How to test brand positioning before investing in identity design
Test brand positioning by asking relevant customers to explain the offer and compare it with how they already shop. Look for confusion, unsupported assumptions and reasons to choose an alternative. Those findings give an identity designer a more useful brief than a vote on which logo people like.
In this article
Overview
Test brand positioning by asking relevant customers to explain the offer and compare it with how they already shop. Look for confusion, unsupported assumptions and reasons to choose an alternative. Those findings give an identity designer a more useful brief than a vote on which logo people like.
Choose one question the research needs to answer
Be specific about the choice ahead. You might be comparing two product explanations, choosing which use to emphasize or learning why customers consider an unexpected alternative. Write that question down before recruiting anyone. Asking people to validate the brand invites broad opinions that can be difficult to act on.
Check three things: do people understand the offer, does it matter in a real buying situation, and can the product deliver what it promises? A clear message may describe something people do not need. An appealing benefit may lack support. Resolve those issues before asking design to communicate the idea.
The decision before the identity
Uncertainty
Name the assumption that could change the brief.
Evidence
Gather customer context and approved product facts.
Decision
Retain, revise or investigate the proposition.
What rhode, Rare Beauty and April Dunford help you examine
rhode’s founder note organizes its assortment around carefully selected everyday essentials. Rare Beauty’s mission centers individuality and self-acceptance. These are brand-owned statements of intent, not isolated explanations of their commercial success. Their value as references is that each offers something specific to examine beyond a list of product attributes.
April Dunford’s positioning primer starts with what customers would use instead, then connects the product’s differences to value and customer fit. Her examples are mainly technology and B2B. Here we adapt the question about alternatives to consumer research; we are not presenting a tested ecommerce version of her method.
For your brief, ask what someone would do without the proposed product: keep an existing routine, buy another item, use a different format or buy nothing. Then identify the reason your offer deserves consideration in that situation. A long competitor list built from search results is less useful than understanding the alternatives that prospective buyers actually describe.
Recruit around the buying situation and use neutral questions
Write participant criteria before recruitment. If the product is intended for US customers, include the relevant location, category behavior and ability to buy the actual offer. A Korean or European founder’s home-market fans may provide useful context, but they do not automatically represent the unfamiliar US shopper. Record which people already know or buy the brand.
Ask about a recent real decision before showing the concept. What did the person need, what did they consider, what did they buy and what nearly stopped them? Ask for the sequence and the reasons in their own words. Avoid announcing your favored benefit in the opening question; doing so can teach the participant the answer you later interpret as a discovery.
A small interview round can reveal confusion and help improve the next brief. To estimate market-wide preference or demand, you would need a suitable quantitative study and a qualified researcher. Match the method to the investment at stake, keep participation voluntary and collect only what the research needs.
- Define the actual buying situation and target market.
- Record prior brand familiarity separately.
- Ask about a real recent choice before presenting ideas.
- Use consistent, neutral prompts across participants.
- Document contrary evidence and uncertainty.
- State what the sample can and cannot support.
A worked example: compare two credible product propositions
Imagine a new brand selling a compact travel wash bag. This is an illustrative scenario. The product team can verify the dimensions, washable lining and internal compartments. One proposed message emphasizes keeping a small daily routine organized; another emphasizes packing for short trips. Both need to describe the same actual item, with the same price and contents, so the comparison is not accidentally between two different offers.
Prepare simple concept cards with comparable detail and presentation. Ask participants what the item is, when they would use it, what they expect to receive and what they would otherwise buy. Follow up on words that create an unsupported assumption. If people infer that the bag is leakproof, check whether the product can substantiate that property rather than quietly accepting it as persuasive copy.
Keep the different reactions visible. One person may understand the travel message but prefer their current bag. Another may like the daily-organization idea but need to see the size. Those responses suggest different next steps; combining them into a positive sentiment score would lose the useful detail.
| Proposed explanation | Question to investigate | Evidence needed |
|---|---|---|
| Organize a small everyday routine | Does this solve a situation the customer actually describes? | Recent behavior, alternatives and the role of compartments. |
| Pack for a short trip | Does the customer understand the size and intended contents? | A realistic packing demonstration and purchase context. |
| Implied leak protection | Did the wording create an unsupported product expectation? | Product-owner verification; revise the wording if unsupported. |
Ask people to explain the offer in their own words
Ask the person to describe the offer without repeating the headline back to them. Record the product category, intended use, important difference and unanswered questions they mention. Ask what feels unclear or implausible. A participant can politely like a concept while misunderstanding the product, so agreement alone is a weak reason to approve the brief.
