Every Touchpoint
Including invoices, emails and error messages.
Every organisation has two brands: the one in the guidelines and the one a customer encounters across the website, the invoices, the social accounts and the support replies. A brand audit documents the second one, which is usually the first time anyone has looked at it all together.
The gap between the intended brand and the encountered one is where the findings are.
Including invoices, emails and error messages.
How it looks and how it sounds, which frequently disagree.
What a customer actually encounters, in sequence.
The gap, with reasons rather than blame.
By what a customer notices, not by severity of the breach.
Four areas, and the third is where most gaps appear.
Request an Audit →Logo, colour and type across everything.
How the organisation sounds across channels.
Invoices, confirmations, support replies. Rarely branded, always seen.
How you are described relative to alternatives.
Everything a customer encounters, compared to what was intended.
Where an audit finds a deeper problem, brand positioning is usually the next step.
Follow the customer journey and collect everything they see.
Every point where a customer meets the brand.
Screenshots, documents, emails, accounts.
Against the guidelines, and against each other.
Why the gap exists, which is usually process rather than carelessness.
By what customers actually notice.
It is seen by every customer and designed by nobody.
Competence, or the absence of it. An invoice with a stretched logo, a confirmation email in a default system font, an automated message written by a developer — each is a small signal and every customer receives all of them.
They are also the touchpoints with the highest reach. Marketing materials are seen by prospects; invoices and confirmations are seen by everyone who actually bought something.
They fall outside marketing's ownership, which is precisely why they are never audited and why they are where the gap is largest.
Not through carelessness. Through the absence of a process: someone needs something, the correct asset is hard to find, they use what is available, and that version propagates.
Each instance is a rational local decision. The cumulative effect is an organisation with four versions of its logo in circulation and no record of how that happened.
Which means the fix is usually process and asset availability rather than retraining or enforcement.







A brand audit documents how a brand actually appears and sounds across every touchpoint a customer encounters, and compares that to what the guidelines intended.
The largest gaps are in operational materials — invoices, confirmations, automated emails, support replies. They have the highest reach and sit outside marketing's ownership.
Usually because the correct asset was hard to find at the moment someone needed it. Each substitution is a rational local decision, and they accumulate into several versions in circulation.
By what customers actually notice and how often, rather than by how serious the breach of guidelines is. A minor inconsistency on every invoice outranks a major one on a rarely-seen document.
No. An audit establishes the current state. Where it uncovers a deeper problem, brand positioning is the separate piece of work that follows.
Still deciding if brand audit is right for you?
Talk to UsBrand reviews look at the website, the campaign work, the brochures and the social accounts — everything marketing owns and can point to.
The invoice belongs to finance. The order confirmation belongs to whoever configured the ecommerce platform. The support reply template belongs to customer service. None of them is in the review.
All of them reach every single customer who ever bought something, which is a considerably larger and better-qualified audience than the campaign work will ever have.
Give us your website and a few operational documents. We will show you what a customer encounters end to end.
