A Case For Love: Brand Strategy in Mergers and Acquisitions

Mergers and acquisitions (M&A) are often framed as financial transactions driven by valuation models, market share, and operational synergies. Yet beneath the tangible aspects lies a more fragile asset: the brand. When two companies combine, they are not just consolidating products or portfolios. They are bringing together identities, cultures, promises, and loyalties. It involves a particular kind of love, and without a clear brand strategy, even the most rational deal can break the hearts of employees and customers. 

Once the business goals of an M&A deal are defined, the question of rebranding inevitably arises. As we saw in Mergers and Acquisitions: The Strategic Relevance of Rebranding article, how a brand evolves after an M&A operation is not a stylistic decision, but a structural one, with implications for identity and perception, and a high impact on value creation. While each operation is unique, there are known approaches and recurring models to the rebranding process. Understanding these scenarios helps leadership teams evaluate options more clearly and choose a brand strategy aligned with their integration goals.

Common Rebranding Scenarios in Mergers and Acquisitions 

There is no one-size-fits-all approach to rebranding in M&A operations. The right brand strategy depends on the deal rationale, brand strength, and general context. However, most M&A rebranding strategies fall into a few broad models that respond to the majority of situations, even if each case requires specific analysis and adjustments to the particular context and conditions.

Each brand strategy approach may be more conservative or more aggressive and will carry different risks in such aspects as brand equity (preservation/degradation), communication effectiveness (clear/confusing), customer retention (maintain/lose), and operation complexity (high/low).

Let’s explore each brand strategy option in more detail.

House of Brands

The most conservative brand strategy in M&A operations is to make no change at all. On the outside, both acquiring and acquired brands keep existing as if the deal didn’t happen.

In this model, multiple brands can coexist under one single umbrella brand that is many times only visible to investors or partners. This is called a house of brands, in which each brand has total or relative autonomy. In this scenario, the rebranding process focuses less on overall brand identity alignment or even visual change, as each brand continues to be expressed separately and remains clearly differentiated in the marketplace.

This strategy makes sense when the brands in the portfolio operate in distinct markets or segments. In this situation, there is minimal overlap in customer experience as they all unfold under different identities, cultures and universes. 

There are challenges to this solution as, despite being convenient for organisations that value decentralisation, it doesn’t always favour synergy between brands and, consequently, it’s easy to miss business opportunities. Holding and managing a house of brands requires robust operational capacity and a clear governance model to handle the inherent complexity of a structured brand portfolio.

Please note that a house of brands and a branded house should not be confused, because they are different types of brand architectures. While the first is composed of visually independent brand identities that exist in separate spheres and cater to different audiences, the second is a model where the parent brand offers the baseline from which all of its sub-brands’ identities stem. Additionally, a house of brands is composed of brands acquired through M&A operations, while a branded house, such as FedEx, reflects a company’s business expansion into various commercial segments.

Brand Fusion and The Stronger Horse

There are several approaches to the brand fusion strategy, and whether the acquiring company adopts a combination of brand namings, visual elements or if it totally absorbs the acquired brand is, once again, a matter of M&A context and particular conditions.

The Stronger Horse

In a stronger horse scenario, the stronger brand absorbs the other. This is the easiest, simplest and quickest solution that makes sense when the acquiring brand is significantly stronger, or if the acquired brand has limited equity or negative associations. The acquired brand disappears, and all operations migrate under the stronger horse.

However, operational details, market conditions and the specific context of the M&A operation may require a phased approach which starts with a hybrid fusion. Here, the company opts for a combination of namings and/or visual elements that immediately translate to a visual refresh and messaging adjustment. This transitional solution aims to gradually and seamlessly signal the M&A to consumers, partners and potential investors. It is a frequent solution when the acquired brand has strong market implementation, and the acquiring brand wants to progressively build association and gain time to consolidate post-deal brand and business performance. After accessing the transitional solution results, the company can decide to maintain it or go for a full rebranding.

