What Is Brand Health?
Brand Health is a measure of how well a brand is performing in the minds of category buyers and how likely it is to be thought of, considered and chosen in buying situations.
Traditional Brand Health tracking often focuses on metrics such as awareness, consideration, preference and brand associations. These measures remain useful, particularly because they provide continuity and historical context. However, they do not always explain whether a brand is becoming easier to think of in the moments that matter.
A more complete view of Brand Health should include output measures that can be hardwired into business metrics, for example, Mental Market Share, the primary diagnostic of Mental Availability AND utilise tools that enable the valuation of Category Entry Points and a Brand’s set of Distinctive Assets.
Why Brand Health Matters
CFOs respond to clarity on what drives brand growth and how it will be measured.
It is therefore important that whatever you track, the results can be linked to business performance and measure the short-term and long-term objectives for the brand. In my experience, when all critical stakeholders can answer the questions below as a result of what is being tracked, you have an aligned business much more likely to achieve its objectives.
- Is the brand becoming easier to think of?
- Is the brand associated with more relevant buying situations?
- Is the brand gaining Mental Advantage versus competitors?
- Are improvements in brand metrics translating into business performance?
- Does the business understand what needs to change as a result?
Why Brand Health Tracking Needs To Evolve
We are all aware the concept of branding goes way back, but brand measurement and market research are a little more than 100 years old.
In the first three decades of the 20th century, advertising agencies and marketing departments developed the basic techniques to understand how and why consumers used brands.
The advent of commercial radio in the 1920s, and television in the 1940s, led a number of market research companies to be formed, one of the most notable being AC Nielsen in 1923.
The 1940s attracted increased interest in motivational research with Ernest Dichter recognised as one of the key proponents of this qualitative methodology to understand consumer behaviour.
The 1970s saw the introduction of tracking data and in 1976 Maurice Millward and Gordon Brown, Millward Brown, conducted their first continuous tracking study.
Thanks to the contributions of David Aaker and others, the 1990s saw a shift toward measuring brand equity, the intangible value that a brand adds to a product.
The 2010s-2020s saw a number of significant breakthroughs in our understanding of how purchase decisions are made and how brands grow, which has led to a more science orientated framework for marketing.
In 2011, Daniel Kahneman released his seminal book Thinking, Fast and Slow explaining the two systems that influence behaviour. Understanding the implicit level of decision-making and how, as marketers, we use this insight to develop brand strategies and measure effectiveness was a transformational development.
The year prior, Byron Sharp released How Brands Grow, which urged marketers to concentrate on making their brands easy to think of and easy to buy, by building Mental & Physical Availability, shifting the emphasis of brand tracking toward salience and away from metrics such as brand loyalty.
Now, in the present day, advancements in AI are having a significant influence on;
i) what data is being collected, for example the use of ‘synthetic consumers’ to provide faster and cheaper insight
ii) how the data is analysed, for example assessing the effectiveness of multiple pieces of creative work in real time.
The history of brand health tracking reflects the evolution of marketing itself, from the early days of awareness and recall to today’s focus on salience and behavioural science. As brand owners navigate the challenges of staying up to date they must prioritise metrics that are strategically relevant and scientifically grounded.
The Brand Health Challenge For Brand Managers Today
Many brand owners have been tracking metrics like awareness, consideration, and preference for decades.
These metrics provide continuity and historical context, but may not fully reflect the advancements in our understanding of how the brain works, what influences behaviour and how brands are recalled in buying situations. The opportunity lies in integrating newer concepts like mental availability into existing tracking so you don’t lose the ability to compare past performance.
This evolution will require an open-minded approach and partners who are willing to help you enhance your brand tracking by blending methodologies.
For example the ‘How Brands Grow’ theories offered by The Ehrenberg Bass Institute and the ‘Brand Equity Measurement’ offered by organisations such as IPSOS can be seen as complementary frameworks that enrich our understanding of brand performance and consumer behaviour. I don’t know if EBI and IPSOS agree, but I do know that this is a common dilemma faced by clients and one that I offer this pragmatic perspective;
How To Blend Brand Health Methodologies
Breadth vs. Depth In Brand Health Measurement
Mental Availability focuses on breadth: being present across a wide range of buying situations through distinctiveness and ‘mental pathways’, a term Jenni Romaniuk proposes as a way to think of Category Entry Points.
