Brand Architecture Is Revenue Infrastructure

A Hard Reset for the AI Era

I’ve always been wired to connect things. Not just people or ideas—but the parts of a business that don’t always speak the same language.

That’s probably why I’ve spent most of my career working at the seams. Between vision and operations. Between narrative and execution. Between leadership teams who see the future and the systems that have to carry it there.

It’s a strange perch—but a useful one.
‍
The Hidden System Nobody Wants to Touch

One of those hidden systems—the one that never gets enough attention—is brand architecture.

It’s not a logo thing. It’s not a ”marketing“ thing. It’s infrastructure.

And when it’s unclear or unmanaged, it doesn’t just confuse people. It creates drag—on revenue, on operations, on M&A integration, and on your ability to tell a coherent story.

Every brand in your portfolio is either creating clarity or creating cost. There is no neutral.

It takes real capital to launch and maintain a brand—across systems, platforms, vendors, people, and content. If that brand isn’t pulling its weight, it’s quietly draining resources.

According to McKinsey, companies with coherent brand systems outperform peers by up to 20% in total shareholder return.
Source: McKinsey & Company – The Business Value of Design

‍Gartner reports that over 60% of B2B organizations struggle with brand alignment post-merger, leading to redundant spend and fractured customer experiences.
Source: Gartner – CMOs Strategic Planning Report 2022

‍In one client engagement, we found a company maintaining over 200 live websites—many duplicative or unmanaged—generating operational expense without advancing clarity or revenue.

Most companies think brand is a marketing problem.
Brand architecture is a business problem. And it’s a solvable one.

Why B2B Brand Architecture Is a Different Animal

I don’t work with many consumer brands. Most of my clients are global B2B companies—tech-forward, engineering-led, growing fast.

In B2C, brands often orbit around one product or lifestyle promise. In B2B, it’s different. Revenue is spread across portfolios. Acquisitions pile up. Marketing is often downstream of product. And naming? It’s usually inherited, not designed.

That’s what makes architecture in B2B such a strategic lever—and such a mess when it goes unmanaged.

The Old Playbook Is Broken

Here’s what I’ve come to believe after doing this work for over two decades: the traditional approach to brand architecture doesn't work at scale.

Most frameworks are too static, too marketing-centric, and too far removed from the real systems of growth. They rarely account for the layers of complexity introduced by global operations, rolling acquisitions, or evolving go-to-market strategies. They treat brand as a creative output, not an operating system.

And they almost never connect brand decisions to financial outcomes.

While working through a particularly complex brand portfolio with a client recently, it struck me how much more clearly we could now see the full ecosystem. Thanks to advances in AI and data modeling, we’re finally able to audit massive swaths of identity data and peer deeply into the farthest branches of a brand tree—spotting legacy detritus, orphaned platforms, and redundant assets that used to be invisible.

For the first time, we can evaluate sub-brands and assets against real indicators—simultaneously:

• Customer lifetime value
• Revenue contribution
• Awareness levels
• Lifecycle stage
• Portfolio fit
• Competitive overlap

This creates a whole new strategic advantage. It makes governance more precise and transformation more scalable. It reduces the scope and cost of implementing system-wide change.

But it only works if leadership recognizes the value of the investment—and empowers their teams to act.

Building the Case Across the C-Suite

Brand architecture lives on a balance sheet somewhere. And yet most organizations only revisit it in crisis—during a merger, reorg, or forced rebrand.

That's a mistake.

In complex, global organizations, brand architecture is the connective tissue between story, scale, and strategy. It determines:

• How new products enter the market
• How acquisitions are integrated (or not)
• How customers understand relationships between offerings
• How internal teams align across divisions
• How equity is built—and attributed—back to the masterbrand

CMOs and Chief Strategy Officers often own this work, but making the case for investment requires building alignment across finance and operations.

Here’s what CMOs should be discussing with their CFO, COO, and CSO:

• How many brand names are we maintaining, and at what cost?
• Are we duplicating platforms, teams, or content across brands?
• Can we measure which sub-brands generate value—and which dilute it?
• Do customers know which brands belong to us?
• How fast can we integrate an acquisition—strategically and visually?

A single, highly visible sub-brand with weak linkage to the corporate parent can quietly siphon brand equity. Multiply that across dozens of entities, and you've built a system that corrodes its own value.

Death by a thousand cuts is still death.

New Methodology: From Complexity to Clarity

In a recent global B2B engagement, we applied this new approach. Years of organic growth and acquisitions had created a sprawling, inefficient brand portfolio:

• Product names that overlapped or conflicted
• Naming conventions developed organically over decades
• Brands with strong market recognition but no corporate connection
• Brands with little to no recognition acting like they were household names
• Legacy visual systems still in use, years post-acquisition
• Sub-brands that pulled against core category positioning
• Very little control over how all of these were organized, governed, or maintained

Each of these decisions had made sense in isolation. But in aggregate, they were holding the company back.

We worked with stakeholders across divisions—strategy, legal, product, marketing, ops—and used AI-assisted auditing to map the full landscape. Then we rebuilt it:

• A zone-based architecture model to classify brand relationships, from fully masterbranded to transitional to independent.
• A Brand Scoring Tool built around binary logic—legal standing, equity, awareness, financial impact—to objectively sort brands and remove emotion from the equation.
• A scalable visual system tailored to each brand zone, so every entity knows how it shows up relative to the parent.
• A governance framework for integrating new brands and maintaining clarity over time.

This system is now in motion—an operating model that:

• Absorbs acquisitions with less friction
• Connects brand decisions to revenue impact
• Protects equity while reducing OpEx
• Gives leadership a decision engine, not just a brand book

It’s the kind of infrastructure that compounds over time. And it’s already driving change.

What Leading Companies Get Right

This isn’t theory. The best in the business—especially in B2B—treat architecture as infrastructure.

Siemens runs a multi-sector empire, but brands like Siemens Healthineers and Siemens Mobility build their own vertical equity while reinforcing the parent. Their naming strategy reinforces category strength while allowing for vertical specialization.

Anthropic is a fascinating example of disciplined architecture in a young, fast-moving company. Despite rapid growth and an expanding product suite—Claude, Claude Code, the Claude Developer Platform—Anthropic maintains tight naming conventions and clear visual hierarchy. Everything ties back to a single, protected brand identity. They’re building equity intentionally, not accidentally. It’s the kind of discipline most companies don’t develop until they’ve already made expensive mistakes.

Adobe structures its offerings into clear clouds—Creative, Document, and Experience—with consistent naming and visual systems that let each product shine while reinforcing the masterbrand. You always know where you are, and who’s behind what.

These systems don’t just prevent confusion.They accelerate growth.

Final Thought

A good architecture system gives you something priceless: the ability to grow without losing coherence.

When everything connects back to a shared narrative and a shared goal, every name, every product, every message carries more weight.

When the architecture is clear, the story holds.
When it’s not, everything bleeds.

Brand architecture is revenue infrastructure. Treat it that way, and it will serve you.