How to Choose Between Two Brand Identities
At Advery, we recently completed a branding project for TexMode, a Tunisian textile brand operating since 2012. We developed two complete visual identities two different directions, two different stories, two different bets on who TexMode could become. The client chose one. We have opinions about that.
But first of all,
What is a brand identity?
According to the Branding Journal, a brand identity is the unique blend of tangible and intangible traits such as history, name, personality, values, and visual appearance that shape how a brand is perceived.
When it comes to creating a brand identity, a brainstorming session is made with the team to discuss the client’s vision, audience, and meaning behind the brand in order to look for the right inspirations, and deliver the directions that the graphic designer found suitable to the brief.
As a branding agency in Tunisia, we realise that textile brand identity design ain’t the same as for a digital only brand.
Textiles demand a deeper sensory engagement. The logos need to be felt and to leave a lasting impression on the audience.
Why did we present two directions in the first place?
Many agencies use the one-concept method. They present a single, fully developed identity and defend it. The logic is clean: one direction signals confidence, reduces decision fatigue, and keeps the project moving.
We respect that approach. But for TexMode, it wasn’t the right one.
TexMode sat at a real crossroads. A brand in the textile industry since 2012, they had built genuine expertise and market presence, but their visual identity didn’t reflect either. When a brand has been operating for over a decade without a defining visual language, the question isn’t just “what should the logo look like.” It’s “who do we actually want to be, and who are we speaking to from now on?”
That’s a strategic fork in the road. And when the fork is real, presenting one path isn’t honest, it’s convenient.
So we built both.
Direction A: The Cotton Standard
The first identity was built on restraint. A charcoal and grey palette. A geometric mark constructed from the letter T, stripped down to its structural logic the way cotton is stripped to its fiber before it becomes fabric. No ornament. No warmth. Just precision.
The thinking: textile manufacturing is increasingly technical and competitive. A brand that looks clean, modern, and structurally confident signals that it belongs in boardrooms and B2B procurement conversations, not just on factory floors. The grey palette was intentional it’s the color of raw material, of neutrality before production begins.
The identity reads as serious without being cold. Minimal without being generic. It’s a brand that says: we know exactly what we do, and we don’t need decoration to prove it.
Direction B: The Heritage Claim
The second identity went the other way. Deep brown. Gold accents. The same geometric T mark, but this time rendered with texture and weight as if embossed into leather, stitched into a label. The taglines we proposed: Du tissu à la création. Chaque couture a son histoire.
The thinking: textile is also craft. It’s human. It’s generational. A brand that leans into its twelve years of history and positions itself as a custodian of quality has a completely different kind of authority one that resonates with premium clients, design partnerships, and markets where provenance matters.
This was the warmer direction. The one with a story already visible in the color palette, before a single word was read.
What the client chose, and why
TexMode chose Direction A.
The reason was specific and legitimate: they wanted their identity to communicate the texture of cotton; neutral, clean, honest. They operate primarily in a B2B context where their buyers are procurement professionals and manufacturing partners, not end consumers. A warm, heritage-inflected identity risks reading as artisanal in a context where technical credibility is the actual currency.
That is a sound strategic argument. And it’s exactly the kind of reasoning that should drive a brand identity decision, not personal taste, not what looks good on a mood board, but what the identity will actually do in the rooms where it needs to work.
The question we're still sitting with
Direction B never went into production. But it’s still in our files, and we still think about it.
Not because the client was wrong. But because Direction B had something that’s genuinely rare in branding: a point of view that could have owned a position almost no Tunisian textile brand currently holds. The heritage and craft narrative in textile manufacturing is almost entirely unclaimed in this market. The warm, artisanal aesthetic that Direction B embodied would have been a differentiator not just visually, but strategically.
Honestly? It was our favorite. That’s a creative opinion, not a complaint.
And here’s what that tension actually taught us about choosing between two brand identities.
How to choose between two brand identities: A framework for making the decision
When both directions are strong, the decision can’t be made on aesthetics. Here’s how to actually think through it:
1. Who is the first person that needs to trust this brand?
Not your end customer but your most immediate audience. For TexMode, that was procurement managers and B2B partners. For a direct to consumer fashion label, it would be entirely different. The identity that works for a trade show booth is not always the identity that works for a retail shelf.
2. Where will this identity live most of the time?
A brand identity that looks stunning on packaging may feel wrong on a PowerPoint deck sent to a corporate buyer. A minimal, clean identity built for digital-first use may lose impact in a physical retail environment. Map the primary touchpoints before choosing.
3. Which direction protects more strategic options?
Heritage positioning, once established, is hard to move away from without a full rebrand. Minimalist positioning is more flexible, it can be warmed up with photography and copywriting without touching the identity system itself. If you’re not sure where the brand will go in five years, lean toward the direction that gives you more room.
4. Which direction matches what the market is not doing?
This is the question most clients skip. They compare the two directions against each other. The more useful comparison is against the competitive landscape. In TexMode’s market, the minimal and clean direction is differentiated. In another category, it might be exactly what everyone else is doing.
5. Which one do your customers recognize, and which one do you need them to grow into?
Sometimes the identity a brand chooses is aspirational, it represents who they want to become, not who they are today. That’s valid. But the gap between current reality and identity aspiration needs to be managed, or the identity will feel like a costume.
The takeaway
Choosing between two brand identities is not a design decision. It’s a business decision that happens to live in a design format. The direction that feels bolder, warmer, or more beautiful is not necessarily the right one. The right one is the one that does a specific job in a specific context, for a specific audience, at a specific moment in the brand’s history.
TexMode’s chosen identity does that job well. We believe the other one could have done a different job just as well — in different hands, for a different strategic moment.
That’s what makes brand identity genuinely hard. And genuinely worth doing right.
Advery is a creative and digital marketing agency based in Sousse, Tunisia, working with brands across Tunisia, the Gulf, and Europe. If your brand is facing a similar crossroads, we’d like to hear about it.
FAQ
It depends on the brief. When a brand's positioning is already clear, one strong concept is enough. When the brand is navigating a real strategic question about who it is and who it speaks to, two directions even more is the more honest approach. What matters is that every concept presented is fully built and justified, not a filler option designed to make the real recommendation look better.
Say it early, and be specific. Vague feedback like "it doesn't feel right" is hard to act on. Specific feedback like "this palette reads too cold for our audience" gives the creative team something to work with. The most expensive moment to change a brand identity is after production has started.
Yes, if the intellectual property agreement allows it. A rejected concept isn't rejected because it failed, it's rejected because the other direction was a better fit at that moment. Circumstances change, and a concept set aside during the original project can become the foundation for a future rebrand rather than a from-scratch exercise.
When it does something measurable. The clearest signal is recognition, whether your audience identifies the brand across touchpoints without reading the name. Beyond that, look for increased inbound inquiries, stronger consistency in team-produced content, and positive feedback from clients and partners. A brand identity cannot be measured by internal preference alone.