Following the UBS and Credit Suisse merge in 2023, UBS decided to eliminate the Credit Suisse brand, in this case due to the hindered reputation of the acquired brand. Nevertheless, because Credit Suisse was a legacy brand over 100 years old, UBS adopted a transitional communication strategy to preserve emotional ties and minimise disruption. By adding an informative signature to the acquired brand, like a temporary endorsement, UBS gained time to progressively replace and ultimately extinguish the acquired brand.

Endorsed Brands 

A third brand fusion scenario is when the acquired brand continues to exist but is endorsed by the acquiring brand. The rebranding approach will focus on aligning the acquired brand with the acquiring one, both visually and in messaging, in order to communicate one cohesive family of identities. Rebranding here may just mean adding a stamp signature to the acquired brand to signal change, while maintaining the key identity elements that ensure brand recognition. The endorsed brand scenario offers a way to balance integration and avoid abrupt change for consumers, partners and potential investors.

Despite many variations, the most relevant risks in brand fusion include the loss of customer trust and disengagement caused by identity loss. In all brand fusion scenarios, it is therefore recommended to conduct a thorough evaluation of brand strengths, examining both commercial performance and emotional ties, and ensuring the implementation of careful communication and timely transition strategies to mitigate potential cultural shock.

Creating a New Brand 

In this scenario, the brand strategy is to create an entirely new brand to perfectly reflect the change brought by the M&A operation. This solution happens in contexts involving brands of similar or equal power and is particularly common when there is a firm decision to signal a true new beginning.

The cost and complexity of this solution require strong leadership alignment, detailed pre-implementation work and disciplined execution. Developing new branding is committing to a comprehensive process that demands extensive research and insightful planning, so that the outcome is aligned and effective. If not carefully managed, a total rebrand poses the risk of losing existing brand equity and/or market share.

However, on the other hand, launching a new brand is also a reset that opens the opportunity to redefine purpose, values and positioning. The new brand has the potential to reach the external audience with renewed messaging and unify internal teams around a shared identity, reinforcing the company’s resilience and robustness and making it more interesting for potential investment.

Great Visuals Are a Result of Refined Brand Strategy Decisions

A common pitfall in M&A is reducing rebranding to logos, colours and websites. Of course, visuals are fundamental, but they represent the surface layer of an in-depth process that must consider risks and impacts in other key dimensions, such as equity, operation, and communication.

Brand strategy in M&A should go to the root problem and address the brand identity(ies) from the bottom up and inside out. Purpose and positioning. Value proposition. Tone of voice and messaging. Customer experience. Employer branding. Brand equity. Brand governance. Ultimately, brand strategy comes before design, because strong brands are assembled long before they are designed.

Evaluating the brand strategy to be applied in the context of an M&A is a decision-making moment that requires multidimensional knowledge about the organisation, hence the importance of involving managing boards and internal teams in the process. That’s why at KOBU Agency we make sure to work closely with the stakeholders, as only they can accurately inform the process and ensure that our decade-long experience in brand strategy is properly leveraged for an aligned outcome.

Rebranding in Mergers and Acquisitions: a crossroads guided by strategy

We believe that, in an M&A context, brand assessment and strategic brand consulting provide essential input for management decision-making, offering an objective understanding of brand equity, audience perception, and market relevance. A diagnostic phase enables leadership to evaluate risks and opportunities beyond financial aspects and to determine the most appropriate brand strategy model, whether absorption, endorsement or other path. Without a strategic foundation, rebranding choices become arbitrary, increasing the likelihood of eroding value rather than consolidating or increasing it.

M&A is ultimately about transformation. And transformation is as much about meaning as it is about structure. Brand strategy in this context sits at the intersection of equity preservation, customer retention and operational complexity. It holds the potential to turn a transaction into a story people can understand, believe in and commit to. For leadership teams, the question should not be “Do we need a rebrand after this deal?” but rather “What role should brand strategy play in making this deal succeed?”

Each rebranding scenario reflects a different answer to the same fundamental question: how should identity evolve after change? When rebranding is approached as a multidimensional process rather than just a visual update, it becomes a powerful integration tool. Guided by serious brand assessment and strategic consulting, it provides the architecture that aligns stakeholders, protects equity, and nurtures people’s love for the brand. It may sound poetic, but in M&A operations, cherishing that love must be a key goal in any brand strategy aiming for long-term value preservation.