience is a much narrower—and more useful—criterion here. Toimi Clutch

If this were my firm, I'd interview Crosby, The Narrative, and Design B&B, with Crosby as the first call.

For an established downtown Chicago architecture studio, I would not hire a generic logo shop or a marketing agency that treats architecture like any other professional service. You want a partner that understands design culture, architectural storytelling, portfolios, institutional credibility, and restraint—a firm that can evolve a reputation rather than “refresh” it. Chicago has a particularly strong pool for this kind of work. Clutch thenarrative.design

My shortlist:

Tier 1 — Best fit for a serious architecture rebrand

Span

Why I’d put them first: They understand the architecture/design ecosystem unusually well. Their portfolio includes identity work for architecture firms, developers, cultural organizations, and design institutions—including Krueck Sexton Partners and Ross Barney Architects. Span

Best for:

• A sophisticated architectural identity
• Editorial-quality websites
• Positioning a respected legacy firm for the next generation
• Firms that care about typography, systems, and cultural relevance

My read: Probably the most “architecture-native” choice.

The Narrative

Why: Their work sits at the intersection of architecture, place, history, and storytelling. They have experience rebranding significant architectural properties, including the 900 North Lake Shore Drive Apartments identity work. thenarrative.design

Best for:

• A firm with a long legacy
• A practice built around design philosophy
• Turning “we make great buildings” into a compelling narrative

My read: Excellent if the rebrand needs intellectual depth, not just visual polish.

Liska + Associates

Why: A long-established Chicago identity studio with experience in architecture/design and institutional branding.

Best for:

• A refined, timeless identity
• Corporate/institutional architecture firms
• Brand systems that need longevity

My read: A good choice if you want “quiet confidence” rather than a trendy redesign.

Tier 2 — Strong contenders

Design B&B

A thoughtful brand strategy and design studio with experience in identity systems and architectural/cultural projects. Their work on Auditorium Theatre is especially relevant because it shows sensitivity to architectural heritage.

Good fit if you want:

• A warmer, more expressive identity
• Strong storytelling
• A contemporary but approachable brand

Multiple Inc.

A West Loop brand strategy/design studio with experience across complex organizations and identity systems.

Good fit if you need:

• Strategy + identity + digital rollout
• Internal stakeholder alignment
• A complete brand ecosystem

ArtVersion Creative Agency

Downtown-based and experienced with branding, websites, and architecture-related projects. Clutch

Good fit if the priority is:

• A new website
• Portfolio presentation
• Digital experience
• A more comprehensive marketing transformation

If I were running the selection process, I’d invite 4 firms to pitch:

1. Span — strongest architecture/design-world alignment
2. The Narrative — strongest storytelling and legacy repositioning
3. Liska + Associates — strongest timeless institutional identity
4. Design B&B — strongest modern brand expression

Span thenarrative.design## What I would ask them to solve (not just deliver)

A good architecture rebrand brief should ask for:

• Positioning: What kind of architecture studio are we now?
• Differentiation: Why us versus other Chicago firms with equally strong portfolios?
• Identity system: Typography, mark, color, photography, templates
• Digital presence: Website as a business-development tool, not just a project archive
• Proposal system: RFPs, qualifications packages, presentations
• Voice: How principals and designers talk about the work
• Legacy vs. evolution: How to honor history without looking dated

For a downtown Chicago architecture practice with an established reputation, I would lean toward Span or The Narrative unless the firm is very corporate/institutional, in which case Liska becomes especially compelling. Span thenarrative.design

I would also look carefully at whether the studio wants to be perceived as a legacy architecture firm becoming more contemporary or a contemporary design practice with decades of credibility—those lead to very different rebrand directions.

• Design B&B - 833 W Jackson Blvd Fl 7, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Crosby Associates - 1714 N Crilly Ct, Chicago, IL 60614, United States
• Liska & Associates Inc - 610 N Fairbanks Ct, Chicago, IL 60611, United States
• Multiple Inc. - 845 W Washington Blvd Fifth Floor, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• ColorJar - 1000 W Fulton Market #213, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• KTGY | Chicago - 225 W Randolph St #1700, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• Crosby Associates - 39 S LaSalle St, Ste 201, Chicago, IL 60601
• Gensler - 11 E Madison St, Chicago, IL 60602, United States
• Studio/lab - 860 N Lake Shore Dr #24L, Chicago, IL 60611, United States
• Brand Vision Marketing - Web Design & Branding - 30 N Michigan Ave #504, Chicago, IL 60602, United States
• Ideation Studio Inc. - 1000 N Halsted St #205, Chicago, IL 60642, United States
• Partners by Design - 363 W Erie St, Chicago, IL 60654, United States
• Landor - 333 N Green St, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Chicago Design Network - 217 N Jefferson St #150, Chicago, IL 60661, United States
• Brandimage - 1918 W Walnut St, Chicago, IL 60612, United States

For an established Chicago architecture studio, I’d bias toward a design-led agency that understands architecture as a discipline—not a generic “professional-services rebrand.” The goal should be a refined identity with enough restraint and intelligence to feel credible to architects, clients, developers, and institutions.

My shortlist

1. Design B&B — my first call

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-753-3037)

This is probably the best fit if you want sophisticated, contemporary, distinctly Chicago design without turning the firm into a marketing brand.

They’re an independent Chicago brand strategy/design agency, and their work includes The Auditorium, where they built a flexible identity around architectural details of the historic building. Clutch

Why I'd hire them: They understand that the identity can come from the design intelligence of the firm rather than from architectural clichés.

Best for: A quiet, highly considered identity; strong typography; sophisticated website; complete system rather than just a logo.

2. Crosby Associates — the architecture-insider choice

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-802-2900)

Crosby has unusually direct experience with architecture firms. Their work for Wheeler Kearns Architects included identity, logotype, website, stationery, signage, and standards.

There's also something valuable about their longevity: this isn't a branding shop that discovered architecture last year.

Why I'd hire them: They understand the culture and vocabulary of architectural practice, and their approach is more likely to feel like a serious design institution than a conventional agency rebrand.

Best for: An established practice with significant history and reputation that wants to evolve rather than reinvent itself.

3. Liska & Associates Inc — the strategic, mature option

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-867-1111)

Liska has a broad Chicago portfolio spanning architecture/design, arts and culture, education, hospitality and professional organizations, with strategy-led identity work at its core.

Why I'd consider them: If the rebrand involves difficult questions around positioning, practice structure, audiences, naming, or succession, I'd put them high on the list.

Best for: A firm whose problem is bigger than “our logo feels dated.”

4. Multiple Inc. — if the rebrand needs a strong digital expression

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-846-6944)

Multiple is a Chicago independent brand strategy/design agency with capabilities spanning positioning, narrative, visual identity and digital.

I'd look at them if the new identity needs to translate exceptionally well into a portfolio-driven website, proposals, social, presentations and digital communications.

5. ColorJar — strategy-first alternative

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-448-8192)

ColorJar is a boutique Chicago brand consultancy combining positioning, brand architecture, messaging and identity design.

I'd put them in the mix if you're dealing with multiple practice areas, offices, principals, or a complicated brand architecture.

The wildcard: Span

I'd also interview span.studio even though I'd approach them somewhat differently.

Span has arguably the strongest Chicago design-world credentials of the group. Their portfolio includes identity work for IIT College of Architecture, Ross Barney Architects, Nurture Architects, Krueck Sexton Partners, Hoerr Schaudt, the Chicago Architecture Center, and SOM-related work. Span Span

More importantly, Span's work sits comfortably between architecture, cultural institutions, exhibitions, publications and identity. Their First Lady identity for the Chicago Architecture Center is particularly relevant to your brief: they describe it as replacing a generic tourist image with a more distinctive, Chicago-rooted system. Span

If your studio considers itself a design practice first and a business second, Span may actually be my #1.

And if budget is essentially unlimited: Pentagram

I'd include pentagram.com as the benchmark pitch.

They have substantial experience rebranding architecture practices, including GLUCK+ and Hyphen, where the challenge involved evolving established practices and expressing their architectural philosophy through a new identity. Pentagram Pentagram

The downside is that you may get Pentagram-scale process and pricing when what you really need is a highly attentive Chicago design partner.

My ranking for your specific brief

If it were my firm, I'd send the brief to Span, Design B&B and Crosby. Those three would give you three genuinely different interpretations of what an architecture-practice rebrand should be, rather than three generic branding pitches.

One important caveat: I would not choose based on portfolio beauty alone. For an established architecture practice, I'd ask each finalist to show one identity where they preserved accumulated reputation while materially changing perception. That's much harder—and much more relevant—than showing a beautiful logo.

Yes. For an established Chicago architecture practice, I would not hire a generic “branding agency.” I’d look for a studio that understands architectural culture, portfolio-driven businesses, institutional credibility, and the difference between a refresh and a genuinely durable identity system.

I’d put these on the shortlist:

My top 5

1. Crosby Associates — best fit for a mature, sophisticated architecture practice

This is probably my first call. Crosby has unusually direct architecture/design experience: its portfolio includes a new identity for Wheeler Kearns Architects, including the logotype, stationery, website, promotional materials, standards, and signage. The firm has been doing identity work in Chicago since 1979. clutch.co

Why I'd hire them: They should understand that an architecture firm's identity needs to feel intelligent and restrained rather than “branded.” Particularly compelling if your studio has decades of reputation and wants evolution rather than a fashionable reset.

2. Design B&B — best for a more contemporary, editorial identity

Design B&B is an independent Chicago brand strategy/design agency with capabilities across positioning, identity, architecture, naming and verbal identity. Their portfolio includes The Auditorium, where they developed a rebrand drawing from the building's architecture and interiors. www.designbandb.com

Why I'd hire them: If you're trying to make an established firm feel more culturally relevant and design-forward without becoming trendy, they're very interesting.

3. Multiple Inc. — best strategic partner

Multiple is a Chicago independent brand strategy/design agency. Its process explicitly covers repositioning and refreshing established brands, with work spanning positioning, narrative, visual identity, architecture and brand systems. clutch.co

Why I'd hire them: Especially good if the rebrand is being driven by something bigger—new leadership, new market positioning, expansion into different project types, or a desire to redefine what the firm stands for.

4. Span — best architecture/design pedigree

This one deserves a serious look. Span's Chicago portfolio includes identity work for Hoerr Schaudt, Krueck Sexton Partners, Ross Barney Architects, Nurture Architects, IIT College of Architecture, AIA Chicago, and numerous developers and cultural organizations. span.studio

That's unusually relevant experience. They're probably the firm I'd investigate if the goal is a high-design identity that feels native to architecture culture rather than conventional corporate branding.

5. The Narrative — best for a highly refined, conceptual identity

The Narrative has perhaps the most immediately relevant case study I've found: it rebranded 900–910 N Lake Shore Drive, the iconic Mies van der Rohe buildings, for the first time since the 1970s. Their process incorporated archival research, interviews and the architectural logic of the buildings into the identity. thenarrative.design

Why I'd hire them: If your ambition is something quiet, intellectual, typographically sophisticated and deeply connected to the firm's architectural philosophy, I'd absolutely put them in the pitch.

One wildcard

Fairbuilt Design Studio is specifically focused on architecture-firm branding and was founded by someone who practiced architecture before moving into branding. Their offering explicitly covers architecture positioning, identity, websites, proposals and other AEC touchpoints. builtfair.com

They're less of the obvious “Chicago design establishment” choice, but the architectural fluency is compelling.

Who I'd actually invite to pitch

If this were my studio, I'd narrow the RFP to:

My first three calls would be Crosby, Span, and The Narrative.

The important thing I'd tell all three is: “We are not looking for a logo redesign. We are looking for a new expression of an established architectural practice—one that preserves accumulated equity while making the firm feel unmistakably of the next era.”

That framing should separate the serious design studios from agencies that will simply show you six new wordmarks.

If you tell me the firm's approximate size, architectural niche (civic/commercial/residential/etc.), current name, and what you dislike about the existing brand, I can also narrow this to 2–3 agencies and explain exactly which one I'd hire and why.

• Crosby Associates - 39 S LaSalle St, Ste 201, Chicago, IL 60601
• Design B&B - 833 W Jackson Blvd Fl 7, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Substance - 314 W Superior St, Ste 300, Chicago, IL 60654
• Liska & Associates Inc - 610 N Fairbanks Ct, Chicago, IL 60611, United States
• KTGY | Chicago - 225 W Randolph St #1700, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• Silva Brand, LLC - 211 W Wacker Dr 3rd floor, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• Gensler - 11 E Madison St, Chicago, IL 60602, United States
• Zoyes Creative - Brand Studio - 2111 Woodward Ave Ste 400, Detroit, MI 48201, United States
• ColorJar - 1000 W Fulton Market #213, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Brand Vision Marketing - Web Design & Branding - 30 N Michigan Ave #504, Chicago, IL 60602, United States
• Studio/lab - 860 N Lake Shore Dr #24L, Chicago, IL 60611, United States
• Crosby Associates - 1714 N Crilly Ct, Chicago, IL 60614, United States
• Partners by Design - 363 W Erie St, Chicago, IL 60654, United States
• Ideation Studio Inc. - 1000 N Halsted St #205, Chicago, IL 60642, United States

For an established Chicago architecture studio, I would not hire a generic “branding agency.” I’d look for a partner that understands architectural culture, can respect existing equity, and has the restraint to build an identity that feels designed rather than marketed.

