What it is

The Brand Positioning Audit examines the gap between where your brand currently sits and where you want it to be – in the minds of your target audience. Unlike a positioning statement exercise (which defines desired positioning) or a competitor audit (which maps the external landscape), this template focuses on internal diagnosis: is your current messaging actually achieving the position you’re aiming for?

It works by examining your owned communications against a set of positioning dimensions, identifying inconsistencies and gaps, and producing a clear brief for what needs to change. The output is a structured assessment and a set of prioritised messaging recommendations – not a finished positioning statement, but the evidence base for building one.

When to use it

Use this template when:

You suspect your messaging has drifted from your intended positioning over time
You’ve been through organisational change (merger, new leadership, new strategy) and need to reassess whether your communications still reflect who you are
Your audience is describing you in ways that don’t match how you describe yourself
You’re preparing to refresh your messaging and want a clear diagnosis before writing new content
You want an honest, evidence-based picture of how you currently come across

Don’t use this template when:

You’re starting from scratch with no existing brand or messaging at all (use the Positioning Statement Generator first)
You want to understand external competitor positioning rather than your own (use the Competitor Comms Audit)
You need to assess a single piece of content rather than your overall positioning (too granular for this template)

Inputs needed

Before starting, gather:

Your current positioning statement, mission/vision, or similar foundational document
Five to ten examples of recent owned communications: homepage copy, two or three social posts, a press release or news article, a pitch or presentation introduction
Any direct audience feedback – survey verbatims, customer comments, media descriptions of you
A clear statement of your intended positioning: who you want to serve, what you want to be known for, and what makes you different
Optional: notes from the Competitor Comms Audit if you’ve completed one

The template

Positioning baseline

Field	Details
Organisation / brand
Audit date
Conducted by
Intended audience	(Who are you trying to position with?)
Current stated positioning	(Your positioning statement, or best articulation of where you want to be)
Aspired positioning	(Where do you want to be in 12–18 months, if different?)

Positioning dimensions assessment

For each dimension below, assess how clearly and consistently it comes through in your current communications. Use a simple RAG (Red / Amber / Green) rating plus a brief observation.

Dimension	What to look for	RAG rating
Clarity of purpose	Is it immediately obvious what you do and who you serve? Does a newcomer understand your offer within 10 seconds on your homepage?	R / A / G
Differentiation	Do you communicate clearly what makes you different from alternatives? Is the difference meaningful and specific?	R / A / G
Audience fit	Does your messaging speak directly to your target audience’s actual concerns, language, and priorities?	R / A / G
Credibility	Do you back up claims with proof? Evidence, credentials, case studies, third-party validation?	R / A / G
Consistency	Is the core message consistent across channels and content types? Or does it shift depending on format or author?	R / A / G
Tone alignment	Does the tone of your communications match how your target audience expects to be spoken to in this category?	R / A / G
Narrative coherence	Is there a clear through-line to your communications over time? Does it build a consistent story?	R / A / G
Competitive distinctiveness	In the context of how competitors communicate, do you sound different – or are you saying similar things with different words?	R / A / G

RAG definitions:

🟢 Green – Clear and consistent; this dimension is a communications strength
🟡 Amber – Partially working; some inconsistency or gap that needs attention
🔴 Red – Not coming through; a significant gap between intention and execution

Content sample audit

Review five to ten recent pieces of owned content and note what positioning signals they send:

Content piece	Channel	Dimension(s) it addresses well	Dimension(s) where it falls short	Overall verdict
				Strong / Average / Weak

What dimension appears most often in the “falls short” column?

What is consistently absent from your content?

Audience perception check

This section asks you to compare your intended positioning against any available evidence of how you’re actually perceived:

Source	What it suggests about how you’re perceived
Customer / audience feedback (surveys, comments, NPS verbatims)
Media descriptions (how journalists or analysts describe you)
Organic social conversations (how people talk about you when you’re not in the room)
Word-of-mouth descriptions (how your own team describes you informally)

Gap between intended and perceived positioning:

Dimension	Intended	Perceived	Gap size
Core purpose			Large / Small / None
Differentiation
Audience served
Tone and personality

Messaging consistency audit

Review your key messages across three to five different channels and note what’s consistent and what varies:

Key message or claim	Website	LinkedIn	Press / PR	Events / Sales	Consistent?
					Yes / Mostly / No

Where is inconsistency causing the most damage to positioning?

Root cause diagnosis

Based on everything above, what is causing the gaps you’ve identified?

Cause	Contributing?	Priority to address?
The positioning itself is unclear or undefined	Yes / No	High / Medium / Low
Different teams or channels are working from different briefs	Yes / No
The positioning was defined but hasn’t been embedded in content practice	Yes / No
The positioning is outdated – the organisation has moved on but messaging hasn’t	Yes / No
Content is being produced reactively without reference to positioning	Yes / No
There is no clear owner for messaging consistency	Yes / No
Other:

Primary root cause (in one sentence):

Recommendations

Priority	Recommendation	Rationale	Suggested owner	Suggested timeline
1
2
3

Single most important change:

AI prompt

Base prompt

I'm conducting a brand positioning audit for [ORGANISATION NAME].

