Branding at startups vs. branding post-PMF
The biggest differences I've seen between the two.
Hi, y’all,
How’s it going? What’s happening? Have you had water today?
After my last letter about the three biggest lessons I learned from a recent rebrand, one of you kind souls wrote to me and said:
Hiya Grace, just read your newsletter issue on the lessons from your recent rebranding project and it’s fantastic!
It’s so great to see content on what it’s like to exit the startup phase and tackle positioning/branding at a higher level. LinkedIn is such a startup echo chamber (although I contribute to it as well haha😆).
I would love to know the biggest differences you saw with rebranding at startups vs enterprises/post-PMF companies (apart from access to leadership and the complexity of the business).
While I’m not an expert by any means — I’ve spent the last 10 years working with startups across the board, and know very well the chaos that is pre-product-market-fit life.
However, in the last year or so, I’ve started working with bigger companies that have leaped over that hurdle. In the last 6 months alone I’ve worked with:
A financial services consultancy/SaaS
A really cool robotics company
A security consultancy
A multi-million user platform in the creator economy
A sustainability solutions provider
^All of these companies have found product-market-fit. They weren’t building a brand for the first time. This round of branding was more about refining and organizing everything.
It’s been interesting to see and work through. Here are the big differences I’ve noticed.
Difference 1: Brand becomes more than a marketing task
Every startup I’ve worked with has had a brand that’s “good enough” for their needs. The smart ones don’t spend months on branding, because they know it’s going to change anyway.
Example: Our first project as an agency was for a startup in the energy industry. They help collect data from assets in the field faster. They obviously care about their branding (and I’m REALLY proud of the work we did) — but they didn’t sink $100k and a year into it. They’ve been open and honest and expect it to change over time. That’s realistic.
Post-PMF brands are a little different. They know their special sauce. They know their audience. They’ve built up relationships. They’ve acquired businesses, gone public, and gone through actual growth.
At this point, the brand isn’t just something that marketing needs to do to make the website look pretty. It’s something that the business needs for alignment. It becomes more about storytelling, vision-setting, and positioning, and less about the size of your logo.
Difference 2: Brand infrastructure becomes more important.
In my experience, pre-PMF teams are, for lack of a better word, scrappy. You don’t join a startup for a stable 9-5. You join a startup because you’re interested in an idea, or you love the grind of solving new problems every week.
At the pre-PMF stage, your team is smaller. Motivated in a different way. Everyone is kind of bought into the brand — and it’s easy to make collective decisions.
What I’ve learned at my post-PMF companies is that as headcount grows, the need for solid brand education grows with it. One of my clients — a billion-dollar company — had me go through a full brand onboarding to make sure I understood the ins and outs of it.
I’ve learned that to be successful with brand post-PMF, you’ve got to be two things:
Defensive as hell.
Willing to teach people how to hit the mark.
The company I’m seeing do this really well has a marketing team that was built by a brand genius. Brand governance is baked into every single process. The infrastructure is set up to support a brand vision.
Difference 3: Post-PMF has more on the line.
Things change a lot pre-PMF. I’m lucky if there’s a marketing team. If there is, they’re responsible for everything under the sun. Brand is important, yes. But it’s not live-or-die. It’s going to change.
Post-PMF brands are less relaxed. They’ve gone through the awkward puberty stages (and they do NOT want to go back). They’ve built up a reputation that has monetary value. They literally cannot afford to screw it up. The risks are higher… and so are the standards.
That’s not to say there’s NO risk with pre-PMF brands. Obviously you want something that looks great and builds trust. But, when you don’t have widespread recognition, it’s easy to make changes and iterate.
When there’s more on the line? It’s harder to change your name, your color palette, your logo, and you overall mood. Look at what Jaguar did. It’s an expensive rebrand because they’re trying to completely overhaul your associations with the brand.
The big takeaway: Brand is only as successful as the people who own it.
I think you can have a great brand at any business size. But the ones that really capture our attention aren’t afraid to take some bets. That’s true for both pre- and post-PMF.
However, those risks are only possible when the people internally (notably, the marketing team) have the authority to push it as a priority. Too many marketers, unfortunately, are saddled with responsibility of building something great, but lack the authority to do it well.
I’ve had Fat Freddy’s Drops’ Wairunga concert video on repeat for the last week. I know it’s three years old. I don’t care.
Why media literacy is more important than ever. (Long video essay, but well worth a listen.)
I’ve seen a lot of people talk about how the B2B buying journey is changing. The always-brilliant
has actually written something awesome about how to change with it.
Hey, thanks for the shoutout, Grace! 😘