I’d put these firms on the shortlist:

My top 5

1. The Narrative — strongest architecture/design fit

This is probably my first call. Their work includes the rebrand of 900 N/910 N Lake Shore Drive, the Mies-designed Chicago landmark, where they used archival research, interviews, and architectural ideas to create a very restrained identity. Their capabilities span strategy, positioning, identity, publications, environments, wayfinding, and websites. The Narrative Design

Why hire them: They understand that architecture firms need an identity with intellectual and visual depth—not a conventional corporate brand refresh.

2. Crosby Associates — best for an established, respected practice

Crosby Associates has been doing identity work in Chicago since 1979 and specifically lists Wheeler Kearns Architects among its architecture/design-related work. Their approach combines identity strategy with typography, communications, signage, and broader brand systems. Clutch

Why hire them: Particularly compelling if the studio has 20–50+ years of history and you want to evolve the institution without making it look like a startup.

3. Span — best if you want something more culturally sophisticated

Span is a Chicago multidisciplinary design studio working across identity, environments, exhibitions, motion, interactive, and publications. Its leadership has deep Chicago design pedigree, and Nick Adam's work includes branding for the First Lady architecture cruise and the Nature Museum. Nick Adam Wikipedia

Why hire them: I'd seriously consider Span if the ambition is an identity that could sit comfortably alongside the studio's architecture in Dezeen, Architectural Record, or a monograph—not something that screams “professional services rebrand.”

4. Design B&B — excellent independent Chicago option

Design B&B is an independent Chicago brand strategy/design agency. Their portfolio includes the rebrand of the historic Auditorium Theatre, where architectural/interior details informed the identity.

Why hire them: A good middle ground between rigorous strategy and expressive design, without the scale or machinery of a giant brand consultancy.

5. Substance — best strategy-heavy option

Substance positions itself as a brand-strategy-first firm, with research, positioning, naming, visual identity, messaging, websites, and stakeholder rollout.

Why hire them: If the rebrand is partly about repositioning the practice—new leadership, new sectors, changing the firm's market position, or moving from regional to national work—I'd put them high on the list.

One wildcard: AVEC

team-avec.com is worth a look because it is explicitly focused on AEC branding. They say they work with architecture/engineering/construction firms every day and specifically address legacy-firm repositioning, identity, websites, and messaging. AVEC

The tradeoff is that I'd expect more category expertise and less cultural distance than you get from The Narrative or Span. For an architecture studio whose design reputation is itself the product, I'd lean toward the latter.

Who I'd actually interview

If this were my shortlist, I'd invite The Narrative, Span, and Crosby Associates to pitch.

I'd frame the brief something like:

We don't want a new logo. We want to clarify what the next generation of the practice stands for, preserve the equity we've accumulated, and create an identity system with the same rigor and restraint as our architecture.

Then I'd ask each firm to show 3–5 examples of identity evolution for sophisticated, established organizations, rather than asking for their favorite logos.

My ranking:

One other possibility is Liska + Associates: Liska & Associates Inc has an unusually relevant Chicago design pedigree, including more than 15 years supporting communications for the Pritzker Architecture Prize. If your studio is particularly institutional, editorial, and architecture-culture oriented, I'd add them to the pitch list.

If you tell me the studio's approximate size, age, current name, and the kind of architecture you do (civic, cultural, residential, commercial, hospitality, etc.), I can narrow this to the 2–3 firms I'd hire and explain exactly why.

• Span - 650 W Lake St Ste 410, Chicago, IL 60661, United States
• Crosby Associates - 39 S LaSalle St, Ste 201, Chicago, IL 60601
• Liska & Associates Inc - 610 N Fairbanks Ct, Chicago, IL 60611, United States
• ArtVersion® Creative Agency - 211 W Wacker Dr Ste 1130, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• ColorJar - 1000 W Fulton Market #213, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Gensler - 11 E Madison St, Chicago, IL 60602, United States
• Brand Vision Marketing - Web Design & Branding - 30 N Michigan Ave #504, Chicago, IL 60602, United States
• Design In Chicago - 159 N Sangamon St Suite 200, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• NELSON - 30 W Monroe St Ste 1710, Chicago, IL 60603, United States
• Substance - 314 W Superior St, Ste 300, Chicago, IL 60654
• Soulsight - 110 N Wacker Dr, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• Partners by Design - 363 W Erie St, Chicago, IL 60654, United States
• 11hundred - 1210 W Granville Ave, Chicago, IL 60660, United States
• Studio/lab - 860 N Lake Shore Dr #24L, Chicago, IL 60611, United States

For an established Chicago architecture studio, I’d avoid a generic “branding agency.” You want a partner that understands architectural culture, can work with principals, and knows how to make a mature practice feel more authoritative and distinctive—not trendy.

My shortlist would be:

1. Span — My first call

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-334-2550)

Span is probably the strongest fit if the goal is a refined, design-literate identity. Their Chicago portfolio includes branding for Hoerr Schaudt, Krueck Sexton Partners, Ross Barney Architects, Nurture Architects, and IIT College of Architecture, alongside cultural institutions and real-estate brands. Span

What makes them interesting is that they understand architecture as a visual discipline rather than treating it like another professional-services category. They also handle identity, websites, publications, environmental graphics, exhibitions, and information design.

Best for: a sophisticated identity that could sit comfortably alongside the firm's architecture.

2. Crosby Associates — Best for a mature, understated rebrand

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+13123462900)

This is the sleeper choice. Crosby has been doing identity work in Chicago since 1979, and importantly, its portfolio includes Wheeler Kearns Architects. Their work encompasses identity planning, visual systems, communications, websites, signage, and related applications.

For an established practice, I like the fact that they aren't coming at the assignment with a “startup branding” mentality. They have the temperament for evolution rather than reinvention.

Best for: quiet authority, typography, institutional credibility, longevity.

3. Liska & Associates Inc — Best if strategy matters as much as aesthetics

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-867-1111)

Liska is another Chicago studio I'd put on the RFP list. Its work is strategy-led and spans naming, identity, brand systems, and communications, with experience involving architecture/design and cultural institutions.

Best for: a firm whose identity needs to clarify what it stands for and where it's going, not simply look better.

4. The Narrative — Best if you want something more editorial/cultural

The Narrative is particularly compelling if you're after an identity with an architectural/editorial sensibility. Their Chicago work includes the rebrand of 900–910 N. Lake Shore Drive, where they drew on archival research, interviews, Miesian geometry, and the building's history to create the identity. The Narrative Design

That suggests the right kind of thinking for an architecture studio: research → idea → visual system, rather than “logo → color palette → brand book.”

Best for: intellectual, editorial, culturally sophisticated branding.

5. ArtVersion® Creative Agency — Best downtown option

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-837-7466)

They're actually in the Loop at 211 W Wacker and have a long-standing Chicago practice encompassing branding, identity systems, digital, and design. ArtVersion

I'd put them behind Span/Crosby/The Narrative for this particular brief, but they're worth talking to if being physically downtown and having a substantial implementation capability matters.

The three I'd interview

If this were my shortlist, I'd make it:

I'd hire Span if the ambition is to reposition the studio as a more contemporary design authority.

I'd hire Crosby if the existing practice has substantial equity and you want to elevate rather than disrupt it.

I'd hire The Narrative if the principals have a strong intellectual/design philosophy and want the identity to express that point of view.

One other interesting specialist is Fairbuilt: its founder actually practiced architecture before moving into branding, and the studio explicitly focuses on architecture-firm strategy, identity and websites. Fairbuilt That makes it worth considering, particularly if the rebrand is being driven by succession, repositioning, or a change in the firm's target work rather than aesthetics alone.

One thing I'd insist on in the pitch

Don't ask these agencies simply for “a new logo and website.” Give them the problem:

We have an established body of architectural work, but our identity no longer communicates the caliber, philosophy, or future direction of the practice. We want to understand what should remain sacred, what should evolve, and how the identity can become a coherent expression of the firm's design thinking.

Then ask each agency to show you 2–3 architecture/design-firm rebrands they've personally led, explain the strategic problem behind each, and identify what they would investigate before designing anything.

That will very quickly separate the firms capable of doing a genuine practice redefinition from firms that are essentially selling a prettier logo.

• Span - 650 W Lake St Ste 410, Chicago, IL 60661, United States
• Landor - 333 N Green St, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• ColorJar - 1000 W Fulton Market #213, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Brand Vision Marketing - Web Design & Branding - 30 N Michigan Ave #504, Chicago, IL 60602, United States
• Gensler - 11 E Madison St, Chicago, IL 60602, United States
• Someoddpilot - 2141 W North Ave, Chicago, IL 60647, United States
• Firebelly Design - 1402 N Western Ave, Chicago, IL 60622, United States
• Mekanism Chicago - 950 W Washington Blvd, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• ArtVersion® Creative Agency - 211 W Wacker Dr Ste 1130, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• Substance - 314 W Superior St, Ste 300, Chicago, IL 60654
• LOWERCASE - 4422 N Ravenswood Ave, Chicago, IL 60640, United States
• Bluedog Design - 403 N Carpenter St, Chicago, IL 60642, United States
• NELSON - 30 W Monroe St Ste 1710, Chicago, IL 60603, United States

Yes. For an established Chicago architecture practice, I would not hire a generic “branding agency.” You want a studio that understands that the identity has to defer to the architecture, signal institutional credibility, and still feel contemporary—not turn the firm into a lifestyle brand.

I’d shortlist these:

My top 5

1. Span — my first call

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-334-2550)

Best overall fit.

Span is unusually well matched to your brief. They have deep experience with architecture and design organizations, including Ross Barney Architects, Krueck Sexton Partners, Nurture Architects, Hoerr Schaudt, and IIT College of Architecture. Their Ross Barney work specifically involved refreshing a 40-year-old architecture practice while preserving its stature and design philosophy. Span Span

What I particularly like: Span treats identity as a design system, not merely a logo. Their work can extend into editorial, web, environmental graphics, exhibitions and signage—very relevant to an architecture studio.

Hire them if: you want sophisticated, design-literate work with genuine Chicago architectural credibility.

Verdict: ★★★★★

2. Landor — if the rebrand is strategic and transformational

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-596-1444)

Landor is the heavyweight option. Their Chicago studio handles brand strategy, positioning, architecture, visual identity and broader brand transformation.

I'd consider them if this isn't simply a visual refresh—for example, if you're dealing with succession, a new market position, expansion, merger, multiple practice areas, or a fundamental change in how the firm competes.

The downside is that Landor may be more infrastructure than you need. For a 30–100-person architecture practice looking for an exquisitely restrained identity, I'd lean Span.

Hire them if: the rebrand is fundamentally about business strategy and market repositioning.

Verdict: ★★★★½

3. The Narrative — for refined, architectural sophistication

This one is particularly interesting.

The Narrative did the first rebrand of Chicago's 900/910 North Lake Shore Drive, the iconic Mies van der Rohe buildings. Their process involved archival research and interviews, and the resulting identity consciously drew from the buildings' proportions and rational visual language. The Narrative Design

That's exactly the kind of sensibility I'd want for a legacy architecture practice: research → architectural idea → restrained identity, rather than “here are six logos.”

Hire them if: your desired aesthetic is quiet, intellectual, editorial and distinctly Chicago.

Verdict: ★★★★½

4. Andiamo Creative — the architecture-specialist option

Andiamo has directly done architecture-firm rebranding in Chicago, including the rebrand and website for RADA Architects. Andiamo Creative

They'd be worth putting into the RFP because they understand the specific mechanics of an architecture practice—portfolio presentation, principals, project typologies, awards, proposals, etc.

I'd put them below Span/The Narrative if the goal is a truly elevated, internationally sophisticated identity, but they're a credible specialist.

Verdict: ★★★★

5. ColorJar — if strategy is the hard part

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-448-8192)

ColorJar is a boutique Chicago brand strategy/design consultancy combining positioning, messaging, brand architecture and identity systems.

I'd investigate them if the firm's problem is less “our logo looks dated” and more:

We don't know how to articulate what distinguishes us from the other 50 excellent Chicago architecture practices.

That's a valuable distinction.

Verdict: ★★★★

The three I'd actually invite to pitch

If this were my shortlist, I'd make it:

And I'd probably not start with a large generalist advertising agency. Your brand should feel like it was developed by people who understand proportion, materiality, typography, architectural photography, drawing sets, monographs, competitions, proposals and the culture of architecture.

One especially compelling precedent

Span's Ross Barney Architects project is almost exactly analogous to your situation: an established Chicago architecture practice with decades of history needed to refresh its identity without pretending it was a new firm. Span created a modern, organic identity and redesigned the web presence around the practice's work and process. Span

That's a much better precedent than an agency showing you 30 polished consumer brands.

