The design system has no brand in it
A product that retains a component library’s default styling may have little visual distinction. Check whether this affects recognition or consistency with its brand.
A library can support consistency and accessibility, but both depend on how it is implemented. Test the finished workflows, content, states and keyboard behaviour.
Key facts
- Library defaults were meant as a starting point.
- A brand made for the logo was never translated into interface decisions.
- The logo colour is often too loud for the interface.
- The marketing site and the product look unrelated.
- Tokens shared between product and marketing connect the two.
Why it happens
Library defaults kept. They were meant as a starting point.
A brand made for the logo. Nobody translated it into interface decisions.
The brand was never translated into interface tokens, so library defaults remained.
How it shows up
- Prospects confuse the product with competitors
- The logo colour is too loud for the interface
- The marketing site and the product look unrelated
- Screenshots resemble the library’s own demos
Options and trade-offs
What helps:
- A UI palette derived from the brand
- Typography and density choices with character
- A few signature components
- Tokens shared between product and marketing
The tension: heavy customisation makes the product recognisable, and each library upgrade then costs more. Light theming keeps upgrades cheap and leaves the product looking like everyone else’s.
Common mistakes
- Using the logo colour as the primary interface colour
- Rebranding the website and leaving the product as it was
- Customising every component when a few signature ones would carry the brand
- Keeping product and marketing tokens separate
Related experience