Ipsos measures the depth of brand associations: understanding emotional, functional, and rational benefits driving equity.
Aligning Brand Health Metrics
Mental Availability metrics like Mental Market Share and Category Entry Points correlate with Ipsos’ measures of brand relevance and salience.
Both approaches recognise the importance of memory and emotional resonance, albeit with slightly different lenses, i.e. memory structures vs. consumer perceptions.
Integrating Brand Health, Mental Availability And Brand Equity
Recognising that ‘someone can’t give consideration to something they haven’t yet thought of’, combining these approaches can create a holistic strategy:
You could use SmilingCFO to quantify and grow Mental Availability by ensuring the brand is thought of in more buying situations.
And you could use Ipsos’ framework to enhance equity by deepening associations with those attributes that act as tie-breakers in the ‘Consideration’ phase of decision-making.
Key Considerations When Blending Brand Health Trackers
i) Data Integration: Ensure seamless merging of datasets to avoid silos.
ii) Stakeholder Alignment: Clearly communicate the value of blended metrics to the C-Suite, showing how they enhance decision-making.
iii) Test and Learn: Pilot the blended tracker with one brand or market before scaling.
The Intersection Of Brand Health Tracking And Brand Strategy
The integration of brand strategy and brand health tracking creates a powerful system for brand building.
A recent example is McCain, winner of the 2024 IPA Effectiveness Grand Prix for its case, “when the chips are down, margins matter.”
The case demonstrates how a mature FMCG brand can use long-term emotional brand building to strengthen both brand health and commercial performance.
We set out 10 years ago to build a bonfire that was going to burn brightly for 10 years plus. We weren’t interested in firework displays. – Mark Hodge, VP Marketing, McCain Foods
Over this period, McCain rebuilt the brand around the joyful reality of family teatime, rather than treating frozen chips as a commoditised product. The results show why brand health tracking should be connected to strategy, not treated as a reporting exercise. The campaign delivered a 56% increase in sales value, improved consideration across all buyers by 37%, reduced price elasticity by 47%, and delivered a profit ROI of £1.48 for every £1 invested.
This is the point at which brand health tracking becomes strategically useful. The role of tracking is not simply to show whether awareness, consideration or preference has moved. It is to help explain whether the strategy is strengthening the brand in ways that make it easier to think of, easier to choose and more resilient in commercially challenging conditions.
For McCain, brand strategy, brand health and commercial performance were not separate workstreams. The brand idea shaped the communications, the tracking showed whether the brand was becoming stronger, and the commercial analysis demonstrated whether that strength was translating into greater pricing power, sales value and profit.
Aligning Brand Health Metrics With Strategic Objectives
A key way to integrate tracking and strategy is by ensuring that metrics align with strategic goals.
A brand seeking to expand market share should prioritise metrics like Mental Market Share, which can be influenced by diagnostic metrics such as Mental Penetration and Network Size.
This alignment ensures that the marketing metrics being measured correlate with the business KPIs, resulting in greater engagement and clarity for employees and stakeholders inside and outside the organisation.
For example, there is a clear correlation between Mental Market Share, MMS, and actual Market Share, so by tracking MMS and making the results visible to the business, everyone can share in the success, or if improvements are required, better understand the reasons for the mitigating actions.
What Brand Health Metrics Should You Track?
What you measure should also be reflective of the maturity of your brand.
If you are a new brand you should be most concerned with whether buyers of the category can associate your brand with that category. Prompted Awareness is the best measurement for this.
As you set about establishing your brand in the category, you will want to increase the number of buyers who associate your brand with at least one category entry point. Mental Penetration is the metric you should track. The SmilingCFO Database shows those able to make a link are significantly more likely to purchase the brand than those who cannot.
As your brand matures it will be increasingly important to widen the number of CEPs the brand is associated with in order to have the best possible chance of being thought of in multiple buying situations. Tracking Network Size will help you monitor progress.
Using Brand Health Tracking For Data-Informed Decision Making
Brand tracking ensures that strategic decisions are grounded in consumer insights and market realities.
i) Market Entry Strategies: When launching in a new category or region, tracking tools can assess baseline awareness and identify opportunities for ‘relative differentiation’.
ii) Competitive Positioning: Tracking metrics like Mental Availability and Mental Advantage, the extent to which a brand’s association with a CEP is greater than expected, reveals how the brand performs relative to competitors, enabling strategic adjustments to increase the probability of the brand being thought of in buying situations.
