When each unit works on a piece, no one sees the entire brand picture.
Using multiple agencies at the same time is not the problem; the lack of a single source of truth is the issue. A single original document containing all identity decisions is needed, along with a person on the business side responsible for updating and distributing that document to all parties. Without this mechanism, each agency will interpret things in their own way, and the identity will become chaotic over time.
Many Vietnamese businesses operate with four to five units simultaneously: one for design, one for advertising, one for communications, and one for building and maintaining the website. This division of labor is entirely reasonable from a professional standpoint. The issue is not the number of units but that none of them see the whole picture, and no one takes responsibility for keeping the pieces together.
Each agency receives a different version of the identity document at different times. The design team has the original logo file from last year. The advertising team reuses old banners and adjusts the colors accordingly. The communications team writes in a tone they feel is appropriate. The web team applies fonts according to the existing template. No one is wrong in how they understand their work. However, the overall result is that the brand is speaking in four different voices, using three different color palettes, and appearing with inconsistent logo proportions across channels.
This is not a competency issue. This is a structural issue: not identifying who holds the single source of truth (the original document that all parties rely on).
Most businesses already have guidelines in some form: a PDF file, a Google Drive folder, a Notion page. The problem is that document does not live. No one updates it when adjustments are made. No one redistributes it to the parties when changes occur. No one checks whether each unit is using the correct version.
Adobe notes that static guidelines often start to diverge within six months if there is no one proactively managing them. At the same time, 71% of brand assets (images, banners, content) require at least seven people to review before approval, creating delays that lead parties to handle things themselves instead of waiting for proper approval. Source: Adobe / Workfront.
When no one owns the overall picture, each person optimizes their part. And the sum of many good parts does not necessarily create a good brand.
Integration principles, McKinsey Business Value of Design 2018
Before assigning tasks to any unit, a clear set of original identity documents is needed so that any new agency can understand immediately without further questions. This document does not need to be lengthy. It needs to be accurate.
A functional original document set typically includes:
This document is not a final product. It is an operational tool. It needs to be placed in a location that all parties are aware of and can access, not just sent via email once.
The more important question than "where is the document" is "who owns that document in an operational sense." There are three roles that need to be clearly defined:
In many medium-sized enterprises, these three roles are handled by one person responsible for branding or marketing. This is completely acceptable, as long as the roles are clearly defined and not left vacant.
If the business does not yet have someone capable of taking on the role, the design agency that created the initial identity system should temporarily maintain the documents during the early implementation phase, with a clear handover roadmap.
Delivering documents is not just about sending a file once. There are practical steps to ensure the documents are used correctly:
There are signs that it is time not only to update the documents but also to sit down and reconsider the entire organization of responsibilities among the parties:
These signs are not just aesthetic issues. They are indicators of an identity system that is depleting rather than accumulating. Each time a customer encounters a different version of the brand, the impression they build becomes blurrier instead of clearer.
Wally Olins describes a brand as a combination of four vectors: product, space, communication, and behavior. When these four vectors are controlled by four different units without a coordinating hand, the result is not a combination of four strengths but four pulls in four directions.
The solution is not to use fewer agencies. The solution is to clearly identify who holds the single source of truth, place that document in the right location, and maintain it as part of the brand's operational process, not as a one-time task left aside.
Marty Neumeier, The Brand Gap (2003). Wally Olins, On Brand (2003). Marq / Demand Metric, Brand Consistency Report (2021). Adobe / Workfront, internal report on the brand asset approval process. McKinsey & Company, The Business Value of Design (2018).
Not wrong. Many large businesses operate with four to six units simultaneously and still maintain consistent identity. The condition is to have a clear original identity document and a person on the business side responsible for distributing and updating that document for all parties. Without these two elements, whether there are many or few agencies, the situation will be equally chaotic.
Static guidelines often become misaligned within six months if there is no one proactively managing them. Each new agency will interpret the documents according to their context, and no one informs each other when adjustments are made. The issue is not the content of the guidelines but that no one owns it in an operational sense: updating, distributing, and regularly checking.
The business side should own the original documents, as agencies can change with each project. However, the design agency that created the initial identity system should draft and maintain that document in the early stages until the business has someone capable of taking over. It is crucial to clearly define this role from the beginning of the project, not after chaos ensues.