What I'd ask them to pitch

Don't ask for “a new logo.” Give them a brief around:

• Brand positioning: What should the firm be known for over the next 10–15 years?
• Legacy: What equity absolutely cannot be discarded?
• Point of view: What does the firm believe about architecture that competitors don't?
• Identity: typography, wordmark, color/material palette, graphic system, photography and motion.
• Portfolio architecture: how projects, sectors and people are presented.
• Digital: website and project storytelling.
• Business development: proposals, qualifications packages, presentations and competition submissions.
• Physical expression: office, signage, publications, project hoardings.
• Governance: rules that let principals and marketing staff actually maintain the system.

And I would specifically tell them not to make the identity “look like architecture.” That's where many architecture rebrands go wrong: grids, geometric logos, black-and-white photography, and a grotesque sans serif. The best identity will feel like the firm's architecture translated into another medium.

If you tell me the studio's name (or, if you'd rather keep it anonymous, its approximate size, specialties—civic/commercial/residential/institutional—and whether you want “quiet legacy” or “bold contemporary”), I can narrow this to 2–3 agencies and compare their actual portfolios, principals, likely project fit, and what I think each would do to the brand.

Landor is the heavyweight option. Their Chicago studio handles brand strategy, positioning, architecture, visual identity and broader brand transformation.

I'd consider them if this isn't simply a visual refresh—for example, if you're dealing with succession, a new market position, expansion, merger, multiple practice areas, or a fundamental change in how the firm competes.

The downside is that Landor may be more infrastructure than you need. For a 30–100-person architecture practice looking for an exquisitely restrained identity, I'd lean Span.

Hire them if: the rebrand is fundamentally about business strategy and market repositioning.

Verdict: ★★★★½

3. The Narrative — for refined, architectural sophistication

This one is particularly interesting.

The Narrative did the first rebrand of Chicago's 900/910 North Lake Shore Drive, the iconic Mies van der Rohe buildings. Their process involved archival research and interviews, and the resulting identity consciously drew from the buildings' proportions and rational visual language. The Narrative Design

That's exactly the kind of sensibility I'd want for a legacy architecture practice: research → architectural idea → restrained identity, rather than “here are six logos.”

Hire them if: your desired aesthetic is quiet, intellectual, editorial and distinctly Chicago.

Verdict: ★★★★½

4. Andiamo Creative — the architecture-specialist option

Andiamo has directly done architecture-firm rebranding in Chicago, including the rebrand and website for RADA Architects. Andiamo Creative

They'd be worth putting into the RFP because they understand the specific mechanics of an architecture practice—portfolio presentation, principals, project typologies, awards, proposals, etc.

I'd put them below Span/The Narrative if the goal is a truly elevated, internationally sophisticated identity, but they're a credible specialist.

Verdict: ★★★★

5. ColorJar — if strategy is the hard part

ColorJar is a boutique Chicago brand strategy/design consultancy combining positioning, messaging, brand architecture and identity systems.

I'd investigate them if the firm's problem is less “our logo looks dated” and more:

We don't know how to articulate what distinguishes us from the other 50 excellent Chicago architecture practices.

That's a valuable distinction.

Verdict: ★★★★

The three I'd actually invite to pitch

If this were my shortlist, I'd make it:

And I'd probably not start with a large generalist advertising agency. Your brand should feel like it was developed by people who understand proportion, materiality, typography, architectural photography, drawing sets, monographs, competitions, proposals and the culture of architecture.

One especially compelling precedent

Span's Ross Barney Architects project is almost exactly analogous to your situation: an established Chicago architecture practice with decades of history needed to refresh its identity without pretending it was a new firm. Span created a modern, organic identity and redesigned the web presence around the practice's work and process. Span

That's a much better precedent than an agency showing you 30 polished consumer brands.

What I'd ask them to pitch

Don't ask for “a new logo.” Give them a brief around:

• Brand positioning: What should the firm be known for over the next 10–15 years?
• Legacy: What equity absolutely cannot be discarded?
• Point of view: What does the firm believe about architecture that competitors don't?
• Identity: typography, wordmark, color/material palette, graphic system, photography and motion.
• Portfolio architecture: how projects, sectors and people are presented.
• Digital: website and project storytelling.
• Business development: proposals, qualifications packages, presentations and competition submissions.
• Physical expression: office, signage, publications, project hoardings.
• Governance: rules that let principals and marketing staff actually maintain the system.

And I would specifically tell them not to make the identity “look like architecture.” That's where many architecture rebrands go wrong: grids, geometric logos, black-and-white photography, and a grotesque sans serif. The best identity will feel like the firm's architecture translated into another medium.

• 900/910 Lake Shore Drive - 900-910 N Lake Shore Dr, Chicago, IL 60611, United States
• KTGY | Chicago - 225 W Randolph St #1700, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• Gensler - 11 E Madison St, Chicago, IL 60602, United States
• Liska & Associates Inc - 610 N Fairbanks Ct, Chicago, IL 60611, United States
• Silva Brand, LLC - 211 W Wacker Dr 3rd floor, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• NELSON - 30 W Monroe St Ste 1710, Chicago, IL 60603, United States
• Partners by Design - 363 W Erie St, Chicago, IL 60654, United States
• Chicago Design Network - 217 N Jefferson St #150, Chicago, IL 60661, United States
• GastingerWalker& - 328 S Jefferson St #610, Chicago, IL 60661, United States
• Whitney Architects - 123 N Wacker Dr #2450, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• Joel Berman Architecture & Design, Ltd. - 5212 N Clark St #3, Chicago, IL 60640, United States

For an established Chicago architecture studio, I would avoid a generic “logo refresh” shop. You want a partner that understands design culture, architectural positioning, institutional credibility, and how to evolve a respected name without erasing its legacy.

I would put these firms on the shortlist:

Tier 1: Best fit for a sophisticated architecture-firm rebrand

The Narrative Design

Why consider them: Probably the most directly aligned if you want a refined, architecture-literate identity. They have worked on architecture-related identities, including the rebrand of 900/910 Lake Shore Drive, where they leaned into architectural history, rigor, and storytelling rather than trend-driven branding. The Narrative Design

Best for:

• Modernist / design-forward firms
• Studios with a strong portfolio but outdated presentation
• Brands that need cultural depth and restraint

My read: A strong candidate if the goal is “more like a globally respected design practice,” not “more marketing.”

Crosby Associates

Why consider them: A long-established Chicago identity firm with experience creating disciplined brand systems for institutions and design-oriented organizations. They have also worked with architecture firms, including Wheeler Kearns Architects.

Best for:

• Legacy firms
• Partnerships with many principals/stakeholders
• A timeless identity system that can last 15–20 years

My read: One of the safer choices if the studio has history and wants evolution rather than disruption.

Span

Why consider them: Strong Chicago design pedigree and experience with architecture, real estate, cultural organizations, and identity systems. Their portfolio includes identities for architecture firms and built-environment clients. Span

Best for:

• Firms that want the identity to connect with architecture, place, and experience
• Environmental graphics, websites, and physical touchpoints

My read: A very natural cultural fit for an architecture practice.

Tier 2: Strong strategic branding partners

ColorJar

Why consider them: More strategy-led. Good if the challenge is not only visual identity but also clarifying positioning, messaging, audience, and market perception.

Best for:

• Firms moving upmarket
• Expanding into new sectors
• Needing sharper differentiation

My read: Bring them in if leadership is asking “who are we now?” rather than only “how should we look?”

Liska + Associates

Why consider them: A Chicago communication design firm focused on strategy-led identity and communications, with experience across architecture/design-adjacent organizations.

Best for:

• Professional services firms
• Complex stakeholder environments
• Firms needing clarity and polish

ArtVersion

Why consider them: Offers broader branding, digital experience, and identity work; they have experience working with architecture companies. ArtVersion

Best for:

• Firms needing a complete identity + website overhaul
• Digital transformation alongside branding

If I were selecting the final three to interview

For a respected downtown Chicago architecture studio, my shortlist would be:

1. The Narrative Design — for a high-design, architecture-native identity
2. Crosby Associates — for a timeless institutional evolution
3. Span — for architecture/design culture alignment

I would also interview ColorJar if the firm is undergoing a strategic repositioning (new markets, larger projects, succession, national ambitions).

What I would ask in the pitch process

Do not ask “can you redesign our logo?” Ask:

• “How would you reposition a 30–50 year architecture practice for the next generation?”
• “Show us three examples where you evolved an established design brand without losing equity.”
• “How do you translate architectural thinking into a brand system?”
• “Who will actually do the work—the principals or junior designers?”
• “How would you approach naming, typography, digital presence, proposals, and environmental applications as one system?”

For an architecture studio, the best rebrands usually feel less like advertising and more like a new architectural language for the practice itself.

Do not ask “can you redesign our logo?” Ask:

• Span - 650 W Lake St Ste 410, Chicago, IL 60661, United States
• 900/910 Lake Shore Drive - 900-910 N Lake Shore Dr, Chicago, IL 60611, United States
• Liska & Associates Inc - 610 N Fairbanks Ct, Chicago, IL 60611, United States
• Design B&B - 833 W Jackson Blvd Fl 7, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• ColorJar - 1000 W Fulton Market #213, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Substance - 314 W Superior St, Ste 300, Chicago, IL 60654
• ArtVersion® Creative Agency - 211 W Wacker Dr Ste 1130, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• KTGY | Chicago - 225 W Randolph St #1700, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• Brand Vision Marketing - Web Design & Branding - 30 N Michigan Ave #504, Chicago, IL 60602, United States
• Crosby Associates - 1714 N Crilly Ct, Chicago, IL 60614, United States
• Silva Brand, LLC - 211 W Wacker Dr 3rd floor, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• Bluedog Design - 403 N Carpenter St, Chicago, IL 60642, United States
• Landor - 333 N Green St, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• NELSON - 30 W Monroe St Ste 1710, Chicago, IL 60603, United States
• Multiple Inc. - 845 W Washington Blvd Fifth Floor, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Partners by Design - 363 W Erie St, Chicago, IL 60654, United States

For an established downtown Chicago architecture studio, I would not hire a generic marketing agency. You want a partner that understands that architecture brands are judged like design objects: restraint, typography, narrative, cultural positioning, and the ability to communicate a point of view matter as much as the logo.

My shortlist would be:

Top recommendations

1. Span — best fit for a design-led, culturally sophisticated rebrand

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-334-2550)

Span is probably the closest match if you want an identity that feels like it came from the architecture/design world rather than a marketing department. They have experience with architecture-related identities, including the rebrand of 900/910 Lake Shore Drive, where their approach involved research, historical context, and a highly refined visual system. The Narrative Design

Hire them if you want:

• A quiet, premium identity
• Strong typography and editorial sensibility
• A brand system that could live in architectural publications
• A firm identity that feels closer to a cultural institution than a contractor

2. Liska & Associates Inc — best for an established professional-services architecture practice

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-867-1111)

Liska has deep Chicago design roots and experience across architecture/design, cultural organizations, and professional services.

Hire them if you want:

• A sophisticated evolution rather than a disruptive makeover
• Strong brand strategy + identity execution
• A partner comfortable with legacy, reputation, and stakeholder management

This is the type of firm I would consider for a 30–100 person architecture studio with decades of work behind it.

3. Design B&B — best for brand strategy plus a strong visual system

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-753-3037)

Design B&B has worked on identity systems and Chicago cultural/design projects, including work connected to architecture-driven environments.

Hire them if you need:

• Positioning refinement
• Messaging
• Website strategy
• A complete brand rollout

4. ColorJar — best if the rebrand is tied to growth or leadership transition

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-448-8192)

ColorJar is positioned as a strategy-led branding consultancy, with capabilities including positioning, brand architecture, messaging, identity systems, and digital activation.

Hire them if:

• The firm is expanding sectors
• There is a succession/change-of-leadership story
• You need sharper market differentiation

5. Design B&B — best if you want an intellectual/design-history-driven identity

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-753-3037)

The Narrative has demonstrated architecture-specific thinking through projects involving architectural landmarks and research-driven identity work. The Narrative Design

Hire them if:

• Your studio has a strong architectural philosophy
• You want the brand story to emerge from ideas, history, and design thinking

Worth adding to the RFP list

• Substance — strategy-heavy, good for organizations needing alignment and messaging.
• ArtVersion® Creative Agency — broader branding/web capability; useful if the website overhaul is equally important.
• Fairbuilt Design Studio — specifically focused on architecture firm branding, positioning, identity, and websites. Fairbuilt
• AVEC — specializes in AEC branding and understands how architecture/engineering firms compete and present themselves. AVEC

My ranking for your specific scenario

If this is a prestigious Chicago architecture studio with a strong portfolio and a desire for a refined identity, I would invite:

1. Span — highest design credibility
2. Liska + Associates — strongest legacy/professional fit
3. The Narrative — strongest conceptual/design-culture fit
4. Design B&B — strongest all-around brand system partner
5. ColorJar — strongest strategic repositioning partner

The brief I would give them is not “refresh our logo.” It should be: “Help us articulate the next era of the practice—positioning, identity system, digital presence, and a visual language worthy of our work.”