**Our intended positioning:**
[DESCRIBE WHERE YOU WANT TO BE POSITIONED – who you serve, what you offer, what makes you different, what you want to be known for]

**Current communications sample:**
[PASTE OR DESCRIBE 3–5 RECENT CONTENT EXAMPLES – e.g., homepage copy, recent LinkedIn posts, a press release introduction]

**Any available audience perception data:**
[INCLUDE ANY SURVEY FEEDBACK, MEDIA DESCRIPTIONS, CUSTOMER COMMENTS IF AVAILABLE – or note "none available"]

Please help me:
1. Assess how well our current communications reflect our intended positioning, across the dimensions of: clarity, differentiation, audience fit, credibility, consistency, and tone
2. Identify the two or three most significant gaps between where we're trying to be and what our content is actually communicating
3. Highlight any messaging that is actively working against our intended position
4. Suggest three specific, prioritised actions to close the positioning gap

Be direct. If the communications are not working, say so clearly and explain why.

Prompt variations

Variation 1: Consistency check across channels

I want to assess whether our brand positioning is coming through consistently across channels.

**Our core positioning claim:** [ONE SENTENCE – what we stand for and why we're different]

Here are examples of how we communicate on each channel:
- Website: [paste homepage hero copy or key page intro]
- LinkedIn: [paste 2–3 recent post openings]
- Press releases: [paste intro paragraph from a recent release]
- Sales pitch / presentations: [paste opening description of the company]

For each, assess:
1. Does it reflect our core positioning claim?
2. What does it suggest about who we are and what we offer?
3. How does it compare to the others – are we consistent or fragmented?

Then identify: what is the single most important thing a newcomer would take away from encountering each channel, and are these impressions aligned?

Variation 2: Audience language audit

I want to check whether our communications are written in the language our audience actually uses, or whether we're defaulting to internal language that doesn't resonate externally.

**Our target audience:** [DESCRIPTION – role, sector, challenges, priorities]

**Our current messaging:** [PASTE 3–5 EXAMPLES OF YOUR COPY]

**Language our audience uses:** [PASTE EXAMPLES FROM AUDIENCE FEEDBACK, REVIEWS, FORUMS, OR SURVEYS – or describe their language style]

Please help me:
1. Identify language in our communications that is unlikely to resonate with our target audience (jargon, internal framing, assumed knowledge)
2. Highlight where we're using language that genuinely reflects how our audience talks and thinks
3. Suggest how we could rewrite two or three of the weaker examples to better match our audience's language and priorities

Variation 3: Differentiation gap analysis

I want to understand whether our communications are actually differentiating us, or whether we're blending in with competitors.

**Our stated differentiation:** [WHAT WE CLAIM MAKES US DIFFERENT]

**Our core messaging:** [PASTE EXAMPLES]

**Competitor messaging:** [PASTE OR DESCRIBE HOW KEY COMPETITORS COMMUNICATE]

Please assess:
1. Are we communicating our stated differentiation clearly, or is it buried or absent?
2. If a potential customer read our content alongside competitor content without the brand names, would they know which was ours?
3. Where are we inadvertently saying the same things as competitors?
4. Suggest two or three specific ways to sharpen our differentiation in the language we use

Be specific about what language to add, change, or remove.

Variation 4: Quick positioning health check

Give me a rapid assessment of this organisation's brand positioning based on their public communications.

[PASTE HOMEPAGE COPY OR ABOUT PAGE]

In your assessment, tell me:
1. In one sentence, what does this organisation appear to do and who for?
2. What is their implied differentiation (even if unstated explicitly)?
3. What is the tone – and who does that tone seem designed to appeal to?
4. What is the most significant positioning weakness visible in this copy?
5. What one change would most improve the clarity and impact of the positioning?

Respond directly and concisely.

Tips for better AI output:

Paste actual copy rather than describing it – analysis of real language is always more useful than analysis of a paraphrase
Include audience language examples alongside your own – the contrast often reveals the gap more clearly than either alone
Ask for specific rewrites, not just assessments – “rewrite this sentence to better reflect X” produces actionable output
If you disagree with the AI’s assessment, push back – ask it to justify its reading with evidence from the text

Human review checklist

Evidence quality – Are your assessments based on actual communications samples, or primarily on your internal sense of how things should feel?
Outside perspective – Have you asked someone outside your organisation or team to review the same content samples before comparing your assessment to theirs?
Audience data – Where you have audience perception data (however limited), have you prioritised it over internal assumptions?
Consistency completeness – Have you reviewed enough channels and content types to draw a meaningful conclusion about consistency, not just the channels you find easiest to assess?
Specificity of gaps – Are your identified gaps specific enough to act on? “Weak differentiation” is not actionable; “homepage hero copy makes no mention of [key differentiator]” is
Root cause honesty – Have you been honest about whether the gap is a content execution problem or a more fundamental positioning problem? These require different solutions
Prioritisation – Have you prioritised recommendations by impact, not by ease? The most important fix may not be the quickest one
Forward look – Do your recommendations clearly connect to a next action – specifically who will do what by when?

