Choose the level based on current status or roadmap.
The question is not how big you want to grow, but how certain you are about that.
Choose a level that aligns with current conditions and a near-certain roadmap, not distant, vague ambitions. If you are certain you will open a chain or franchise in the next one or two years, establishing scalable rules from the start will be cheaper than redoing it later. However, investing in a high level for an uncertain future may just be wasting money on many years of inactivity.
- already certain to open a chain or franchise within one or two years
- Upcoming roadmap with real commitments, not just wishes.
- Uncertain roadmap and limited resources.
- high-level investment for an unclear future that has not yet materialized
When starting to create brand guidelines, the question Sinh Vũ receives most often is not "what colors should we choose" but rather: at what level should we operate? The short answer is to stick to the current state while following a near-certain roadmap. However, to make the right decision, you need to distinguish between two easily confused things: real commitment and desire.
Two things are easily confused
A true commitment is a plan with a budget, personnel, and specific timelines. A desire is a vision of the future without a clear action plan. You may want to open a chain in the next three years, which could be true. However, if there are no partners, no capital, and no operational model, that remains a desire, not a roadmap.
The reason distinguishing this is important: the level of standardization determines complexity, time, and cost. High-level investments for a future may not necessarily mean burying money in many years of untouched work, and often create thick documents that the current team does not fully understand how to use.
Three scenarios and how to choose
Scenario 1: Uncertain roadmap. Currently a single location, small team, no specific expansion plans. Choose a low or medium level, covering the real existing needs. No need for multi-brand governance rules or franchise systems when no one has taken on the rights.
Scenario 2: Relatively certain roadmap. In the next one to two years, branches will open, franchising, or fundraising will require standardized branding. At this point, establishing expansion rules from the start will be cheaper than redoing them later. Choose a medium level with architecture that allows for additional floors.
Scenario 3: Growing in stages. Uncertain about the future but want to avoid obstacles. Create a medium-level design, with open architecture, committing to gradual upgrades as real milestones appear, not when you feel ready.
The cost of redoing compared to the cost of capital burial
This is the comparison you need to ask yourself before making a decision. The cost of redoing occurs when you choose a lower level without considering the expansion path, leading to the need to break the foundation and rebuild when it really grows. The cost of sunk capital occurs when you choose a high level for an uncertain future; the money has been spent, but most of the materials remain unused, and the team does not utilize them, rendering them of no practical value.
Both are real costs. The difference: redoing happens later, while capital is tied up immediately. The exit is not about choosing low or high, but about designing an architecture that can evolve over time. Sinh Vũ calls this a living system: a set of rules designed to evolve as the company grows, adds channels, partners, and enters new markets, rather than doing it once and closing it off.
The brand governance framework is a living system, evolving as the company grows, adds channels, partners, and enters new markets. It should be designed for scalability rather than a one-time solution.
Frontify, Brand Governance guide
Common mistakes
- Buying high-level services because they sound more professional, but lacking a team capable of managing that complexity.
- Working at a low level without considering scalability, leading to having to start over when upgrades are needed because the foundation doesn't allow for expansion.
- Confusing desire with planning: investing based on dreams rather than real commitments, real budgets, and real people involved.
- Choose the level based on the ambition felt at the time of working with the consultant, rather than the actual operational status of the team.
The viewpoint of Sinh Vũ
Sinh Vũ finalizes the scope after the outline step, based on how your team actually operates, not based on how you wish to operate in the future. From there, Sinh Vũ can design a set of rules with an open architecture, allowing for gradual upgrades instead of starting over.
The goal is to have rules used at the right time, not the most comprehensive set of rules. A mid-level document that the team understands and applies consistently has more practical value than a high-level rulebook that few open. Sinh Vũ advises sticking to real milestones, not pushing you to a higher level for an uncertain scenario.
Decision checklist
Topic: Choose the level of standards based on current status or a three-year roadmap. Sinh Vũ guide, sinhvu.com
Select each item you find appropriate, then print or save as PDF to take with you.
If you have marked most of the signs above, this is the time to discuss in more detail. Sinh Vũ can help you review and propose a direction.
References
Sinh Vũ a2-brand-guideline.md (Scope); Sinh Vũ A2.json (phases); Frontify, Brand Governance guide.
Frequently asked questions
If I want to get it done in one go, is it okay to choose the highest level?
Yes, if you will actually use that part in the near future. The issue is not that high-level is wrong, but that unused parts will become wasted costs and documents that no one understands. Sinh Vũ advises choosing levels that truly match real needs, designing an open architecture to gradually enhance as milestones appear.
Is it more costly to start at a low level and then upgrade later?
It costs more if the initial architecture does not allow for expansion, as it must be redone from scratch. It does not cost more if Sinh Vũ designs the rules with an open structure from the beginning, so when it grows, you only add layers instead of breaking the foundation. This is why outlining and defining the scope is crucial before starting to draft the rules.