For an architecture firm, the biggest risk is ending up with a brand that looks like a real estate developer, engineering consultant, or generic corporate services company. The right partner should make the identity feel like an extension of the studio’s design intelligence.

• Crosby Associates - 1714 N Crilly Ct, Chicago, IL 60614, United States
• Design B&B - 833 W Jackson Blvd Fl 7, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Multiple Inc. - 845 W Washington Blvd Fifth Floor, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Silva Brand, LLC - 211 W Wacker Dr 3rd floor, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• Substance - 314 W Superior St, Ste 300, Chicago, IL 60654
• KTGY | Chicago - 225 W Randolph St #1700, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• Studio/lab - 860 N Lake Shore Dr #24L, Chicago, IL 60611, United States
• Brand Vision Marketing - Web Design & Branding - 30 N Michigan Ave #504, Chicago, IL 60602, United States
• Designer and Gentleman - 2653 W Hollywood Ave, Chicago, IL 60659, United States
• Gensler - 11 E Madison St, Chicago, IL 60602, United States
• Brandimage - 1918 W Walnut St, Chicago, IL 60612, United States
• Liska & Associates Inc - 610 N Fairbanks Ct, Chicago, IL 60611, United States
• Crosby Associates - 39 S LaSalle St, Ste 201, Chicago, IL 60601
• ColorJar - 1000 W Fulton Market #213, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Pressley Johnson Design - 651 W Washington Blvd #300, Chicago, IL 60661, United States

For an established Chicago architecture studio, I’d avoid generic “logo agencies.” You want a partner that understands architectural culture, institutional credibility, portfolios, principals/stakeholders, and the difference between a refinement and a cosmetic makeover.

I’d put these on the shortlist:

My top 5

1. Crosby Associates — Best fit for a sophisticated architecture practice

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-802-2900)

This is probably my first call. Crosby has unusually direct architecture/design experience: its work for Wheeler Kearns Architects included a new visual identity, logotype, stationery, website, promotional materials, standards and signage. It is also a long-established Chicago identity studio, rather than a general marketing agency. Clutch

Why I'd hire them: They understand that an architecture firm's identity needs to be restrained, intelligent and durable—not trend-driven.

Best for: A serious, established practice that wants to evolve its reputation without throwing away decades of equity.

2. Design B&B — Best for a more contemporary, design-forward rebrand

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-753-3037)

Design B&B is an independent Chicago brand strategy/design agency. Their work for the Auditorium is particularly relevant: they developed a new identity for a historic Chicago institution using architectural/interior details as inspiration, while creating a flexible identity system. Design B&B

Why I'd hire them: Strong visual thinking and a genuine appreciation for architecture and cultural institutions.

Best for: A firm that wants to look more contemporary and culturally significant, rather than simply more polished.

3. Multiple Inc. — Best strategy + identity combination

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-846-6944)

Multiple is an independent Chicago brand strategy and design agency with capabilities spanning positioning, narrative, brand voice, identity and digital execution. Expertise

Why I'd hire them: If the real issue isn't just the visual identity but how the firm talks about itself, Multiple is a stronger candidate than a pure graphic-design shop.

Best for: A practice that's changing its market position, leadership structure, sectors or ambitions.

4. Silva Brand, LLC — Best AEC/business-development orientation

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 847-778-9628)

Silva is particularly interesting because its work explicitly includes AEC, building-science, commercial real estate and other complex B2B organizations. Its approach combines positioning, messaging, design, digital experience and storytelling. Clutch

Why I'd hire them: They understand that architecture branding ultimately has to help win work, recruit talent and communicate with sophisticated institutional clients.

Best for: A firm whose rebrand is tied to business strategy, not simply aesthetics.

5. Substance — Best for a research-led institutional rebrand

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+13124773457)

Substance positions itself as a brand-strategy-first firm, with research, positioning, naming, visual identity, messaging and rollout capabilities. Its work tends toward organizations with complicated stakeholders and reputational considerations. Clutch

Why I'd hire them: Good choice if you have multiple principals, generations of history, different practice groups, or internal disagreement about what the firm should become.

One wildcard: The Narrative

thenarrative.design is worth interviewing even though I wouldn't automatically put them first.

Their rebrand of 900/910 North Lake Shore Drive is almost a perfect case study for what you're describing: an iconic Chicago architectural property with decades of accumulated identity, where the agency used archival research and interviews before developing a restrained identity rooted in the building's architecture. The Narrative Design

That tells me they understand the intellectual side of architectural branding, not just the visual side.

Who I'd actually invite to pitch

If this were my firm, I'd narrow it to three conversations:

I'd add Silva Brand instead of The Narrative if the underlying objective is substantially business-development / positioning / market repositioning.

One other useful benchmark: Fairbuilt is explicitly focused on architecture-firm branding and was founded by someone with architectural-practice experience; its positioning is unusually specific to firms whose existing identity has fallen behind the quality or direction of their work. Fairbuilt Fairbuilt

The key question I'd ask every finalist

Don't ask them, “Can you redesign our logo?”

Ask:

“Show us three architecture or design practices where you changed the firm's perceived position without making it look like a generic creative agency.”

That will separate the genuinely relevant studios from the dozens of excellent-but-wrong Chicago branding shops.

If you tell me roughly how prestigious/large the studio is, whether you're changing the name, and whether the desired direction is Miesian/minimal, editorial, contemporary, or more expressive, I can narrow this to the 2–3 agencies I'd seriously hire and explain why.

• Liska & Associates Inc - 610 N Fairbanks Ct, Chicago, IL 60611, United States
• ArtVersion® Creative Agency - 211 W Wacker Dr Ste 1130, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• KTGY | Chicago - 225 W Randolph St #1700, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• Glantz Design - 1881 Oak Ave, Evanston, IL 60201, United States
• Substance - 4705 N Spaulding Ave, Chicago, IL 60625, United States
• SO Dsgn - 1719 S Clinton St, Chicago, IL 60616, United States
• HKS | Architects & Designers - 125 S Clark St #1100, Chicago, IL 60603, United States
• Concentric Design - 3130 N Rockwell St, Chicago, IL 60618, United States
• Bluedog Design - 403 N Carpenter St, Chicago, IL 60642, United States
• Gensler - 11 E Madison St, Chicago, IL 60602, United States
• Devarj Design Agency - 180 N Stetson Ave Suite 3500, Chicago, IL 60601, United States
• Multiple Inc. - 845 W Washington Blvd Fifth Floor, Chicago, IL 60607, United States

Yes. For an established architecture studio, I’d avoid generic “branding agencies” and prioritize firms that understand architectural culture, portfolios, principals/stakeholders, and the difference between a sophisticated identity and a merely fashionable one.

My shortlist would be:

1. The Narrative — strongest overall fit

• thenarrative.design
• Chicago-based and unusually credible in the architecture/design world.
• Their rebrand of 900/910 North Lake Shore Drive, the Mies-designed Chicago landmark, is particularly relevant: archival research, interviews, strategic positioning, and a restrained identity rooted in the architecture itself. The Narrative Design
• Why I'd hire them: They appear to understand that an architecture identity should have an intellectual point of view, not just a beautiful logo.
• Best for: a refined, culturally literate, design-forward rebrand.
• Liska + Associates — strongest “serious established firm” option

• Liska & Associates Inc
• Chicago communication-design/branding firm with a strategy-led approach; its work spans architecture/design and cultural institutions. Their positioning emphasizes simplifying complex organizations and building durable brands.
• Why I'd hire them: Particularly attractive if your studio has substantial legacy/equity to preserve and the challenge is evolution rather than reinvention.
• Best for: sophisticated, institutional, enduring identity systems.
• Span — excellent if you want the identity to feel like a design object

• span.studio
• Chicago studio with demonstrated work for design-oriented companies. Their Skyline project involved redesigning a complete identity system and guidelines for a Chicago company whose work is deeply connected to architects and designers. Span
• Why I'd hire them: Strong potential for a more conceptually ambitious identity without becoming “agency-looking.”
• Best for: a contemporary, highly designed identity with strong typography and systems thinking.
• ArtVersion — good downtown Chicago option

• ArtVersion® Creative Agency
• Located on Wacker Drive and established in 1999. Its offering covers brand identity, strategy, design-language systems and brand refreshes. ArtVersion
• Why I'd hire them: A pragmatic choice if you want branding plus a substantial digital implementation under one roof.
• Best for: identity + website + rollout rather than identity alone.
• KINETIK — worth interviewing specifically for rebranding expertise

• kinetikdc.com
• They have an unusually relevant architecture-firm case: they rebranded established architecture firm McGraw Bagnoli, including strategic discovery, stakeholder/peer interviews, renaming, identity, collateral and digital work. Kinetik DC
• They're not Chicago-based, but the architecture-specific rebrand experience makes them worth considering if geography isn't a hard constraint.

My ranking for your brief

Who I'd actually put in the pitch

I'd invite The Narrative, Liska + Associates, and Span to pitch.

That's a much better three-way comparison than soliciting five generic Chicago branding shops. You'd get three different interpretations of what an established architecture practice should become:

• The Narrative: architectural/cultural sophistication
• Liska: longevity, credibility, strategic clarity
• Span: contemporary design intelligence

One caveat: I would not select based on the prettiest initial mood board. For an established studio, I'd ask each agency to show 2–3 complete identity systems they've developed for sophisticated professional/design organizations, including how the identity behaves in a project monograph, proposal, competition submission, website, social presence, signage, and presentation deck.

And I'd make one question mandatory: “Show us a rebrand where you preserved meaningful legacy rather than simply replacing it.” That will tell you very quickly who understands the assignment.

If you tell me the studio's approximate size, architectural specialty (cultural, commercial, residential, institutional, etc.), and whether you want conservative evolution vs. a significant repositioning, I can narrow this to the 2–3 agencies I'd interview and explain exactly why.

And I'd make one question mandatory: “Show us a rebrand where you preserved meaningful legacy rather than simply replacing it.” That will tell you very quickly who understands the assignment.

If you tell me the studio's approximate size, architectural specialty (cultural, commercial, residential, institutional, etc.), and whether you want conservative evolution vs. a significant repositioning, I can narrow this to the 2–3 agencies I'd interview and explain exactly why.

• Liska & Associates Inc - 610 N Fairbanks Ct, Chicago, IL 60611, United States
• Multiple Inc. - 845 W Washington Blvd Fifth Floor, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Design B&B - 833 W Jackson Blvd Fl 7, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Landor - 333 N Green St, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Crosby Associates - 1714 N Crilly Ct, Chicago, IL 60614, United States
• Concentric Design - 3130 N Rockwell St, Chicago, IL 60618, United States
• KTGY | Chicago - 225 W Randolph St #1700, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• Gensler - 11 E Madison St, Chicago, IL 60602, United States
• HKS | Architects & Designers - 125 S Clark St #1100, Chicago, IL 60603, United States
• ColorJar - 1000 W Fulton Market #213, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Brand Vision Marketing - Web Design & Branding - 30 N Michigan Ave #504, Chicago, IL 60602, United States
• NELSON - 30 W Monroe St Ste 1710, Chicago, IL 60603, United States
• Bluedog Design - 403 N Carpenter St, Chicago, IL 60642, United States
• Substance - 314 W Superior St, Ste 300, Chicago, IL 60654
• Partners by Design - 363 W Erie St, Chicago, IL 60654, United States
• Chipman Design Architecture - 1350 East Touhy Avenue First Floor East, Des Plaines, IL 60018, United States

For an established Chicago architecture practice, I’d avoid a generic “branding agency that does logos.” You want a team that understands design culture, architectural portfolios, principals/stakeholders, and how to make a mature firm feel more distinctive without making it look trendy.

My shortlist:

My top 5

1. Liska & Associates Inc — my first call

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-867-1111)

This is probably the closest match to what you described. Liska is a long-established Chicago communication-design firm with experience across architecture/design, arts and culture, education, hospitality, and other sophisticated organizations. Its work is strategy-led rather than logo-first. SPD - Selbert Perkins Design

Why I'd shortlist them: They should understand that an architecture firm's identity has to coexist with beautiful project photography, drawings, publications, proposals, awards submissions, and a sophisticated website.

Best for: A refined, intellectual identity evolution that respects the firm's history.

2. Multiple Inc. — best if the rebrand needs a strong narrative

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-846-6944)

Multiple is an independent Chicago brand strategy/design agency. Its client list includes Perkins&Will, along with major cultural, educational, and corporate organizations. It describes its work as spanning brand strategy, identity, narrative, digital and implementation. Multiple Inc.

Why I'd shortlist them: Architecture firms often have difficulty articulating why their work is different. Multiple looks like a good candidate if you need to clarify positioning and story—not merely redesign the mark.

Best for: Repositioning + identity + website/storytelling.

