When a company acquires another business, branding becomes one of the biggest strategic decisions. Should the acquired company be absorbed into the parent brand? Should it retain its identity? Should there be a phased transition? These decisions have long-term implications for customer perception, internal alignment and overall growth.
In Part 1, we explored how to define a strong brand architecture. In Part 2, we outlined how to plan and execute an effective rollout. Now, in Part 3, we’ll focus on how to bring your strategy to life through creative execution.
Creative decisions are among the most visible — and emotionally resonant — parts of a rebrand. Done right, they reinforce strategic goals, create clarity and build trust with internal and external audiences. But getting there takes early alignment and a deliberate approach.
Regardless of what you go with, strategy and creative teams need to sync as soon as you decide to rebrand, and the product architecture you choose will inform the approach that makes the most sense.
A final note before we get into the weeds: this blog focuses on acquisitions, not mergers. A merger involves a different set of branding considerations.
Connecting Brand Architecture to Creative Execution
The first step is choosing a brand architecture. Parent brands can choose between a branded house (one master brand across all products or services), a house of brands (multiple distinct brands operate independently under a parent company) or a hybrid brand (sub-brands to operate with varying degrees of independence but still benefit from the parent brand’s reputation). Get the full details on brand architecture from our Associate Director of Brand Strategy, Alexa Krause.
Once a brand decides on their architecture, the company can take four typical approaches to a creative rebrand: full absorption, a partial rebrand, endorsement branding or no rebrand at all. Each framework has pros and cons, depending on customer expectations and desired outcomes. As always, there are exceptions to every rule. It’s always best to evaluate your rebrand needs on an individual basis.
The Four Approaches to Branding Post-Acquisition
There are four key approaches to consider when putting together a post-acquisition branding strategy:
1. Full absorption
This approach completely folds an acquired brand into the parent company. The acquired brand absorbs the parent brand’s name, identity and messaging.
Pros:
- This brand acquisition strategy creates long-term efficiency by eliminating the need to manage multiple brands.
- Brands maintain ultimate consistency — a key factor in customer loyalty.
- The parent brand takes full ownership of all successes.
Cons:
- This approach requires significant upfront investment.
- Customers may take time to adjust, leading to short-term confusion or resistance.
- The parent brand also assumes ownership of any losses or baggage.
Example: Bell Atlantic (acquired by Verizon in 2001) was absorbed into Verizon branding
Full absorption is best for: Companies with overlapping services where it makes sense to consolidate for clarity and efficiency.
The typical outcome: Full absorption expands a brand’s customer base, strengthens market position, and enhances service offerings.
2. Partial rebrand
Think of this like a transitional phase. The acquired brand maintains some of its original branding — like its logo — but new messaging is added that hints at the acquisition, e.g. “[Brand A] now a [Brand B] brand.” This way, the acquired company maintains familiarity for a period of time before its full absorption.
Pros:
- This approach gives customers time to adjust to the transition, hopefully maintaining their loyalty.
- It allows more time to refine long-term brand strategy.
- It builds trust before making a permanent shift.
Cons:
- Partial rebrands can create confusion if they’re not communicated clearly to audiences.
- Adding an extra step always increases complexity and leaves room for error in creative deliverables.
- Some customers may react negatively to the initial changes.
Example: Slack became “Slack, from Salesforce” after acquisition
A partial rebrand is best for: Companies that want to ease into a full rebrand while minimizing risk.
The typical outcome: A partial rebrand allows for growth with less disruption, increasing the likelihood of customer retention while preparing for long-term brand integration.
3. Endorsement branding
The acquired company retains its name but is visibly linked to the parent brand, such as “[Brand] by [Parent Company].”
Pros:
- The parent company attains the acquired brand’s equity while the acquired brand benefits from the parent brand’s reputation.
- This approach allows for a quicker rollout, since not everything has to be stripped and replaced.
- Both brands can complement each other without fear of cannibalization.
Cons:
- It requires complete alignment between stakeholders to ensure consistency.
- Creative teams must balance two identities while maintaining cohesion.
- Future marketing efforts need approval from both brands, which can slow decision-making.
Example: Kellogg’s cereals maintain both Kellogg’s branding and their individual brand
Endorsement branding is best for: Acquisitions where the acquired brand has strong existing equity.
The typical outcome: Endorsement branding expands the parent brand’s credibility without disrupting customer familiarity.
4. No rebrand
The acquired company remains completely independent, with no changes to its branding.
Pros:
- Both brands maintain creative freedom with minimal risk.
- The parent company can buy and sell businesses easily without major brand entanglements.
- This freedom maximizes business agility.
Cons:
- It requires strong organizational systems to manage multiple brands effectively.
- This framework can create brand imbalance if the acquired company gains more recognition than the parent brand.
- Brands must maintain strategic alignment between the two companies at all times, which can be a tough process to keep up.
Example: Unilever owns Ben and Jerry’s, Vaseline, Q-tips, Dove etc., each brand maintains its identity
This approach is best for: Companies that operate in separate markets or industries, where distinct branding makes sense.
The typical outcome: Forgoing a rebrand gives the parent company a quick perception shift, and the growth that comes with that, but doesn’t risk operational disruption.
How to Avoid 3 Common Rebranding Pitfalls
Many companies struggle with rebranding after acquisition because they rely on their previous branding strategies. Departments that hesitate to fully commit to a new identity cause internal misalignment and slow adoption. When branding decisions become a push-and-pull between different teams, consistency and brand reputation suffer. Here’s how to avoid that.
Consider long-term strategy, not personal preference
Ensure major stakeholders align on creative deliverables from the start. Emphasize that a rebrand is for the business, not based on personal preference. Just because an executive doesn’t like the new colors, doesn’t mean they won’t work for business goals. Remind everyone to keep the brand acquisition strategy and desired outcome in mind at every stage.
Align early and often
Complete alignment demands creative and strategy work together from the beginning of any rebrand project. A representative from the creative team should be present as soon as rebranding conversations start. The sooner the creative team understands a strategy, the stronger the branding will be.
Empower efficiency from day one
The creative department’s rep will know how much deliverables cost and how long they take to produce. If they’re part of conversations, they can steer production conversations toward more efficient deliverables or workflows — a win for the brand and the creative team alike. When companies make the mistake of finalizing their rebranding approach without involving creative teams, it leads to avoidable delays, misaligned messaging and inefficient execution.
Speaking of Rollouts… When Should a Company Introduce Its New Branding?
The timing depends on the brand acquisition strategy. If there’s no net-new branding, then no rollout is necessary.
If a company must undergo any type of rebrand then it should introduce new creative as soon as the parent company is operationally ready to support the business. Creative should never lead the charge before the business is prepared.
Rollout strategies require external and internal communications. It’s wise to start with internal rebranding communications, so employees always accurately represent the brand. Company town halls, brand workshops and culture initiatives can acquaint employees and get them excited about new branding.
Externally, brands can use every wing of their marketing department to roll out the rebrand. Press releases, social media and customer emails are great places to start — and each serves a unique purpose. Go deeper on rollout considerations with advice from our Director of Strategy, Rachel Lacy.
Get Help with a Tailored Creative Approach for Your Rebrand
While these four approaches provide a roadmap, every acquisition is different. The best rebrand considers business goals, market conditions and customer expectations.
Creative partners guide a business through the complexities of rebranding after an acquisition, analyzing its needs and balancing that with the desired outcomes at every step. If you need assistance defining your rebrand after an acquisition, a tailored creative approach can make all the difference. Reach out to learn more about how Walker Sands can help.
