In this piece, Alicia Coghlan argues that brand and performance marketing are complementary, not competing forces. When aligned through clear positioning, shared incentives and meaningful measurement, they drive more efficient growth, build leadership confidence, reduce risk and deliver stronger long-term commercial results.
Brand and Performance Aren’t Separate. They Never Were
In one of my first marketing roles, brand and performance sat in completely separate teams. I was on the performance side and, if I’m honest, I saw brand as a luxury. They didn’t feel the same heat in sales meetings or against revenue targets, their KPIs felt vague, and while we were under pressure to pivot plans and hit numbers, they were busy “doing nice things”.
At the time, that split felt logical. Performance drove results. Brand supported it, loosely.
I wish I could go back and tell that version of myself what I know now.
Brand and performance aren’t separate disciplines competing for budget or attention. They are two critical inputs into the same outcome. When they work together using customer insight, growth becomes easier, more efficient and more resilient. When they don’t, everyone ends up working harder for less impact.
The real challenge is confidence at the top
As I moved into more senior roles, that early assumption was challenged very quickly.
I’ve rarely worked with leadership teams that didn’t value brand. What I’ve seen more often is uncertainty about how to stand behind it when growth slows, costs rise, or scrutiny increases.
Under pressure, performance marketing feels safer. You have dashboards, benchmarks and levers that can be pulled quickly. Brand, by contrast, is often expected to justify itself using tools never designed to measure its full impact or tell the full story.
This is where the brand versus performance divide really comes from. Not disagreement, but discomfort.
Brand clarity reduces risk, not just builds equity
Working across multi-market, experience-led brands, one pattern has been consistent: the clearer the brand, the more efficient performance becomes.
I saw this most clearly during a major brand repositioning for a cruise line, where we aligned brand strategy tightly with performance execution rather than treating them as parallel tracks. As brand clarity improved, performance metrics followed earlier in the funnel, consideration increased, digital journeys converted more efficiently, and acquisition costs stabilised. Over time, this contributed to a 30% increase in new guests and a double-digit improvement in digital revenue growth, without relying on disproportionate increases in media spend.
When positioning is strong, consistent and with a clear audience in mind, teams spend less time compensating through media spend or constant optimisation. Conversion improves earlier in the journey. Acquisition costs stabilise. Retention improves without incremental investment.
For senior leaders, this matters because brand isn’t just about growth. It’s about predictability, efficiency and resilience when conditions change.
Performance data is how you earn executive trust
Across hospitality, travel and experience-led businesses, the turning point in many board-level conversations I’ve been part of came when brand stopped being defended in abstract terms and started being explained through performance behaviour.
Positive shifts in brand searches, creative testing, landing-page performance and journey analysis all tell a story about how audiences interpret brand in the real world. When this data is framed commercially, you can build confidence with CFOs and CEOs alike.
Brand doesn’t need blind faith. It needs evidence that leaders recognise as credible. It might not always be the final lead or sale that can be attributed, but top of funnel measurements are just as important for sustainable growth in any business.
Measurement should answer the real leadership questions
Senior stakeholders rarely ask for perfect attribution. They ask more practical questions: What’s driving growth? What’s changed? Where should we invest next? Are we leaving any money on the table?
Blended approaches - combining attribution and experimentation as well as econometric modelling and brand tracking - have been far more effective in answering these questions than channel-level reporting alone. They support better decisions, not just better optimisation.
Integration only happens when leadership aligns incentives
In my experience, brand and performance only truly integrate when leadership aligns teams around shared commercial outcomes rather than separate channel targets that only tell half of the story.
When leaders reward long-term value creation, marketing teams gain permission to think holistically, invest confidently and move faster. That alignment is what turns integration from theory into practice.
5 key points on brand and performance marketing
1. The brand-performance divide is driven by leadership confidence, not capability
2. Brand clarity reduces risk and improves efficiency from performance marketing
3. Performance data builds executive trust in brand investment
4. Measurement should support real decisions, not just dashboards
5. Leadership alignment is the unlock for sustainable growth
3 Takeaways
Senior buy-in determines whether integration succeeds
Frame ‘brand’ in commercial terms, not marketing language
Measure brand activity, the right way, to build credibility
2 ACTION ITEMS
Reframe brand conversations through a leadership lens
Always ask yourself: “What would my CEO or CFO want to know?” Align KPIs and reporting to answer their key questions, not just marketing metrics. Challenge every KPI you report with a simple “So what?” from their perspective.
Align incentives to reward long-term value
Ensure leadership and team objectives prioritise sustainable growth and customer lifetime value, not just short-term performance levers.