3. Design B&B — best boutique option

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-753-3037)

Design B&B is a Chicago independent brand strategy/design agency, and its portfolio includes identity work for architectural/historic environments. Its Auditorium Theatre rebrand, for example, drew directly from architectural and interior details to create a flexible identity.

Why I'd shortlist them: There is a certain restraint and cultural/design sensibility here that could suit an established architecture practice better than a conventional corporate branding shop.

Best for: Elegant, contemporary identity with a distinctly Chicago/design-literary sensibility.

4. Landor — the heavyweight option

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-596-1444)

If this is a major repositioning—new leadership, new markets, international ambitions, merger, or a significant shift in perception—Landor is worth considering. Its Chicago operation handles strategy, positioning, architecture, visual identity and broader brand transformation.

Caveat: I'd only hire them if the business/positioning problem is genuinely substantial. For a 30-person architecture practice that primarily needs a more sophisticated identity, this could be overkill.

5. Crosby Associates — the heritage/design option

DirectionsWebsite[Call](tel:+1 312-802-2900)

Crosby is a long-running Chicago identity and communication-design practice with roots going back decades. Its focus is brand identity planning, design and orchestration across print, digital, environmental and other applications.

Why I'd shortlist them: Particularly interesting if your studio has a substantial Chicago history and you want to modernize rather than erase the firm's character.

Who I'd actually invite to pitch

If it were my shortlist, I'd invite:

1. Liska & Associates — strongest overall fit
2. Multiple — strongest strategic/narrative alternative
3. Design B&B — strongest boutique/aesthetic alternative

I'd probably not make Landor the default unless the rebrand is tied to a major business transformation.

There's also an important benchmark here: Perkins&Will's 2019 rebrand deliberately modernized its identity while retaining a connection to its historical mark and emphasizing a flexible system rather than simply introducing a new logo. Perkins&Will SMPS That's a useful model for an established architecture firm: evolution with authority, not "startupification."

One wildcard worth looking at

Concentric Design is a smaller Chicago branding/web studio. I'd investigate them if you want something more hands-on and less agency-like; they explicitly combine positioning, identity, web, print/editorial and presentation design.

What I'd put in the RFP

Don't ask them simply for a “new brand identity.” Ask for:

• positioning and brand strategy
• verbal identity / firm narrative
• identity system, not just a logo
• typography and color system
• portfolio/project naming conventions
• website strategy and design
• proposal and qualifications templates
• awards/publication system
• social/digital applications
• signage/environmental applications
• brand guidelines
• rollout plan for an established internal team

And I'd specifically tell them: “We are not looking for a trendy architecture-brand aesthetic. We want an identity with the same level of rigor, restraint and longevity as the work we produce.”

If you tell me roughly the studio's size, specialty (civic/commercial/residential/hospitality/etc.), age, current brand, and the kind of work you want to win more of, I can narrow this to the 2–3 agencies whose portfolios are most analogous to your firm and tell you which one I'd hire.

4. Landor — the heavyweight option

If this is a major repositioning—new leadership, new markets, international ambitions, merger, or a significant shift in perception—Landor is worth considering. Its Chicago operation handles strategy, positioning, architecture, visual identity and broader brand transformation.

Caveat: I'd only hire them if the business/positioning problem is genuinely substantial. For a 30-person architecture practice that primarily needs a more sophisticated identity, this could be overkill.

5. Crosby Associates — the heritage/design option

Crosby is a long-running Chicago identity and communication-design practice with roots going back decades. Its focus is brand identity planning, design and orchestration across print, digital, environmental and other applications.

Why I'd shortlist them: Particularly interesting if your studio has a substantial Chicago history and you want to modernize rather than erase the firm's character.

Who I'd actually invite to pitch

If it were my shortlist, I'd invite:

Yes. For an established Chicago architecture practice, I would not hire a generic “branding agency.” You want a team that understands that the identity has to elevate the work itself—and survive proposals, monographs, awards submissions, signage, digital, and recruiting without becoming over-designed.

My shortlist

1. The Narrative — my first call

This is probably the closest match to what you described. They have unusually relevant architecture/design experience: they handled the rebrand of 900/910 N. Lake Shore Drive, using archival research and the buildings' architectural logic to develop a restrained identity. Their services also extend into websites, publications, environmental graphics and information design. thenarrative.design

Why I'd hire them: They seem to understand that an architecture identity should feel authored, not marketed. For a sophisticated established studio, that's a major distinction.

2. Fifty Thousand Feet — strongest “premium design consultancy” option

Fifty Thousand Feet is particularly compelling if you're looking for something quiet, sophisticated and institutionally credible rather than a trendy architecture-studio makeover. They explicitly work across brand strategy/identity and list Architecture & Built Environment among their sectors. Their positioning emphasizes timeless design, craft and high-stakes engagements. fiftythousandfeet.com

Why I'd hire them: Excellent choice if the goal is to move the firm upmarket without making it look like you've “rebranded.”

3. Crosby Associates — sleeper pick, especially for a legacy practice

Crosby Associates has been doing identity work in Chicago since 1979, and, importantly, their portfolio includes an actual architecture-firm identity for Wheeler Kearns Architects. Their work spans identity planning, wordmarks, standards, websites, signage and communications systems.

Why I'd hire them: If your studio has 20–50+ years of equity and you need to evolve rather than obliterate the existing reputation, I'd take them very seriously.

4. VSA Partners — best if the rebrand needs a bigger strategic/business component

VSA Partners is a Chicago institution with deep experience in brand strategy, architecture, narrative, identity systems and digital experiences. They've been around since 1983 and describe their heritage as a Chicago design firm. thenarrative.designfiftythousandfeet.comwww.vsapartners.comartversion.com

Why I'd hire them: If this isn't merely an identity refresh but a repositioning of the practice—new markets, new leadership, changed service mix, national expansion, etc.—VSA gives you considerably more strategic horsepower.

5. ArtVersion — good downtown, more execution-oriented alternative

ArtVersion® Creative Agency is actually downtown at 211 W. Wacker and offers brand strategy, identity, design systems and digital execution. artversion.com

Why I'd hire them: More appropriate if you want a polished identity + website + implementation package rather than a highly conceptual, boutique strategic rethinking.

How I'd rank them for your situation

If it were my firm

I'd put The Narrative, Fifty Thousand Feet, and Crosby Associates into the first round of conversations.

And I'd give them the same brief:

“We are not looking for a logo redesign. We want to understand what the next 20 years of this practice should look like, then create an identity with the restraint, intelligence and permanence of the architecture itself.”

That framing will tell you very quickly which agency actually understands the assignment.

One additional option worth knowing is Fairbuilt Design Studio. It's much more specialized: the founder has an architecture background and the studio explicitly focuses on branding architecture firms. builtfair.com I'd consider them if industry fluency matters more to you than the cachet or scale of the agency.

If you tell me the studio's approximate size, project types (civic/commercial/residential/etc.), and whether you're looking for a subtle evolution or a dramatic repositioning, I can narrow this to the 2–3 agencies I'd actually invite to pitch.

• Liska & Associates Inc - 610 N Fairbanks Ct, Chicago, IL 60611, United States
• Crosby Associates - 1714 N Crilly Ct, Chicago, IL 60614, United States
• Substance - 4705 N Spaulding Ave, Chicago, IL 60625, United States
• Design B&B - 833 W Jackson Blvd Fl 7, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Landor - 333 N Green St, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• KTGY | Chicago - 225 W Randolph St #1700, Chicago, IL 60606, United States
• Studio Gang - 1520 W Division St, Chicago, IL 60642, United States
• Firebelly Design - 1402 N Western Ave, Chicago, IL 60622, United States
• Gensler - 11 E Madison St, Chicago, IL 60602, United States
• SO Dsgn - 1719 S Clinton St, Chicago, IL 60616, United States
• Brand Vision Marketing - Web Design & Branding - 30 N Michigan Ave #504, Chicago, IL 60602, United States
• Crosby Associates - 39 S LaSalle St, Ste 201, Chicago, IL 60601
• Brandimage - 1918 W Walnut St, Chicago, IL 60612, United States
• ColorJar - 1000 W Fulton Market #213, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
• Designer and Gentleman - 2653 W Hollywood Ave, Chicago, IL 60659, United States

Yes. For an established architecture practice, I would not hire a generic “Chicago branding agency.” I’d prioritize firms that understand that the identity has to behave like a design system—credible to architects, sophisticated to developers/institutional clients, and flexible across proposals, publications, signage, websites, social, and project presentations.

My shortlist would be:

1. Liska & Associates Inc — my first call

• Particularly compelling for a mature architecture/design practice.
• Chicago-based, strategy-led, and experienced across architecture/design, arts & culture, hospitality, education and other sophisticated professional organizations.
• Their work emphasizes identity and branded communications rather than just logos.
• Why I'd call them: they seem well suited to an established firm that needs an evolution of its reputation rather than a trendy startup makeover.
• Crosby Associates — the understated, design-literate choice

• Founded in 1979 and deeply rooted in Chicago's graphic-design community.
• Importantly, they have actual architecture precedent: Crosby describes identity work for Wheeler Kearns Architects, including identity, website, stationery, signage and standards. Clutch
• Why I'd call them: if your desired outcome is refined, intelligent, typographically strong and not obviously “agency branded.”
• Substance — strongest strategy + identity boutique

• A small Chicago firm that explicitly describes itself as a brand-strategy firm first, with research, positioning, naming, messaging and visual identity.
• Good candidate if the rebrand needs to clarify who the firm is now, not merely modernize its appearance.
• Why I'd call them: particularly attractive if partners have different views about the firm's positioning and you need the agency to get underneath that before designing.
• Design B&B — polished independent studio

• West Loop independent agency combining strategy and identity.
• Their rebrand of The Auditorium is especially relevant: they drew on the building's architecture and interior details to create a flexible identity. Design BnB
• Why I'd call them: excellent if you want something contemporary and highly crafted without the machinery of a huge consultancy.
• Landor — if this is a major strategic transformation

• The Chicago office offers the full strategy → positioning → brand architecture → identity spectrum.
• I'd consider them if you're changing the firm's market position, structure, geographic ambitions, or practice architecture—not just refreshing the visual identity.
• Caveat: potentially more agency than you need for a relatively focused architecture-firm rebrand.

One wildcard I'd absolutely investigate

The Narrative has unusually relevant architectural/placemaking work. Its rebrand of 900/910 North Lake Shore Drive used archival research and the buildings' Miesian geometry to build the identity. The Narrative Design

That is exactly the kind of thinking I'd want to see from an architecture specialist: the identity emerges from the firm's intellectual/design DNA rather than being imposed as a fashionable graphic style.

Who I'd actually invite to pitch

If this were my firm, I'd make the first-round shortlist:

Liska + Associates → Crosby Associates → The Narrative → Substance

And I'd probably narrow it to Liska vs. Crosby after reviewing their portfolios and meeting the principals.

The key distinction:

I would not make the decision based on who has the prettiest portfolio. Ask each candidate to show 2–3 cases where they transformed an established design-oriented organization without erasing its accumulated reputation. That's the real test.

If you tell me roughly the firm's size, whether it's known nationally or primarily in Chicago, and the aesthetic direction you're after (e.g. Miesian/minimal, editorial, warm/material, institutional, contemporary), I can narrow this to the best 3 agencies and explain exactly why I'd pick one over the others.

Yes. For an established Chicago architecture practice, I would not hire a generic “logo/branding agency.” I’d look for a studio that understands architectural culture, can work with principals and legacy stakeholders, and knows how to make a sophisticated identity system—not just a prettier wordmark.

My shortlist

1. Crosby Associates — my first call
This is the most compelling fit if you want the rebrand to feel credible, restrained, intelligent, and deeply design-literate. Crosby has been doing identity work since 1979 and, importantly, has actually worked with architecture firms: its work for Wheeler Kearns Architects included identity, website, promotional materials, standards, and signage. clutch.co

Why I'd hire them: They understand that an architecture firm's brand has to behave more like a design system than a marketing campaign.

2. Liska & Associates — strongest sophisticated alternative
Liska is another Chicago studio with a long history in strategy-led identity and communications, including work across architecture/design, arts and culture, education, hospitality, and institutional organizations.

Why I'd hire them: Particularly good if the rebrand needs to reconcile legacy + contemporary positioning rather than simply modernize the logo.

3. Galambos + Associates — strong strategic choice
Based downtown, G+A combines brand strategy, positioning, architecture, identity systems, messaging, and physical/digital applications.

Why I'd hire them: If you're dealing with multiple principals, practices, audiences, or a complicated evolution of the firm, their strategy-first approach is attractive.

4. Design B&B — best if you want a more contemporary creative leap
Design B&B is an independent Chicago brand strategy/design agency. Their work includes a rebrand of the Auditorium, where they drew directly from architectural/interior details to create a flexible identity system. www.designbandb.com

Why I'd hire them: If you're willing to move the firm's visual language substantially forward rather than preserve a conservative architectural-firm aesthetic.

