Brand archetype

In practice you pick one leading brand archetype and one supporting it, say the creator with a touch of the guide. What matters is what follows: which words you use, what the photography looks like, what you never do. Without that translation a brand archetype stays a slide. It is chosen in a workshop with the people who actually make content, after positioning.

It helps most where several people produce the content. A three person social team argues about tone on every post until it has a shared yardstick. After that, one question settles it: would the guide or the rebel phrase it this way. Even a new colleague can answer. An industrial company finds a human voice this way without cracking jokes where none belong.

How it runs: a half day workshop, a shortlist of three, a decision, then one page of consequences with examples. A week in total. From the client we need the people who genuinely write and shoot, not only management, and the last ten posts, which is where the gap between what is said and what gets published becomes visible.

The limit, honestly. A brand archetype sells nothing on its own and replaces neither positioning nor your offer. We have seen companies spend two workshops choosing one and never use it, because nobody wrote down what it means for an actual post. And if you pick the rebel while your people answer the phone like clerks, the first call gives you away.

Our workshops do not end with the choice. They end by rewriting five real posts from last month in the new voice. It takes an hour and usually shows whether the archetype fits or was picked because it sounded good. The rule that stays with you: an archetype that cannot rewrite yesterday's post is decoration, not a tool.