Common Brand Health Tracking Pitfalls To Avoid
Tracking brand health is a vital part of brand strategy, but there are some common pitfalls to avoid:
Overcomplicating The Brand Health Tracking System
Using too many metrics or overly complex frameworks can overwhelm stakeholders and dilute focus. In her book Better Brand Health, Jenni Romaniuk suggests circa 60% of a tracker should be dedicated to Category Entry Points, 30% ‘Other Attributes’ and 10% Attitude Statements. Even though it could be considered a commercial measurement within the business, I would always recommend adding a Pricing metric to your brand tracking.
Lack Of Actionable Brand Health Insights
We have all sat through Brand Health Reports that are overly complex and fail to drive action, meaning tracking becomes a box-ticking exercise rather than a tool for growth. Use dashboards and storytelling techniques to communicate the “why” behind the data.
Focusing On Short-Term Gains Over Long-Term Brand Health
Prioritising metrics that track immediate sales uplifts while ignoring those that measure brand strength over time is a mistake. Balance short-term metrics, e.g. conversion rates, with long-term metrics, e.g. mental availability.
Lack Of Stakeholder Engagement
Metrics are not communicated effectively to key stakeholders, leading to disinterest or scepticism. Tailor insights to stakeholder priorities, emphasising financial and strategic implications.
Why Brand Health Training Matters
Having reached the point where you are comfortable you have the right brand health tracker in place, invest the time to ensure that your teams and your stakeholders understand it.
In my experience many brand teams have a superficial understanding of what is being measured, not through lack of engagement or capability, but because they have not been trained. They need to be immersed in both the strategies and the metrics that drive brand growth as well as being provided the frameworks that enable them to interpret the data and build the necessary action plan.
For the wider stakeholder group such as the CFO the level of understanding need not be as deep, but time should be spent showing how the brand metrics being tracked correlate with business KPIs.
Conclusion: Navigating The Future Of Brand Health Tracking
As brand health tracking continues to evolve, it’s clear that no single metric or methodology holds all the answers. The history of brand measurement reminds us of the importance of adapting to advancements in neuroscience, technology and evidence based marketing frameworks.
Integrating concepts like Mental Availability into existing brand tracking frameworks and taking the opportunity to question some of what is currently being measured will move you forward. Now is not the time to be precious about what has gone before.
Marketers have a strategically critical role in any organisation and need to continue to demonstrate that what is measured drives both brand performance and business performance. Ensure that your team and wider stakeholders understand what is being measured and why.
Invite your CFO into your world. Encourage them to attend your leadership meetings, involve them in strategy development and provide detailed briefings on key performance metrics such as brand health tracking, resisting the temptation to ‘spin’ the results.
In an era where consumers move seamlessly between digital and physical spaces, the ability to measure what matters most and then adapt strategies quickly will be a defining advantage. Don’t let history hold you back; let it guide you forward.
FAQ
What is the difference between Brand Health and Brand Equity?
Brand Health is usually the ongoing measurement of how a brand is performing over time. Brand Equity is the value a brand adds to a product or service. The two are connected, but Brand Health tracking should provide the diagnostic evidence that helps explain whether Brand Equity is being strengthened.
Why is Mental Availability important for Brand Health?
Mental Availability is important because brands grow when they are easy to think of in buying situations. A Brand Health tracker that measures Mental Availability can show whether the brand is linked to the Category Entry Points that influence category buying behaviour.
How often should Brand Health be tracked?
The right frequency depends on the category, media investment, purchase cycle and business need. Many established brands use quarterly or biannual tracking, while faster-moving categories or active campaigns may require more frequent diagnostic measurement.
Further Reading / Viewing
- Better Brand Health – Jenni Romaniuk
- Decoded – Phil Barden.
- Thinking, Fast and Slow – Daniel Kahneman. (Google seminar)
Martin Coyle is a Partner at SmilingCFO
At SmilingCFO, we help brand owners modernise Brand Health tracking by integrating Mental Availability, Category Entry Points and commercially relevant diagnostic metrics into existing tracking frameworks