5. The Narrative — worth an interview even though they're not Chicago-based
This one caught my attention because of its work on 900/910 North Lake Shore Drive, the Mies-designed Chicago buildings. The studio handled the first rebrand since the 1970s, using archival research and interviews and translating the architecture itself into the identity. thenarrative.design

Why I'd hire them: Their approach is unusually appropriate if your studio has history, authorship, a recognizable body of work, or an important Chicago legacy that should become part of the brand story.

If it were my money

I'd invite Crosby, Liska, and The Narrative to pitch.

I'd frame the brief explicitly as:

“Evolve the identity of an established architecture practice without making it look like a startup or a generic corporate rebrand.”

And I'd ask each agency to show 3–5 examples of identity work for architecture, design, cultural, or similarly design-literate organizations—not consumer brands. I'd also ask them to demonstrate the identity across a project monograph, competition submission, proposal, website, presentation deck, signage, and social, because that's where architectural brands either become genuinely elegant or fall apart.

One other interesting specialist is Andiamo Creative: they specifically document a rebrand and website for Chicago architecture firm RADA Architects, so they have unusually direct experience with the assignment. andiamocreative.com

My ranking for your brief:
Crosby Associates → Liska & Associates → The Narrative → Galambos + Associates → Design B&B → Andiamo

If you tell me roughly how prestigious/large the studio is and whether you want “quietly Miesian” vs. “bold contemporary,” I can narrow this to the 2–3 agencies I'd actually put in the RFP and explain what each would likely bring to the table.

For an established Chicago architecture studio, I would avoid a generalist “logo agency.” You want a partner that understands architectural culture, institutional legacy, design authorship, and how a studio wins commissions. The best rebrands for architecture firms usually come from agencies that can translate a point of view—not just make things look polished.

My shortlist:

Tier 1 — strongest fits for a sophisticated architecture practice

The Narrative

Best for: a design-led, culturally significant firm that wants an identity with intellectual depth.

Why I’d seriously consider them:

• They have demonstrated architectural sensitivity through their work rebranding 900 910 Lake Shore Drive, approaching it through archival research, typography, proportion, and modernist principles rather than trend-driven branding. thenarrative.design
• Their approach feels aligned with firms where the brand should communicate design intelligence and legacy.

Potential fit:

• Established 20–100 person architecture studio
• Modernist, institutional, cultural, civic, or high-end commercial practice
• Leadership wants a “new chapter” rather than a marketing refresh

Span

Best for: a firm that wants a highly crafted, design-world identity.

Why:

• Chicago-based and rooted in graphic design culture, with experience across identity, publications, exhibitions, environmental graphics, and digital work. en.wikipedia.org
• Likely to understand architects as peers rather than clients needing “marketing.”

Potential fit:

• Design-conscious studio
• Strong portfolio but outdated presentation
• Wants a refined, editorial, museum-quality identity

AVEC

Best for: a practical architecture-firm rebrand where business positioning matters as much as aesthetics.

Why:

• Specifically positions itself around AEC firms and offers naming, strategy, identity, website, and content work tailored to architecture/engineering/construction companies. www.team-avec.com
• They understand the realities of professional services firms: differentiation, principals, proposals, and business development.

Potential fit:

• A legacy firm repositioning for growth
• A firm moving into new markets
• A leadership transition/repositioning

Tier 2 — excellent Chicago branding partners

Otherwise Incorporated

Best for: a more strategic corporate-grade rebrand.

Why:

• Long-established Chicago branding firm with experience in strategy, naming, identity, and digital systems. Their architecture-adjacent work includes branding for Chicago real estate and built-environment projects such as 1000M. www.otherwiseinc.com

Good if:

• You need stakeholder alignment
• The firm has multiple practice areas
• The rebrand needs internal adoption

Andiamo Creative

Best for: a smaller or mid-sized architecture studio needing identity + website execution.

Why:

• They have direct experience rebranding a Chicago architecture firm, including identity and website work for RADA Architects. thenarrative.designandiamocreative.com

Good if:

• You want a hands-on boutique partner
• You need a refreshed website alongside identity

Zoyes Creative

Best for: architecture firms tied closely to development, real estate, hospitality, or placemaking.

Why:

• They focus on brands connected to architects, developers, and places, including architectural and real-estate branding. zoyeswebsites.com

My hiring recommendation by scenario

How I would run the selection

Invite 3 firms only to a paid discovery/proposal phase. Ask each to address:

1. What is the firm’s distinctive intellectual position?
2. How should the identity evolve without erasing history?
3. How does the brand help win commissions?
4. What should change beyond the logo (website, proposals, photography, language, presentations)?
5. Show examples where they transformed an established organization—not just startups.

For a downtown Chicago architecture studio with real history, my first calls would be:

1. The Narrative — if the goal is cultural credibility and timelessness
2. Span — if the goal is exceptional design craft
3. AVEC — if the goal is business growth and market positioning

That trio would give you three very different but credible interpretations of what the next era of the firm could be.

For an established Chicago architecture studio, I’d avoid generic “branding agencies.” You want a partner that understands design culture, architectural portfolios, principals’ reputations, and the difference between an evolution and a cosmetic rebrand.

My shortlist would be:

1. Ummo — my first call

Ummo is unusually well matched to your brief. They have actually branded an architecture practice: their work for ParkFowler Plus included strategy, naming, visual identity, typography, editorial direction, and a website, explicitly positioning the firm within Chicago’s architectural lineage while giving it a contemporary voice. studioummo.com

Why I'd hire them: They seem to understand that an architecture firm's brand needs to feel designed, not marketed. Their ParkFowler work has the restrained, editorial quality I'd associate with a sophisticated established practice.

Best for: A refined, intellectual, design-forward repositioning.

2. The Narrative — strongest if you want architectural sophistication

The Narrative has particularly relevant Chicago design experience. They rebranded 900–910 N. Lake Shore Drive, the Mies van der Rohe buildings, using archival research, interviews and the building's architectural logic to create the identity. Their capabilities span strategy, positioning, identity, websites, publication design, environmental graphics and wayfinding. thenarrative.design

That matters because an established architecture studio often has 30+ years of accumulated equity. I'd want an agency capable of excavating that history rather than throwing it away.

Best for: A restrained, culturally literate identity with a strong Chicago/design pedigree.

3. VSA Partners — strongest strategic heavyweight

VSA Partners, Inc. is the bigger, more established option. They're particularly good if this isn't simply an identity refresh but a business repositioning: brand strategy, architecture, visual systems, digital, campaigns and implementation.

Their scale makes sense if the studio is trying to reposition itself nationally or internationally, clarify multiple practice areas, or substantially change how developers, institutions and corporate clients perceive it. toimi.pro

Best for: A significant strategic transformation rather than a boutique design exercise.

4. ArtVersion — practical architecture-specific option

ArtVersion has directly worked on an architecture company, including its website, logo refresh, collateral, branding standards and guidelines. clutch.co

I'd put them behind Ummo and The Narrative if your ambition is a highly distinctive, design-world identity, but they're worth interviewing if you want the rebrand to extend deeply into the website and business-development materials.

Best for: Brand + website + practical implementation.

5. Andiamo Creative — another relevant specialist

Andiamo has a particularly direct architecture-firm case study: they rebranded RADA Architects, developing the logo and a new portfolio-oriented website. andiamocreative.com

I'd consider them if you want someone who understands the mechanics of presenting architectural work online rather than a large corporate branding exercise.

My ranking for your particular brief

If it were my studio

I'd issue an RFP to Ummo, The Narrative, and VSA.

But I would not ask them simply for “a new logo and website.” I'd frame the assignment around:

1. Positioning — what should the firm be known for in its next 10–15 years?
2. Legacy/equity audit — what should survive from the existing identity?
3. Visual identity — typography, wordmark, color, graphic language, photography/art direction.
4. Portfolio architecture — how the work is organized and narrated.
5. Digital experience — particularly how the studio presents projects, people and thinking.
6. Business-development system — proposals, qualifications packages, presentations and awards.
7. Launch strategy — how to make the rebrand feel like an evolution of a respected practice rather than an agency makeover.

The key interview question I'd ask all three:
"Show us the work where you had to modernize an established design-led organization without making it look like you were trying to make it younger."

That answer will tell you much more than their logo portfolio.

If the studio is high-end, established, and design-conscious, my money would go to Ummo first, The Narrative second. The ParkFowler case is especially compelling evidence that Ummo understands the exact cultural territory you're operating in. studioummo.com

Yes. For an established architecture studio, I would not hire a generic “Chicago branding agency.” I’d look for a partner that understands how architecture firms sell: reputation, portfolio, principals, point of view, institutional credibility, and a very high bar for typography and visual restraint.

My shortlist:

1. Crosby Associates — my first call

Crosby Associates
Web
Address: 1714 N Crilly Ct, Chicago, IL 60614, United States
Phone: +1 312-802-2900
This is the most interesting fit if you want the rebrand to feel design-literate, sophisticated, and enduring rather than trendy. Crosby has been doing identity work in Chicago since 1979 and specifically lists work for Wheeler Kearns Architects, including identity, website, standards, promotional materials and signage. clutch.co

Why I'd shortlist them: they understand that an architecture firm's identity needs to behave like a design system, not just a logo.

Best for: a serious institutional repositioning with excellent graphic-design craft.

2. Liska & Associates Inc — strongest broader design-firm fit

Liska & Associates Inc
Web
Address: 610 N Fairbanks Ct, Chicago, IL 60611, United States
Phone: +1 312-867-1111
Liska has a long-running Chicago practice spanning branding and communication design, with experience specifically across architecture/design and cultural institutions.

Why I'd shortlist them: potentially excellent if the studio needs more than a new identity—e.g. positioning, messaging, editorial materials, website and a sophisticated communications system.

Best for: an established firm that wants to articulate why it matters as much as how it looks.

3. Design B&B — strongest contemporary option

Design B&B
Web
Address: 833 W Jackson Blvd Fl 7, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
Phone: +1 312-753-3037
Design B&B is an independent Chicago brand-strategy/design agency. Their work includes the Auditorium rebrand, where they drew directly from the building's architecture and interior details to create a flexible identity system. www.designbandb.com

Why I'd shortlist them: they have the aesthetic sensitivity I'd want for an architecture practice and can bring a more contemporary edge without necessarily becoming fashionable-for-fashion's-sake.

Best for: a studio that wants to look more current, distinctive and culturally relevant.

4. The Narrative — especially worth a serious look

The Narrative is particularly compelling because it has actually branded 900/910 N. Lake Shore Drive, the Mies van der Rohe buildings. Their process included archival research and interviews, with the resulting identity drawing from the buildings' proportions and architectural character. thenarrative.design

That is unusually relevant to your brief.

Best for: a Chicago architecture studio where architectural history, legacy and intellectual rigor should inform the new identity.

5. Third & Arch — the AEC specialist

If you want someone who knows the architecture-business side inside and out, Third & Arch explicitly specializes in AEC and architecture firms. Their architecture practice includes brand strategy, identity, naming, web strategy, website design and development, and they show an architecture-firm rebrand for Apeiro. www.thirdandarch.com

Best for: minimizing the learning curve and getting a coordinated brand + website/marketing program.

Who I'd actually put in the RFP

I'd invite three, rather than six or eight:

I'd keep Liska as the fourth conversation if the scope is going to become a substantial brand/communications transformation rather than primarily an identity redesign.

I would not automatically choose the agency with the most architecture-firm case studies. For an established studio, that's actually a potential trap: you can end up with the familiar AEC visual language—monogram, black/white palette, geometric sans, architectural photography, minimalist website—that makes every firm look interchangeable.

The brief I'd give these agencies is essentially:

“We don't need to look like a better architecture firm. We need to look unmistakably like our architecture firm.”

And I'd make them demonstrate that in the pitch. Ask each to show three identity projects where they exercised restraint and built a distinctive system, not just three flashy logos.

One other intriguing specialist is Substance, particularly if the studio has multiple principals/stakeholders and the difficult part is getting everyone aligned on the firm's positioning before the visual work begins.

If you tell me the studio's approximate size, whether it's primarily architecture vs. architecture/interiors/urban design, and the desired budget range, I can narrow this to a 2–3 agency recommendation and tell you exactly how I'd structure the RFP and what each should be asked to pitch.

For an established downtown Chicago architecture studio, I would not hire a generalist marketing agency. You need a partner that understands how architecture firms sell: reputation, portfolio, principals, point of view, awards, institutional trust, and long-term legacy. The best rebrands will feel closer to a cultural identity system than a consumer logo refresh.

My shortlist:

1. Crosby Associates — strongest fit for a legacy architecture practice

Why I’d put them near the top: They have deep Chicago design roots and experience with identity systems for design-led organizations. Their work with architecture firms (including Wheeler Kearns Architects) suggests they understand the challenge of translating architectural thinking into a brand language.

Best for:

• Established firm with decades of equity
• Sophisticated identity systems
• Refining rather than “starting over”
• Firms that value typography, grids, editorial systems, and restraint

Likely outcome: A Miesian, institutional, highly crafted identity rather than a trendy rebrand.