When comparing alternatives, keep the presentation as comparable as practical and vary the order appropriately. Otherwise the first idea, a more attractive image or a longer explanation can influence the response. If visual identity is itself the subject of the research, state that explicitly and use a design appropriate to that question. Do not claim a clean positioning comparison when several variables changed at once.
Keep participants’ words separate from your interpretation. “The bag looks small” is an observation; “our target audience needs a larger bag” is a conclusion that needs more support. With permission, save short excerpts so the team can revisit what was actually said.
Use the same prompts and comparable presentation for each concept. Avoid “How much do you love this?” or “Would this make travel easier?” because they suggest the reaction you want. If a participant understands the offer but does not need it, record that separately from confusion. Better comprehension alone does not establish demand.
| What you need to learn | Question to ask | What to record |
|---|---|---|
| Category understanding | In your own words, what is this product? | The category and any assumptions the participant adds. |
| Use situation | When, if ever, would you use it? | A specific occasion, or the absence of one. |
| Alternatives | What would you use or buy instead? | Actual substitutes, including keeping what they already own. |
| Missing information | What would you need to know before deciding? | Unanswered questions about fit, size, price or proof. |
| Expected contents | What do you think you would receive? | Any mismatch between the concept and the real offer. |
Keep observation and interpretation separate
Observe
Record the customer’s explanation and questions.
Interpret
State what the response may imply and why.
Check
Identify the evidence needed before acting.
Decide what to retain, revise or investigate next
Write the decision rules before reviewing the findings together. A message should be revised if it repeatedly creates a material misunderstanding or promises something the product cannot support. A promising explanation may still require a better demonstration, clearer offer or another round with people in the intended buying situation. Approval should record those conditions rather than pretend uncertainty has disappeared.
When responses differ, examine the underlying situations instead of averaging them into a generic compromise. The product may have more than one relevant use, or the team may have recruited people with different needs. Determine which situation the first launch can serve well, while preserving the other observations for later investigation. A narrow first scope does not require claiming that nobody else could buy the product.
| Finding | Useful decision | What remains open |
|---|---|---|
| Offer understood and supported; relevance plausible | Carry the proposition into a limited execution test. | Actual behavior, scale and commercial economics. |
| Interest depends on a false assumption | Correct the proposition before design approval. | Whether the truthful offer still matters. |
| Responses depend on different use situations | Clarify the first launch context and research gaps. | How widely each situation occurs. |
Give the designer a brief grounded in what you learned
The final brief should identify the customer situation, the alternatives considered, the supported value, the product facts and the remaining uncertainties. Include examples of what the message needs to communicate on a package, a phone screen and a creator demonstration. Give the designer a clear problem to solve without prescribing every aesthetic decision.
Use the same brief for the website, photography and creator work. Each should communicate the explanation you chose, and everyone should know who can approve changes to product facts. Keep the research alongside the brief so future campaigns build on the learning.
- One clear proposition and the situations it serves.
- Evidence supporting the product promise.
- Actual alternatives and unresolved questions.
- Priority packaging, website and creator applications.
- Approval owners and a dated review point.
Prepare the positioning study
Prepare a concept-testing plan with customer criteria, neutral prompts, comparable materials, a response log and explicit decisions to retain, revise or investigate.
Use the downloadable planning sheet linked below to adapt the examples to your brand. Add the current product information, the person responsible for each task and the check that will show the work is complete. Keep unanswered questions visible for the project discussion.
About the sources
April Dunford’s March 2021 positioning primer draws mainly on technology and B2B experience. The consumer interviews and concept-testing approach in this guide are Dahna’s adaptation, rather than a validated reproduction of her method for ecommerce.
rhode’s founder note by Hailey Bieber was checked on October 12, 2026. It establishes the brand’s stated product philosophy, rather than proving that the philosophy caused sales or can reproduce celebrity-assisted awareness for another brand.
Rare Beauty’s mission and Selena Gomez’s founder statement were checked on October 12, 2026. They describe what the brand stands for. They do not independently establish its social impact or isolate the effect of the mission on sales.
Sources & further reading
Turn positioning into a practical brief
Dahna can help translate positioning research into product copy, creator briefs and the store experience. We’ll define the research and content work together, and agree where a specialist identity designer or researcher is needed.
Why consider Dahna for this work?
Dahna brings bilingual Korean and English strategy together with creator, content, and measurement work for brands growing in the US. You can review the people behind the recommendations and the kind of work we propose before starting a conversation.
Founder experience includes prior and contracted roles. Sample deliverables illustrate our approach; they are not client results or a performance promise.
We’ll agree on deliverables, responsibilities and approvals before work begins.
