Evolution or Revolution in Packaging Design

A Decision Guide

Every briefing starts with the same key question:

Should the design be evolved – or completely rethought? Evolution - oder Revolution in Packaging Design?

𝘚𝘱𝘰𝘪𝘭𝘦𝘳:

Brand managers often lean towards revolution because they know the existing design inside out.

Creatives tend to prefer revolution because it’s simply more exciting.

But neither perspective is decisive.What really matters are the shoppers – because at the shelf, packaging has to work within seconds.

When Evolution makes sense:

👉 when the brand fundamentally works

👉 when clarity or modernisation is the goal

👉 when adapting to new channels is required

Advantages:

More cost-efficient than a revolution, significantly lower risk, and it strengthens brand recognition.

Disadvantage:

Evolution needs to happen regularly to keep the brand relevant.

Example:The redesign of the peanut bar "Mr. Tom"

When Revolution makes sense:

👉 when strategy, market or business model change fundamentally

👉 when the brand needs to be completely repositioned

👉 when a brand merger is planned

Advantages:

Maximum attention, clear repositioning, and the opportunity to reach new target groups (note: not all new audiences are the right ones – the Bahlsen redesign is a well-known example).

Disadvantages:

High costs and the risk of losing loyal shoppers – therefore usually only advisable with strong media support.

Example:The repositioning of Gläserne Molkerei to Gläserne Bio-Molkerei, including logo and packaging relaunch.

My Recommendation:

👉 Switch off gut feeling and FOMO – focus on objectives, strategy and data.

👉 Regardless of the chosen path: first define your Distinctive Brand Assets – the elements that are intuitively associated with the brand.

👉 And in most cases, several evolutions are more effective than one big revolution.

---

LinkedIn Post: 15.01.2026 by Katja Wagner