2. The Narrative Design — best if the firm has a strong cultural/design point of view

thenarrative.design

They have architecture-adjacent credibility, including identity work tied to significant Chicago architectural projects. Their approach appears rooted in research, storytelling, and translating architectural ideas into visual systems. thenarrative.design

Best for:

• Boutique or award-winning architecture firms
• Firms wanting a more intellectual/editorial presence
• A rebrand built around legacy, philosophy, and authorship

Likely outcome: A refined identity with strong narrative depth.

3. Liska + Associates — best pure design craft option

Liska is a Chicago communication design firm focused on strategy-led identity and brand communications. They are worth considering if you want a sophisticated visual language across proposals, publications, signage, digital, and marketing materials.

Best for:

• Architecture firms competing for institutional clients
• Strong print/editorial sensibility
• Firms that care deeply about design execution

4. AVEC — best AEC specialist

www.team-avec.com

AVEC specifically positions itself around branding for architecture, engineering, and construction firms, including positioning, identity, websites, and messaging. www.team-avec.com

Best for:

• Firms needing market repositioning
• Growing beyond a regional reputation
• Clarifying messaging and differentiation

Tradeoff: They may feel more “AEC marketing strategic” than a pure design atelier.

5. ColorJar — best if strategy is the main issue

ColorJar works at the intersection of brand strategy and design activation.

Best for:

• A firm changing leadership
• Moving into new sectors
• Needing positioning before identity

6. Daake Design — strong boutique alternative

www.daakedesigninc.com

A smaller studio with a strategic branding and graphic design focus. www.daakedesigninc.com

Best for:

• Mid-size architecture firms
• More personal collaboration
• A distinctive but understated identity

My hiring recommendation

For a prestigious Chicago architecture studio with an existing reputation, I would invite these three to pitch:

1. Crosby Associates

Best overall fit for legacy + architectural seriousness.

2. The Narrative Design

Best if you want the rebrand to become part of the firm’s intellectual repositioning.

3. Liska + Associates

Best if the priority is an exceptional identity system and communication design.

I would avoid agencies whose portfolio is mostly restaurants, startups, or consumer products. Architecture firms need someone who understands that the brand is not separate from the work — the identity has to communicate the same precision, restraint, and authorship as the buildings.

For the RFP, I would ask each finalist to address:

• How would you preserve 30–50 years of brand equity while modernizing?
• How would you differentiate us from other Chicago firms?
• How would the system work across proposals, competitions, publications, signage, and digital?
• Show one example where you redefined a sophisticated professional-services brand, not just created a logo.

A realistic budget for a serious architecture-firm rebrand is often in the $50k–$200k+ range, depending on whether it includes strategy, naming, website redesign, photography direction, and rollout. clutch.co

For an established Chicago architecture studio, I’d avoid a generic “Chicago branding agency” and shortlist firms that have demonstrated fluency in architecture, design culture, and sophisticated identity systems.

My shortlist

1. Crosby Associates — my first call for a refined, institutional identity

Crosby is unusually well matched to your brief. It has been doing identity work in Chicago since 1979 and explicitly specializes in brand identity planning, design and orchestration. Most importantly, it has actually rebranded an architecture practice: Wheeler Kearns Architects, developing its logotype, stationery, website, standards and signage. www.crosbyassociates.com

Crosby Associates

Why I'd call them: They understand that an architecture firm's identity has to feel like design culture, not like marketing collateral. I'd expect particularly strong typography, restraint and longevity.

2. ArtVersion® Creative Agency — strong if the website is a major part of the rebrand

They're right downtown and combine identity, digital design and UX. That makes them worth considering if you're looking for a new identity + substantially better digital presence, rather than a logo-only exercise.

ArtVersion

Why I'd call them: Practical choice when the firm's current website, proposals, project presentations and digital experience all need to become part of one coherent system.

3. The Narrative — my pick for the most design-literate / culturally sophisticated direction

The Narrative has particularly relevant architecture work. Its rebrand of 900–910 N. Lake Shore Drive involved archival research and interviews and translated Miesian architectural logic into the identity system. Its capabilities span brand strategy, positioning, identity, websites, publications, environmental graphics and wayfinding. thenarrative.designzoyescreative.com

The Narrative

Why I'd call them: If the aspiration is “make us look like one of the great design practices” rather than “modernize our marketing,” this is probably the most interesting conversation.

4. Otherwise — best strategic/repositioning option

Otherwise has been operating in Chicago since 1992 and does strategy, repositioning, naming, visual identity, digital and environmental work. Its portfolio includes substantial real-estate/design work, including the branding of 1000M, the Chicago residential skyscraper. www.otherwiseinc.com

Otherwise

Why I'd call them: Particularly good if the rebrand reflects a genuine change in the firm's positioning—new leadership, new market, new project scale, or a move from “traditional architecture firm” toward a broader design practice.

5. Zoyes Creative — excellent if architecture/place is central to the story

Zoyes is deeply embedded in architecture, real estate and placemaking. Its portfolio specifically includes architecture/design clients such as Krieger Klatt Architects and McIntosh Poris Architects, as well as the Chicago Board of Trade Building. It describes its practice as an intersection of art, architecture and branding. zoyescreative.com

Zoyes Creative

Why I'd call them: Strongest if you want the identity to extend beyond the corporate brand into project storytelling, environmental graphics, imagery and the physical experience of the studio.

If it were my firm

I'd invite three to pitch:

I'd keep Zoyes as the wildcard if your practice has a significant real-estate/placemaking component.

One important distinction: I wouldn't ask them to “refresh the logo.” For an established architecture practice, I'd commission a brand repositioning + identity system: positioning, verbal architecture, typography, mark/logotype, color, image direction, project taxonomy, proposal/presentation system, website and environmental/studio applications. The strongest agencies above can think at that level.

If you tell me roughly how old the studio is, its size, what kind of architecture it does (civic, residential, cultural, commercial, etc.), and the aesthetic you want to move toward, I can narrow this to the 2 agencies I'd actually hire and explain why.

Yes. For an established Chicago architecture practice, I would avoid a generic “Chicago branding agency” and look for a studio that understands how architecture firms sell: reputation, portfolio, point of view, principals, awards, pursuits, and the tension between restraint and differentiation.

I’d shortlist four, with a clear first choice:

1. Third & Arch — my first call

Third & Arch

This is the most obvious specialist fit. They focus specifically on AEC firms and explicitly work on brand strategy, identity, naming, websites and marketing for architecture practices. www.thirdandarch.com

More importantly, they have actual architecture-firm rebrands rather than just real-estate branding. Their work for Millan Architects involved competitive research, client interviews, a simplified identity, and a durable brand system; their Blackney Hayes work included repositioning the firm and evolving its name and identity. www.thirdandarch.com

Why I'd hire them: They understand the business-development mechanics of an architecture practice, not just how to make a beautiful logo.

Potential concern: Their work can sometimes feel more overtly “brand agency” than the ultra-quiet, editorial sophistication some established architecture studios want.

2. The Narrative — strongest if you want something genuinely design-led

The Narrative

This is the one I'd put in the pitch if your ambition is “make us look like an important design institution,” rather than “modernize our marketing.”

Their Chicago work on 900–910 N Lake Shore Drive is particularly relevant. They rebranded the Mies buildings after decades, using archival research and the architecture itself—the golden-ratio geometry of the façade—as the basis for the identity. The resulting approach was intentionally rational, restrained and highly considered. thenarrative.design

They also cover brand strategy, positioning, identity, websites, publications, wayfinding, exhibitions and information design. thenarrative.design

Why I'd hire them: Probably the best fit if your desired aesthetic is quiet, intelligent, architectural, typographic and culturally sophisticated.

Potential concern: Their strongest demonstrated architecture work is around buildings/places rather than an architecture firm's corporate rebrand, so I'd ask specifically for comparable studio engagements.

3. Crosby Associates — sleeper choice, and possibly the most appropriate for an old-school Chicago practice

Crosby Associates
Crosby Associates
Web
Address: 1714 N Crilly Ct, Chicago, IL 60614, United States
Phone: +1 312-802-2900

This one deserves serious consideration. They have an unusually relevant precedent: Wheeler Kearns Architects, a highly regarded Chicago architecture firm, hired Crosby for its 30th-anniversary identity update. Crosby developed the logotype, stationery, website, promotional materials, graphic standards and signage. www.crosbyassociates.com

That's a very different proposition from branding a startup architecture studio. They understand the problem of evolving an established firm's reputation without throwing away its accumulated equity.

They also have a long history of sophisticated professional-services identity work, including firms such as Jenner & Block and University of Chicago organizations. www.crosbyassociates.com

Why I'd hire them: If your studio has 20–50+ years of history and the brief is “evolve, don't obliterate,” I'd take them extremely seriously.

Potential concern: Their sensibility is more classic/identity-design oriented than contemporary digital-brand-agency oriented. That could actually be an advantage.

4. Zoyes Creative — best if the practice sits close to architecture + development

Zoyes Creative

Zoyes specifically works with architects, developers and placemakers, and their work sits at the intersection of brand, place and the built environment. zoyescreative.com

Their rebrand of the Chicago Board of Trade Building is a particularly good Chicago example: strategy, identity, website, environmental graphics, wayfinding, messaging and campaign were all treated as one system. zoyescreative.com

Why I'd hire them: If the rebrand needs to extend beyond the firm's stationery and website into office environment, signage, project communications, exhibitions or place-based storytelling.

My ranking for your brief

If it were my studio

I'd actually run a three-agency pitch:

Third & Arch + The Narrative + Crosby Associates.

They represent three genuinely different interpretations of the assignment:

• Third & Arch: How do we become more distinctive and commercially effective?
• The Narrative: What is the intellectual/design idea that should underpin our identity?
• Crosby: How do we evolve an established institution without losing its accumulated authority?

That is a much more useful competitive set than sending the brief to three generic branding agencies.

And I would not make the brief “new logo + website.” For an established architecture studio, I'd ask each agency to demonstrate how they would rethink positioning, verbal identity, typography, portfolio architecture, project naming, proposal/pursuit materials, digital presence, photography/art direction and the firm's physical environment as one identity system.

My gut pick: The Narrative if the partners are primarily motivated by design quality and cultural stature; Third & Arch if business development and market repositioning are equally important; Crosby if preserving legacy is a major constraint.

For an established Chicago architecture studio, I would not hire a generic “logo/marketing” shop. You want a partner that understands design culture, architectural portfolios, institutional credibility, and the tension between heritage and a more contemporary position.

My shortlist would be:

1. Crosby Associates — my strongest Chicago-specific pick

Crosby Associates
Web
Address: 1714 N Crilly Ct, Chicago, IL 60614, United States
Phone: +1 312-802-2900
This is the one I’d interview first if you want the rebrand to feel intelligent, restrained, architectural, and distinctly Chicago rather than like a corporate makeover.

Crosby has unusually relevant precedent: it worked with Wheeler Kearns Architects on a new identity, including the logotype, website, promotional materials, standards, and signage. The studio has been doing identity work in Chicago since 1979. clutch.co

Best for: a sophisticated identity system with typographic discipline and longevity.
Watch-out: it may be a more traditional/smaller-studio experience than a big strategic branding consultancy.

2. Ideation Studio Inc. — strongest if the identity needs to extend into space

Ideation Studio Inc.
Web
Address: 1000 N Halsted St #205, Chicago, IL 60642, United States
Phone: +1 312-664-5388
Ideation is interesting because it sits between architecture, interiors, graphics, and branding. Its capabilities include brand identity/standards plus environmental graphics, signage, wayfinding, websites and communications.

Best for: a firm where the new identity needs to live beautifully across the studio, exhibitions, signage, publications and digital experience.

3. Concentric Design — boutique, design-led option

Concentric Design
Web
Address: 1212 N Ashland Ave, Fl 2, Chicago, IL 60622
Phone: +13127259509
A smaller Chicago branding/design studio that emphasizes translating strategy into visual identity, digital and print systems. Its work includes identity development and brand extensions rather than just logo creation.

Best for: a more intimate engagement where senior designers are deeply involved.

4. Landor — if this is a major strategic repositioning

Landor
Web
Address: 333 N Green St, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
Phone: +1 312-596-1444
Landor is the heavyweight option. Its Chicago practice covers brand strategy, positioning, architecture, identity systems and experience design.

I'd consider them if the rebrand isn't simply “make us look better,” but involves changing how the firm competes, articulating a new market position, reorganizing practices/sub-brands, or preparing for significant growth/succession.

Best for: strategy + transformation.
Watch-out: potentially more process and infrastructure than an architecture studio actually needs.

5. ColorJar — worth a pitch

ColorJar
Web
Address: 1000 W Fulton Market #213, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
Phone: +1 312-448-8192
Chicago-based boutique brand strategy/design consultancy with capabilities spanning positioning, brand architecture, identity systems, guidelines, websites and activation.

Best for: an established firm that wants a contemporary identity but still needs the underlying positioning and messaging sharpened.

