Managing Brand Architecture

In developing and managing brand architecture strategy, there are at least four key components to consider:

1) brand portfolio audit;

2) brand architecture principles;

3) brand hierarchy models alternatives;

and 4) the brand naming decision tree.

Many organizations rush into brand hierarchy frameworks without first auditing their existing portfolio and defining brand principles. Below is an overview of each component:

Brand Architecture Audit

The audit defines the “as-is” state of your organization’s brand structure. Depending on your organization’s complexity, this can be simple or elaborate. The audit focuses on two areas: business performance and brand structure.

Business performance involves assessing the sales, profits, and growth potential of various products and brands in your portfolio. Which brands drive your business today and in the future?

Brand structure looks at how customers experience your brands and products across all touchpoints: logos, websites, advertising, and in-store experiences. The goal is to assess whether your brand’s visual representation is clear and consistent, or if improvements can be made.

Once the “as-is” assessment is complete, it’s time to develop portfolio principles to guide strategic decisions.

Brand Architecture Principles

Principles serve as the foundation for developing brand hierarchies. They guide decisions like whether to add or remove a brand or create brand relationships. Principles should be set before developing brand hierarchy examples or alternatives.

Here’s an example:

Sample Brand Architecture Principles

Invest in the fewest number of brands needed to meet business goals, e.g., Brands A, B, and C.
Create new brands only when a business case is proven, with multi-year support confirmed.
Minimize sub-brand proliferation by using endorsed brands or product descriptors.
Use descriptive or generic terms for product extensions to maximize understanding and minimize confusion.

These principles typically favor streamlined brand hierarchies with fewer, stronger brands. Another set might favor more brands, but principles must be established before creating alternative brand structures.

Brand Hierarchy Alternatives

After auditing the brand and establishing principles, it’s time to create alternative architecture models. This involves using a “boxes and sticks” approach to define the strategic, relational structure for all products and brands.

Depending on your organization’s complexity, many options may exist. To streamline this, we typically work with clients to develop three to five distinct alternatives using a brand architecture template.

Brand Architecture Template

Once key elements are developed, a brand architecture template is useful for evaluating alternative models.

In its simplest form, a series of PowerPoint slides are developed, showing:

A brand hierarchy on the left-hand side (e.g., master brand, sub-brand/endorsed brand, product brand).
Free space in the center to map out multiple alternatives.
Room at the bottom for a pros/cons analysis of each alternative.

Each slide represents a different brand hierarchy alternative, allowing for comparison. See the sample brand architecture template for details.

Using Visual Aids

In workshops, using colored sticky notes and flip charts is a great way to conceptualize brand architecture alternatives.

Each flip chart page represents a separate alternative hierarchy.
Sticky notes represent different products and brands.
This method allows teams to see and compare multiple structures side by side, facilitating a strategic discussion.

Focus on Structure, Not Terminology

The focus should be on the perceptual distance between products and brands, rather than terms like “sub-brand,” “endorsed brand,” or “driver brand.” These terms can complicate discussions.

Instead, ensure the logic, structure, and order are sound across all alternatives. Once you have refined the architecture, you can apply the appropriate terms.

Evaluating Alternatives

Once the frameworks are fully developed, including their pros and cons, evaluate each alternative based on the key brand architecture objectives:

Clarity: Is the brand structure clear and intuitive?
Synergy: Do the brands work together effectively?
Leverage: Does the structure allow the strongest brands to support others?

Use these criteria to prioritize and finalize the best brand architecture framework alternative.

To discuss brand architecture development with an experienced brand consultant, contact EquiBrand today.

Brand Naming Decision Tree

After establishing the brand architecture, creating a brand naming decision tree helps test its effectiveness in different scenarios. For instance, if a new product is developed within a product group, the decision tree guides whether it should fall under the master brand or if a new brand is needed.

The decision tree should be published and shared across the organization to ensure consistent application over time. Additionally, brand identity guidelines should be developed to guide the creative treatment of names and branding.

For information on EquiBrand’s managing brand architecture services, please call Tim Koelzer at 925-235-9556 or fill out a contact form here.