Influencers create reach and short-term conversions, but do not create independent brand memories. When the KOL budget stops, the recognition also stops because the brand has never owned any identifying asset in the customers' minds. The solution does not lie in choosing better KOLs but in building a robust identity system.
In this article · 5 sections
Sinh Vũ observes a repetitive loop in the domestic cosmetics industry: a brand launches, pours budget into KOLs, sales spike for a few weeks, then silence. Pour in more budget, and sales return. Stop, and silence returns. Eventually, the budget is no longer sufficient to maintain that rhythm. The brand disappears, not because of poor products but because it never built anything in the customers' minds.
The mechanism of a single purchase
When a KOL reviews a product, what happens in the viewer's mind isn't “I need to remember this brand”. It's “she seems trustworthy, this bottle looks decent, let me give it a try”. The purchase decision is anchored in the reviewer's credibility, not in the brand. Customers remember “the serum she recommended”, not the brand name on the box.
Byron Sharp refers to this as the issue of Mental Availability: the ability of a brand to come to mind at the moment a customer is ready to buy. Mental Availability cannot be built by others on behalf of the brand. It is built by consistently repeating unique identifying signals long enough to leave a trace in memory. KOLs create reach. Consistent repetition creates memory.
Why do local brands easily fall into traps
The barriers to entry in the Vietnamese cosmetics industry are almost nonexistent. A contract manufacturer, a bottle sourced from a Chinese supplier, a cheap outsourced design file: products can be launched within weeks. As a result, the market is flooded with similar-looking serums and creams, lacking any strong identifying signals to differentiate them. In this context, KOLs become the quickest path to instant differentiation because their personal credibility overshadows the similarities of the products.
But this is the trap. Brands are borrowing credibility instead of building it. Every dollar spent on KOLs makes their faces more memorable, not the brand itself. When the budget runs out, that face moves on to another brand. The brand is left empty-handed.
Influencer marketing is not wrong, the usage is what’s wrong
Sinh Vũ does not see KOLs as the enemy of the brand. The issue lies in the order: most local brands use KOLs before establishing a foundation of identity, rather than after. When a brand does not own any unique identifying assets, such as distinctive colors, consistent language, or an uncopyable story, KOLs are merely temporary sales pumps. Once the brand has that foundation, KOLs can become a true amplification channel.
Cocoon is a case worth studying. They built a story around the regional origins of their ingredients, achieving Leaping Bunny and PETA certifications before widely engaging KOLs. When KOLs talk about Cocoon, they amplify things that already exist and can be verified. Customers buy not just because of the face on the video but because the story behind that product has its own weight.
Distinctive assets only create Mental Availability when consistently repeated long enough to form traces in memory.
Jenni Romaniuk, Building Distinctive Brand Assets (Ehrenberg-Bass Institute)
Identity assets belong to you
Jenni Romaniuk defines Distinctive Brand Assets through two dimensions: Fame (level of popularity) and Uniqueness (level of distinctiveness). A true identifying asset must achieve both. The orange color of Hermès is an asset. The unnamed pastel blue on your cream box is not, as it is neither unique nor popular enough to anchor in anyone's memory.
Identity assets can be a color, a packaging shape, a brand language, a signature scent, or an origin story that can't be copied. What they share: they belong to the brand, not to whoever happens to be holding a phone reviewing it right now. When you invest in building these assets and repeat them consistently across every touchpoint, including packaging, web, social channels and customer care language, the brand starts to accumulate memory in customers' minds without anyone doing it for you.
The way out: build first, amplify later
For a local cosmetics brand stuck in a KOL-dependent loop, the practical question isn't “should we stop using KOLs?”. The question is: “If every KOL channel stopped today, what would the brand still hold in customers' minds?”
If the answer is “not much”, that is a clear sign your budget is flowing into a bucket with a hole in the bottom. Every KOL campaign brings purchases but leaves nothing that compounds. The way out is to stop putting the entire marketing budget into amplification channels and set aside a portion for building identity assets that accumulate over time. You don't need to stop working with KOLs. You need to invest in parallel in things that will still be there after the last KOL's contract ends.
- Identify one or two distinctive identity assets and commit to consistent repetition.
- Build a brand origin story or perspective that cannot be replicated by competitors.
- Ensure packaging, language, and brand behavior are consistent across all touchpoints, not just in KOL clips.
- Measure not only the campaign sales but also the brand's natural recognition over time.
References
Byron Sharp, How Brands Grow (Ehrenberg-Bass Institute). Jenni Romaniuk, Building Distinctive Brand Assets. McKinsey & Company, The Business Value of Design, 2018. Kantar BrandZ ~2020. Data on the Vietnamese cosmetics industry: Import-Export Department, Ministry of Industry and Trade.