The great brand debate

Welcome to Spark, a newsletter from Vivace. We curate and publish the most interesting thinking and ideas from our community on themes ranging from business and finance to culture and creativity. Send pitches and feedback to [email protected]. We’d love to hear from you.

Hello Spark reader,

Spark has enjoyed a European-style break over August and we’re now back and ready to spice up your inboxes with renewed vigour, starting with a debate that’s been electrifying the comments sections of LinkedIn posts over the past few months, courtesy of our editor Mimi.

Meanwhile, I’ve been in Minnesota this past week, catching up with the team and diving into a mix of exciting projects we’ll be supporting in the months ahead. I’m really energized about what’s coming as we head toward the end of the year! More on that to come…

—Ryan

What’s your definition of brand?

Guest essay by Mimi Hayton

A few months ago, I shared what I believed at the time to be a lighthearted LinkedIn post celebrating the diversity of brand definitions. Little did I know that my innocent exploration of this idea would expose a rift within the brand strategy community, provoke an epic 7 part LinkedIn post in response and pull in number of industry heavyweights to boot.

The prompt that started it all? ‘What's your definition of brand?’.

Like many of us who have had a non-linear journey into the brand space, the experience I draw upon is varied, but the through-line is one of strategic intention combined with creative expression. No matter how we’ve ended up with ‘brand’ in our roles or titles, most of us also share a desire to understand things deeply and holistically. This is why I have always been drawn to the different ways people evoke not just what brand is, but why it matters.

It’s both the art and the science that fuels my passion for it.

Alongside my collection of definitions (or descriptions depending on your stake in this argument), I also did my due diligence and included one from Interbrand and their seminal article on the subject, from Calin Hertioga and Johannes Frederik Christensen's ‘What is a brand?’ (2018).


It is a definition with a single function: to create shared, incontrovertible, meaning between the people who create brand value and the people who want to extract it. It creates a common ‘currency’, if you will, between brand practitioners and the various other brand stakeholders.

And of course it is perfectly fit for that purpose. With a combined 40+ years experience in brand, these are two people who know what they’re talking about. 

One definition to rule them all

So why should you as brand shaper or marketer even care? Isn’t this all just academic posturing? Well, actually, this may or may not be the most important issue facing our field. Yes, something’s rotten in the state of brand and according to some that thing is the lack of a singular universally-agreed brand definition.

Why is this such a problem? According to Christensen and Hertioga, too many definitions of brand have created corruptive ambiguity for our profession:

“I think we can allow ourselves some poetry alongside the clarity when among friends”

It’s hard to argue with Christensen and Hertioga’s rationale—though naturally that didn’t stop me. As I said in my original post, “[it] might be accurate but it doesn’t exactly inspire me with a burning passion for my career”. It may be fit for the purpose of convincing executives in boardrooms that brand is worth a damn, but it doesn’t convince me that this is something worth dedicating my one wild and precious life to…

Of course then there is the argument that my own personal desires in this matter are completely irrelevant:

The lines are drawn

What emerged in the ensuing discussion were two camps that I've dubbed The Poets and The Purists. Johannes Christensen was provoked inspired enough to reiterate his original argument in a series of 7 posts which the dedicated among you may wish to explore fully:

The Poets, seeking resonance, and The Purists, seeking accuracy, then battled it out in the comments:

Some were in search of a compromise that could capture both:

Others are just sick of the whole argument:

"Yes, and...”

The debate was, of course, fated from the start. Purists are never going to concede that there is room for anything but absolutes, and Poets are never going to give up their poetry. Some see the question as philosophical; others as scientific.

It’s not about whether Christensen and Hertioga’s definition is objectively correct (it is), but whether ‘correct’ should mean game over for all other interpretations.

Is our discipline not rich enough to contain multitudes? Whether you're presenting to eternally skeptical CFOs who crave (false) certainty or crafting brand experiences that need to resonate emotionally, I believe there needs to be room for both poetry and precision. For the measurable and the magical.

Ultimately the more pertinent question is: do our profession's biggest challenges really stem from definitional confusion? Or from capricious human behaviour that no definition can solve…

Beneath the semantics, what we seem to be grappling with is the legitimacy, relevancy and potential of brand, in the eyes of non-believers.

Et tu?

So, are you a Poet or a Purist?

And how much does it matter?

Mimi is a brand marketing consultant, strategist, storyteller and creative. She currently lives in Manchester, UK, and spends far too much time on LinkedIn and Substack, where you can follow her for more thought-provoking musings. She also happens to be the editor of this fantastic newsletter.

Thanks for joining us this week. Anything we missed? Something we should include next week? Send us your shout-outs and strong opinions to include in next week’s edition at [email protected]. 

Spark is a production of Vivace, a global B2B creative studio and consultancy that helps businesses drive meaningful brand and commercial impact. Get in touch if you’d like to chat with any of the team. Have a great week ahead.