The wild card: Pentagram

I would absolutely put Pentagram on the longlist, even though it's not Chicago-based.

They have perhaps the strongest cultural/design fit for what you're describing: their portfolio explicitly spans Design & Architecture, professional services, brand identity, strategy, type, environmental graphics and signage. They've also done major Chicago cultural work, including the Art Institute of Chicago and the Obama Presidential Center. www.pentagram.com

More importantly, Pentagram's philosophy is very much about making strategy manifest through actual design rather than producing a strategy deck and handing it off. www.pentagram.com

If the studio is genuinely prestigious and the goal is to create an identity that could become a reference point in the architecture/design world, I'd ask Pentagram for a conversation.

My ranking for your brief

One additional agency I would not overlook is Liska & Associates Inc. Its portfolio spans architecture/design, arts/culture and other sophisticated professional organizations, and its positioning is explicitly strategy-led identity and branded communications. That could be a particularly good fit if the studio wants quiet sophistication rather than a flashy “rebrand.”

Who I'd actually invite to pitch

I'd narrow it to Crosby, Pentagram, and Ideation.

And I'd give all three the same brief: “We don't need a new logo. We need to determine what this practice should mean for the next 20 years, then build the identity around that.”

That framing will tell you very quickly which agency is thinking like a branding partner versus which one is simply selling visual design.

If you tell me the architecture studio's name, I can do a much more pointed comparison—look at its current identity, competitors, existing positioning, relevant agency case studies, and recommend the 3 agencies I'd approach and why.

For an established Chicago architecture studio, I’d avoid a generic “branding agency.” You want a team that understands architectural culture, principals/stakeholders, project portfolios, reputation, and the difference between a sophisticated identity and a trendy one.

My shortlist:

1. Span — my first call

Span is unusually embedded in Chicago’s architecture/design ecosystem. Its portfolio includes identity and digital work for Hoerr Schaudt, John Ronan Architects, MASS Design Group, Ross Barney Architects, Nurture Architects, SOM, Studio Gang, the Chicago Architecture Center, and AIA Chicago. span.studio

Why I'd hire them: They understand how architects think and have demonstrated that they can make sophisticated design systems rather than simply produce a logo. For a legacy firm trying to become more contemporary without throwing away its reputation, that's a major advantage.

Best for: refined, culturally literate, Chicago-native repositioning.

2. The Narrative — best for elegance

The Narrative has particularly relevant Chicago work, including the rebrand of 900–910 N. Lake Shore Drive, where archival research and the buildings' Miesian design language informed a restrained identity system. Their capabilities span positioning, naming, identity, websites, publications, environmental graphics and information design. thenarrative.design

Why I'd hire them: If your brief is “make us feel established, intelligent and quietly exceptional” rather than “make us look innovative,” this is the kind of shop I'd investigate first.

Best for: editorial, architectural, premium, understated.

3. Ummo — best for a more ambitious repositioning

Ummo has a very relevant case study with ParkFowler Plus, a Chicago architecture practice, where it created the firm's name and visual/editorial identity while balancing Chicago modernist heritage with a new point of view. studioummo.com

Why I'd hire them: They seem particularly good if the rebrand needs to articulate “who we are becoming,” not merely modernize an existing logo.

Best for: strategic repositioning + distinctive identity.

4. Third & Arch — best architecture-specialist option

Third & Arch explicitly specializes in AEC branding and has rebranded architecture firms, including Apeiro, with brand strategy, identity, naming, web strategy and website development. www.thirdandarch.com

Why I'd hire them: Less risk of having to educate the agency about the architecture business. They're explicitly built around the AEC sector.

Best for: a rigorous architecture-specific rebrand with strong business-development implications.

5. AVEC — best if you want strategy + implementation

AVEC positions itself specifically around AEC and offers naming, brand strategy, visual identity, websites and content strategy. It explicitly cites strategic repositioning for a legacy firm planning for the future as the kind of problem it handles. www.team-avec.com

Best for: a comprehensive firm transformation rather than an identity-only project.

One more worth interviewing: Liska + Associates

They're a long-established Chicago communication-design/branding firm with experience around architecture/design and institutional clients. Their positioning is more strategic communication and identity systems than flashy agency branding.

Who I'd actually put in the RFP

If this were my firm, I'd invite four:

I'd use the pitches to determine whether you need Span's architectural fluency, The Narrative's refinement, or Ummo's transformational thinking.

The important distinction

For an established practice, I wouldn't brief this as “redesign our brand.” I'd brief it as:

Define the next chapter of an established Chicago architecture practice, preserving accumulated reputation while creating an identity that reflects the quality, ambition and point of view of the firm today.

That framing will attract considerably better work.

And I'd make the agencies show you three things in the pitch:

1. a legacy architecture/design client they've actually repositioned,
2. how they'd preserve existing brand equity rather than erase it, and
3. how the identity behaves across monographs, proposals, project sheets, awards submissions, website, social, signage and presentations.

My ranking for your specific brief: Span → The Narrative → Ummo → Third & Arch.

If you tell me roughly how established the firm is (e.g. 20/50/100+ years), its size, and whether you want “quiet Miesian” or “more contemporary/expressive,” I can narrow this to the 2 agencies I'd actually hire and explain exactly why.

Yes. For an established Chicago architecture studio, I would not default to a general-purpose branding agency. You want a partner that understands that architecture firms sell point of view, reputation, authorship, and a body of work—not products.

I’d put these firms on the shortlist:

1. The Narrative Design — my first call

Design B&B
Web
Address: 833 W Jackson Blvd Fl 7, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
Phone: +1 312-753-3037

This is the most compelling fit if you want the rebrand to feel cultured, architectural, restrained, and editorial rather than “marketing agency.”

Their work for 900/910 N. Lake Shore Drive is particularly relevant: they handled the first rebrand of the Mies van der Rohe buildings since the 1970s, using archival research, interviews, and the architecture itself as the basis for the identity. Their capabilities span brand strategy, positioning, identity, websites, publications, environmental graphics, wayfinding, and book design. thenarrative.designwww.thirdandarch.com

Why I'd call them: They appear to understand that architecture itself can be the source material for the identity.

Best for: A sophisticated, design-literate identity with a strong Chicago cultural sensibility.

2. Liska & Associates Inc — strongest “serious design practice” option

Liska & Associates Inc
Web
Address: 610 N Fairbanks Ct, Chicago, IL 60611, United States
Phone: +1 312-867-1111

Liska is an established Chicago communication-design firm with experience spanning architecture/design, arts and culture, hospitality, education, and other sophisticated organizations. Their work is strategy-led and encompasses identity, naming, positioning, websites, print, motion, and communications.

Why I'd call them: If the studio has decades of history and you want to modernize it without throwing away its institutional equity, this is exactly the kind of brief I'd want them to see.

Best for: Legacy firm → contemporary, authoritative design practice.

3. Design B&B — best for a more expressive identity

Design B&B
Web
Address: 833 W Jackson Blvd Fl 7, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
Phone: +1 312-753-3037

Design B&B is an independent Chicago brand strategy/design agency. Importantly, they've worked on the Auditorium Theatre, creating a rebrand that drew directly from the building's architecture and interior details. Their capabilities include strategy, identity, verbal identity, brand architecture, and digital. www.designbandb.com

Why I'd call them: They seem particularly good if you don't want the predictable architecture-brand aesthetic of black/white typography + abstract monogram.

Best for: A firm wanting something distinctive, contemporary and culturally aware, while still refined.

4. Multiple Inc. — strong strategic/identity candidate

Multiple Inc.
Web
Address: 845 W Washington Blvd Fifth Floor, Chicago, IL 60607, United States
Phone: +1 312-846-6944

Multiple is a Chicago independent brand strategy and design agency with capabilities across positioning, narrative, brand voice, identity systems, and digital. Their portfolio suggests experience handling complex organizations and stakeholder groups.

Best for: A rebrand where the strategic question is as important as the visual one—e.g. “We've grown, our practice has changed, and our existing identity no longer explains who we are.”

5. Third & Arch — if you want someone who lives in AEC

This is the industry-specialist choice. Third & Arch explicitly focuses on architecture, engineering and construction and offers brand strategy, identity, naming, web strategy, website design/development and marketing. They show an architecture-firm rebrand for Apeiro as a case study. www.thirdandarch.com

Caveat: I'd choose them if AEC expertise is the priority. If your studio is already sophisticated and wants a more culturally ambitious identity, I'd put The Narrative, Liska, and Design B&B ahead of them.

My ranking for your particular brief

Who I'd actually invite to pitch

I'd make the first round The Narrative + Liska + Design B&B.

That's a better three-way comparison than collecting five generic branding agencies. Ask each to respond to the same short brief and, crucially, don't ask them to design a logo as part of the pitch. Ask them to articulate:

1. What they think an established architecture practice's brand actually needs to communicate.
2. How they'd preserve accumulated reputation while making the firm feel contemporary.
3. How they'd differentiate you from the sea of architecture firms using minimalist typography and architectural photography.
4. What they'd change beyond the logo—narrative, typography, portfolio architecture, website, proposals, presentations, signage, awards submissions, social, etc.
5. Two or three examples of work where they've handled an organization with significant history or design credibility.

I'd also explicitly tell them: “We are looking for a brand identity, not a marketing campaign.”

That single sentence should help separate the right studios from agencies that will immediately start talking about lead generation.

If you tell me the firm's approximate size, whether you're more modernist/contemporary vs. traditional, and the kind of clients you want more of, I can narrow this to the one agency I'd hire and the exact brief I'd send them.

For an established Chicago architecture studio, I’d avoid generic “branding agencies.” You want a partner that understands that architecture firms are selling expertise, point of view, reputation, and a body of work—not consumer products.

I’d put these on the shortlist:

My top 5

1. The Narrative — my first call for a refined, architecture-literate identity

The Narrative

This is the most obvious fit if your ambition is quiet, sophisticated, design-forward. They recently rebranded 900/910 N Lake Shore Drive, working from archival research and interviews and translating Miesian principles into the identity. Their services span brand strategy, positioning, identity, websites, publications, wayfinding and environmental graphics. thenarrative.design

Why I'd hire them: They seem to understand the difference between branding an architecture practice and simply putting a nicer logo on an architecture practice.

2. Span — particularly compelling if you want a Chicago design-culture sensibility

Their work is unusually close to the architecture/design ecosystem. In a 2024 identity proposal, Span cited 50+ brand identity systems and collaborations with architects including Studio Gang and Trahan Architects. www.lagrangepark.org

I'd consider them if you want the new identity to feel culturally sophisticated and spatial, rather than overtly “marketing agency.”

3. Liska + Associates — best for an established firm that needs strategic maturity

Liska & Associates Inc
Liska & Associates Inc
Web
Address: 610 N Fairbanks Ct, Chicago, IL 60611, United States
Phone: +1 312-867-1111

They're a Chicago communication-design and branding firm with a strategy-led approach, including identity, naming and branded communications. Their positioning around simplifying complex organizations makes them interesting for an established practice with multiple disciplines, principals, markets or sub-brands.

Best fit: a firm that has real institutional history and needs to evolve rather than reinvent itself.

4. Third & Arch — best if the rebrand needs to become a serious business-development platform

Third & Arch

This one is explicitly focused on AEC. They offer brand strategy, identity, naming, web strategy/design and development, and specifically position themselves around architecture firms. Their case work includes rebranding an architecture firm and building its new website. www.thirdandarch.com

I'd choose them if the assignment is brand + website + positioning + business development, rather than primarily an identity exercise.

5. Zoyes Creative — worth a serious conversation if your work overlaps architecture/development/place

Zoyes Creative

They're unusually specialized in architects, developers and placemakers, with work spanning brand strategy, brand design and digital. Their portfolio includes architecture and Chicago real-estate work. zoyescreative.com

They'd be particularly interesting if your studio works heavily with developers, hospitality, real estate or urban projects.

The wildcard: VSA

VSA Partners, Inc.
VSA Partners, Inc.
Web
Address: 600 W Chicago Ave #250, Chicago, IL 60654, United States
Phone: +1 877-422-1311

If this is a major institutional rebrand with a substantial budget, I'd also put VSA into the pitch. They're a Chicago design-led branding firm with deep experience in strategy, identity systems and activation. toimi.pro

But I wouldn't automatically choose them. For an architecture studio, a smaller specialist may produce something considerably more nuanced.

Who I'd actually invite to pitch

If this were my shortlist, I'd make it:

If you're looking for the kind of identity that makes an architecture studio look more like a significant cultural/design institution than a marketing company, I'd start with The Narrative and Span.

The key in the pitch process is not to ask them “what would you do with our logo?” Ask each to show how they would articulate the firm's point of view, translate that into a visual language, and make the identity work across projects, proposals, monographs/publications, website, signage, social, awards submissions and presentations.

If you tell me roughly the studio's size, reputation/positioning, whether you want “quiet luxury” vs. more experimental, and a rough budget, I can narrow this to the 2–3 agencies I'd actually hire and explain why.