The everchanging fashion industry is not only fickle in design and creative ideas, but also in administration and leadership. Constantly changing brand executives can fuel this inevitable change as well as provide fresh outlooks on existing brand representation.
Many question whether constantly changing executives is beneficial or detrimental, but it boils down to an argument that has been debated throughout the millennia: is change good or bad? In other words, should a brand remain constant in its values and ideas, or broaden its scope and embrace change?
The answer is simply and can be summed up in one simple sentence.
Fashion is change.
Therefore, it’s obvious that constant change in a brand’s image can be extremely beneficial.
Gap Inc. is one example of such change and how it can have a major impacts on an established, popular brand. In an article published on Nov. 20 by the corporation’s official website described the brand’s approach to launching Gap and Banana Republic “into the next decade.”
The main tactic in achieving this goal was elevating two experienced executives into higher leadership positions as the global presidents of Gap and Banana Republic to lead the brand into a bright and prosperous future.
The article said the somewhat courageous move was concocted by Art Peck in preparation for taking on the role of chief executive officer, early next year.
“We’ll start 2015 with a management team comprised of both established executives and the next generation of brand leaders ready for the next generation of customers,” Peck said in the article.
The key takeaway from Peck’s statement on the executive change was the phrase “next generation of customers.” This mindset is what is going to maintain Gap’s relevance in the fashion world, because the company’s executives understand that the market is constantly growing and change is necessary.
Coach appointing a new creative director, Stuart Vevers, is another recent example of prominent change in the fashion industry, and it is, of course, controversial.
According to a Fashionista article by Dhani Mau, Coach has shifted to a more classic, simplistic style of accessories, and there is even word of a ready-to-wear collection in the near future. It’s therefore reasonable to assume that Vevers is meant to guide Coach into this new time of growth in its brand.
As a brand that is almost universally loved by American accessory shoppers, Coach is rather brave for making this change, but with growing trends and a maturing market, this executive move is just what Coach needs to rejuvenate its presence in the fashion world.
Especially in discussing a new clothing, how would it not make sense to infuse fresh views into the company, instead of recycling stale ideas from former creative directors.
Apparel design senior Chelsea Harrell said that while changing executives can be a risky move, there are possibilities of substantial positive advances.
“I think it really depends on the brand itself and the person they’re replacing,” Harrell said. “It can be good in some ways and bad in other ways.”
The industry is always moving forward and changing so a brand should never be stuck in one spot as far as creativity is concerned, she said. Additionally, Harrell said there are always younger people coming into the industry that have experience with newer technologies and ideas that can further benefit a brand.
While traditional styles and approaches can facilitate brand loyalty for numerous years, innovation and creativity is an evolving creature that cannot be easily caged. Brand executives should not try to hold onto ideas that are irrelevant in the fashion world, and experimentation — both in design and leadership — is necessary in this industry.
Michael Tarver is a 20-year-old mass communication sophmore from Houma Louisiana.  Contact him at @michae_T16