Example output

Organisation: A regional law firm that wants to be known as a trusted partner for growing businesses, not just a transactional legal supplier.

Audit summary:

Dimension	RAG	Key finding
Clarity of purpose	🟢	Homepage clearly states who they serve and what type of work they do
Differentiation	🔴	Claims “client-first” approach – same language used by most competitors; no specific proof
Audience fit	🟡	Good on some channels; legal jargon appears in LinkedIn posts that are clearly aimed at non-lawyers
Credibility	🟡	Case studies exist but are buried; credentials visible only on the About page
Consistency	🔴	Brand voice shifts noticeably between website (formal) and LinkedIn (casual) with no clear rationale
Tone alignment	🟡	Generally appropriate but occasionally defaults to legal industry convention rather than speaking to client perspective
Narrative coherence	🟡	No clear through-line across content; topics feel reactive rather than building a consistent story
Competitive distinctiveness	🔴	Content would be almost indistinguishable from three comparable regional firms

Primary gap: Differentiation is claimed but not evidenced or made specific. The phrase “client-first” appears on every competitor’s website. No content explains what “client-first” specifically looks like in practice for this firm.

Top recommendation: Replace the “client-first” claim with one specific, provable behaviour that demonstrates that commitment – e.g., “Every client has a direct mobile number for their lead partner.” Specific proof beats broad claims every time.

Note: This is an illustrative example. Your audit will reflect your specific organisation and communications.

Positioning Statement Generator – Once you’ve identified the gaps, use this to build a sharper positioning statement
Key Messages Grid – Translate your revised positioning into specific messages for different audiences
Message House – Build a complete messaging architecture with your core position, pillars, and proof points
Competitor Comms Audit – Assess the external landscape to sharpen your differentiation assessment
Audience Segmentation Worksheet – Ensure your positioning is calibrated for each distinct audience segment

Tips for success

Read your own content as a stranger would The biggest challenge in a positioning audit is that you’re too familiar with your own material. Before starting, try to approach your content as if you’d never heard of the organisation before. What would someone assume about you? What questions would they have? This is the perception your communications are actually creating.

Separate aspiration from execution Most organisations have a gap between their intended positioning and their actual communications. The aspiration is usually clear; the execution is where it breaks down. Focus on the execution. The gap you need to close is the one between what the content is saying and what you intend it to say – not between a beautiful vision statement and a messy world.

Look for what’s missing, not just what’s wrong A positioning audit often reveals absence more than error. The differentiation claim isn’t wrong – it’s just unsupported. The audience language isn’t offensive – it’s just not present. Note what’s conspicuously absent from your content, not just what’s actively harmful.

Protect the honesty of the assessment Positioning audits conducted internally are prone to confirmation bias – we tend to read our content generously and see the intention rather than the execution. If you can, ask someone outside your team (or outside your organisation entirely) to complete the content sample audit sections before sharing your own assessments. The difference between their reading and yours is often the most instructive finding.

Audit to brief, not to redesign The output of this template should be a clear brief for what needs to change, not a complete new communications strategy. Keep recommendations focused and sequential – the goal is to identify the highest-priority positioning gaps and address them systematically, not to restart everything at once.

Common pitfalls

Confusing positioning with identity Positioning is about where you sit in the minds of your audience relative to alternatives. Brand identity (logos, colours, names) is different. A positioning audit might reveal that your visual identity is confusing or inconsistent – but that’s a symptom of a positioning problem, not the positioning problem itself. Focus on message and meaning first.

Over-weighting internal opinion The most common failure of positioning audits is relying primarily on what the communications team thinks rather than what the audience perceives. Internal views are useful starting points, but they are not evidence. Where any audience perception data exists – even informally gathered – it should take priority over internal assessment.

Treating all dimensions equally Not all positioning dimensions matter equally for every organisation. A professional services firm needs exceptional credibility signals. A challenger brand needs exceptional differentiation. An NGO needs exceptional purpose clarity. Identify which dimensions matter most for your category and audience before assessing them, so you prioritise the right fixes.

Fixing symptoms rather than causes A posting audit that concludes “our social posts need to be better” has identified a symptom. The cause might be that there’s no approved messaging framework for social content creators to work from, or that content is being approved by people who weren’t involved in the positioning work, or that the positioning itself is vague enough that everyone interprets it differently. Fix the cause, and the symptoms resolve.

Skipping straight to new content After an audit, the instinct is often to immediately start writing new content. Resist. Use the findings to update your messaging framework first – the guidance document that sits behind all content creation. New content built on an undocumented, unapproved revision of your positioning will drift again within months.

Want help moving from positioning diagnosis to a strategy that sticks? Faur works with organisations to develop and embed communications positioning across teams and channels.

Brand Positioning Audit