The four levels of branding.

Colours and a logo, brand devices, tertiary detail, then a concept that does strategic work. A ladder for working out where your brand sits today, and where it should sit next.

Jonny HarrisCo-founder, Unlimity
Cover1600 × 900
Four cards rising like steps. The first holds only colour swatches and a logo; each next card adds a layer: a bold graphic device, then a set of small icons and labels, and the last, selected, is built around one idea, a rising sun that reshapes everything beneath it.
Published
24 April 2026
Reading time
7 min
Topic
Brand
Chapters

    I trained as a graphic designer. I went to university, studied it, and practised it for a while before moving into product design. The reason I left graphic design was that I found it frustratingly subjective. Branding especially. You'd sit in front of a computer and freestyle your way to something that was meant to be a "quality brand," mostly by trusting your gut and hoping the client agreed. It never felt like a craft with rules. It felt like vibes.

    Product design was the opposite. Logical, testable, problem-led. That suited how my brain works.

    The funny thing is, after years of running Unlimity and doing a lot of brand work alongside product, I've come around. Branding can be logically understood and logically executed, most of the way. The only part that stays stubbornly subjective is taste, and taste is the multiplier, not the method.

    What I've landed on is that there are four levels of branding complexity. Each one builds on the one below it, and most designers and most brands sit at a particular level whether they realise it or not.

    Level 1: Colours, font and logo

    This is the base layer. You pick a palette, a typeface, a mark, and that's the brand.

    It's the most common approach because it's the cheapest and fastest. It's also the reason so much early-stage B2B stuff looks identical. Everyone is pulling from the same Figma community files, riffing on the same trend (geometric sans, pastel gradient, friendly blob, repeat), and the output reads as interchangeable.

    That's not always a bad call. A pre-seed company with a £500 branding budget needs something functional to put on a pitch deck, not a brand system. Level 1 done with restraint can be perfectly fine for a few months. But it's not ownable, it's not memorable, and it won't survive the company growing into something more serious.

    Level 2: Brand device-led branding

    The next step up is introducing brand devices. You've got your colours, font and logo, and now you layer in something more distinctive. A supergraphic, a holding shape, a signature pattern, a motion style, a way you crop and treat photography. Something that shows up consistently enough to become recognisable in its own right.

    This is where a lot of good design studios live, and it's where I used to think the ceiling was when I was more junior. Device-led thinking feels like a huge upgrade from level 1 because it gives the brand something ownable.

    Done well, level 2 brands feel like systems rather than logos. Done poorly, they feel like a logo with a gimmick attached.

    Pull quote

    Taste is the multiplier, not the method.

    Jonny Harris

    Level 3: Tertiary detail-led branding

    Above that, there's a level I don't think has a popular name. I like to call it tertiary detail-led branding.

    You've got your colours, font, logo and brand devices, but now you've also crafted a layer of small, considered details underneath them. Custom icon sets. Trim copy and micro-labels that sit alongside visuals. Specific illustration treatments. The kind of finish that separates a Stripe or Linear brand from a seed-stage SaaS brand even when the core elements look superficially similar.

    It's hard to describe in the abstract because the whole point is that the detail is specific. But you feel it immediately when you see it. Tertiary detail is what signals maturity. It tells you someone cared, someone had time, someone made decisions at a level most brands never bother with.

    A lot of designers skip this level because it's labour-intensive and it's the first thing to get cut when the timeline tightens. But it's often what separates good from genuinely premium.

    Level 4: Brand concept-led branding

    The highest level is concept-led branding. This is where the whole thing inverts.

    At levels 1 through 3, you're working outward from a logo. You pick a mark and then wrap a system around it. At level 4, you start with an idea about the business, and everything else (logo included) flows from that idea.

    The example I keep thinking about is a piece of work we did for a company called Outsetter. They're an M&A advisory business, helping founders navigate mergers and acquisitions. We built the whole brand around the concept of a lighthouse. A lighthouse is a signpost. It's the steady thing you navigate by. That captured what Outsetter actually does for their clients, so we worked backwards from there. The logo became a lighthouse. The visual language was watercolour, nautical, weather-worn. Every asset pulled from the same metaphor.

