ChatGPT answers, unedited

• 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.