Brand architecture decisions get revisited every five to seven years and almost always under pressure: an acquisition, a portfolio rationalisation, a new platform launch, a market entry. Each time, the team rediscovers the same four archetypes and argues about which one applies. This worksheet shortcuts that argument by forcing the discussion onto a single page with explicit trade-offs.
Four archetypes, one decision
Branded house, sub-brand, endorsed brand, and house of brands sit on a spectrum from maximum master-brand leverage to maximum portfolio independence. The worksheet asks four diagnostic questions per portfolio entity: how distinct is the buyer, how distinct is the use case, how transferable is the trust, and how independent is the go-to-market.
Where IMC enters the picture
Integrated marketing communications is the operating layer that makes a brand architecture survive contact with the calendar. The worksheet includes a channel-by-channel ownership grid: who controls paid, owned, earned, and shared at each architecture level, and how investment is allocated against the master brand versus the children.
Outputs and next steps
A completed worksheet produces three artefacts: a one-page architecture map, a portfolio investment ratio recommendation, and a list of named brand decisions to be ratified by leadership in the next two quarters. It is not a substitute for a formal brand strategy engagement — it is the input that makes that engagement faster.
Last updated May 2026 · Filed under Templates