    What made it easy to execute, paradoxically, is that the concept was doing the thinking. We weren't reaching for decorative ideas. We were asking, what would a lighthouse-themed version of this page, this deck, this icon look like? The concept gave us the answer every time.

    That's the difference. Concept-led branding isn't a mood board. It's a central metaphor that does strategic work. And when it lands, the brand has a reason to exist in a specific form rather than just looking nice.

    A few caveats worth making explicit

    When I first sketched this out, I was framing it as a strict ladder of quality. The higher the level, the better the brand. I don't think that's quite right, and it's worth being honest about why.

    Taste operates at every level. A level 1 brand with exquisite taste (think Apple in its Rams-influenced era) beats a level 4 brand with a weak concept every time. The ladder describes logical sophistication, not final quality. Taste is what separates good from bad inside any given level.

    Some brilliant brands live at level 2 deliberately. Mailchimp, is a great example. They're device-led or element-led, and they're excellent because the restraint and craft are world-class. "Concept-led" isn't automatically better. It's a higher-ceiling approach that also comes with a higher floor of difficulty.

    And level 4 requires something most briefs don't furnish, which is strategic clarity about what the business actually means. You can't find a central metaphor for a business that hasn't figured out its own positioning. That's why most concept-led work happens later in a company's life, when the strategy is mature enough to be captured in an idea.

    Where this meets the real world

    At Unlimity, most of our clients are pre-seed to Series B B2B startups. So the question I've been sitting with is: where on this ladder should any given client actually be?

    Pre-seed, level 1 is often the right answer. Budgets are tight, the product is changing weekly, and the brand's job is to not embarrass the company at pitch meetings. Something clean and functional is a better use of money than an elaborate system that'll need rebuilding in a year.

    Seed and beyond, you'd usually want to move into level 2, and eventually level 3 as the company matures. Level 4 is the interesting one, because it's where strategy becomes the bottleneck. A company can't commission concept-led branding if they don't yet know what concept describes them. That's why you often see companies leap to level 4 around Series A or Series B, when the positioning has been stress-tested and the founders can articulate the metaphor themselves.

    What AI changes

    One thing I think about a lot: AI is quietly lowering the floor on level 4.

    Concept-led branding used to require either illustration chops or a budget for a specialist illustrator. If your concept was a lighthouse, you needed someone who could paint lighthouses. That ruled out a lot of designers, including me, from executing at level 4 visually without hiring help.

    That gate is largely gone. I can now generate a cohesive suite of watercolour lighthouse imagery in a few afternoons. The taste still matters, the concept still has to be the right concept, and the execution still has to hold together. But the barrier to reaching level 4 as a small studio has dropped significantly.

    Which means the bottleneck is shifting from execution to ideas. Having a good concept is now worth more, relatively, than being able to draw one. That's a real shift in where value sits in the craft, and I suspect it's why you're starting to see more small teams and solo designers produce level 4 work that would have been out of reach five years ago.

    Why this matters for founders

    If you're a founder looking at your own brand and trying to work out whether it's doing enough work for you, this ladder is a useful diagnostic.

    If your brand is just a logo, a palette and a typeface, and you're past Seed, you're probably underinvested. If you've got devices but nothing underneath them, you might be one round of craft away from looking genuinely premium. And if you've got a strong business and a clear story but your brand doesn't reflect any of it, you might be ready for concept-led work even if nobody's offered it to you.

    The goal isn't to be at level 4. The goal is to be at the level that matches where your company actually is. Most of the time, the honest answer is one step higher than where the brand currently sits.

    The work behindthis post.

    Starting with Outsetter, the project this post draws on, written up in full.

    01 / 01See all work →

    Keep reading.

    All posts →

    Early stage, scaling or established?

    Let's talk.

    Most of our work is with fast-moving startups, but we work with teams of every size. Tell us what you're building and we'll tell you honestly how we'd help.