Thank you. We will be in touch shortly.
Oops! Something went wrong - please email andrew@singlthread.co.uk
There is a conversation I have heard more times than I can count.
A founder describes, in some detail, the rebrand they commissioned eighteen months ago. New logo. New colours. Often a new name. A website that took three months longer than planned. A launch post on LinkedIn. A feeling, at the time, that things were about to shift.
Then they pause.
"But honestly," they say. "Nothing really changed."
Not the quality of the enquiries. Not the conversion rate. Not the type of client walking through the door. The business looks different. It does not feel different. And no one quite knows how to say that out loud.
If any of this is familiar, the good news is that this is a well-understood problem. The less welcome news is that the design was not the issue.
Most rebrands begin with the wrong conversation. They begin with a mood board.
A founder decides it is time for a change, finds an agency whose work they admire, and the first meeting is about look and feel. References. What they are drawn to. What they want to move away from. Fonts, photography style, tone of voice.
None of that is wrong. But it is the last conversation you should be having, not the first.
Before any of that, there are questions that need answering. What are you actually saying? Who are you saying it to, specifically? Why should someone choose you over the next option available to them? What is the single most important thing your brand needs to communicate?
If those questions are not answered before the design process starts, the designer ends up making decisions that are not really design decisions at all. They are strategy decisions, being made by someone whose expertise is visual rather than strategic. The brief arrived at the creative layer. It needed to start one layer back.
There is a check worth running before commissioning any rebrand, and most businesses never think to do it.
Take the main line on your current website - the headline, the positioning paragraph, the thing you lead with. Now imagine swapping it with the equivalent line from your closest competitor. Could it sit on their site without anyone noticing? Does it describe the category rather than you, specifically?
If yes, the positioning is not distinctive. It belongs to the market, not to your business.
Run the same test after the rebrand. If the answer is still yes, you have changed the appearance but not the argument underneath. And the market responds to the argument. It is largely indifferent to the appearance.
This is the swap test. It is the most useful thing you can do before you spend on a rebrand, because it tells you whether the story underneath is genuinely yours, or whether you are running on language the whole category uses.
A rebrand works when it resolves a genuine strategic misalignment. When the business has moved but the brand has not kept up. When a new audience needs reaching and the old brand was not built for them. When a pivot has left the positioning ambiguous.
A rebrand does not work when it is used to solve a marketing problem that is actually a positioning problem. Better design cannot fix a story that is not working. A new logo cannot fix the fact that you sound like everyone else in your market. A new website cannot fix a value proposition that does not hold up.
Which means that before the next conversation with an agency, there is a more useful question to sit with. Do you have a design problem, or do you have a positioning problem?
If you spent significant budget on a rebrand and cannot see the difference it made, it is worth reading I Spent Money on a Rebrand and Nothing Changed - it covers exactly what to do next. You can also see how we approached this kind of work through the case studies on our site, or find out more about how we work on our services page.
The rebrand that did not work was probably well-executed. The agency likely delivered what they were briefed to deliver.
The problem is almost never the quality of the creative work.
It is that the creative work was briefed before the strategic work was done. That is not an easy thing to say about a significant investment. But it is the thing that is almost always true, and it is the thing worth addressing before the next spend, not after it.
