BRANDING TATVA - BRAND AUDIT EVIDENCE WORKSHEET
Version: 27 October 2026
For a service business preparing a focused brand review.
Copy this text into your own document. No account or email address is required.

Complete the parts you can support. Mark missing information as UNKNOWN.
Use this record to connect an observation with a decision before commissioning
writing, design or a rebrand. A completed worksheet prepares a discussion;
the audit depth, research and recommendations receive an agreed project scope.

Keep your working record in a controlled workspace. Share public URLs and
redacted examples that you have permission to use. Keep credentials, personal
customer details, patient information and confidential proposals out of it.

1. SET ONE AUDIT QUESTION

Business and public website:
Person coordinating the review:
Date and version of this record:
What changed in the business?
Which offer, buyer group or market needs attention?
Which decision should the review support?
What have buyers actually asked or misunderstood?
What would help the team decide what to keep, change or investigate?
Materials and channels included:
Materials deliberately outside this review:
Open questions and constraints:

2. REPEAT ONE TOUCHPOINT RECORD

Record the material as a buyer encountered it, before proposing a correction.

Touchpoint name and public URL or internal reference:
Version, capture date and viewing context:
Owner of the material:
Buyer and stage in the journey:
Action the buyer is trying to complete:
Exact offer or promise shown:
Evidence placed beside that promise:
Next step and destination:
Observation, with a specific example:
Interpretation or possible explanation:
Evidence that supports the interpretation:
Contradictory evidence or another explanation:
What remains unknown:
Follow-up question, owner and date:

Use separate records for a homepage, service page, proposal, profile,
sales introduction or onboarding message. A difference between two records
is an observation. Its effect on buyers still needs evidence.

3. COMPARE THE PROMISE ACROSS TOUCHPOINTS

Repeat for each important mismatch.

Records being compared:
Do they describe the same buyer, offer and category?
Which claim receives most emphasis in each?
Do the stated scope, responsibilities and next step agree?
Do familiar words and visual cues identify the same business?
Where does the explanation change?
Could the variation be appropriate for the audience or stage?
What buyer evidence would help distinguish useful variation from confusion?
Action: KEEP / CORRECT / INVESTIGATE
Reason for that choice:
Owner and unresolved dependency:

4. KEEP AN EVIDENCE REGISTER

Repeat for each claim or interpretation that matters to the audit question.

Claim or interpretation:
Source record and date:
What the source actually establishes:
Relevant context, baseline or comparison:
Permission or usage limit:
Known limitation or conflicting evidence:
Confidence: STRONG / TENTATIVE / UNKNOWN
Reason for the confidence level:
Further evidence needed:
Person responsible for checking it:

An attractive quote or a polished project image does not establish every
result attributed to it. Record only the work or outcome the source supports.
Keep an assumption visible until you have evidence to replace it.

5. CHOOSE THE NEXT ACTION

Repeat for each finding worth discussing.

Finding and linked touchpoint/evidence records:
Buyer task or business decision affected:
Observed frequency, or UNKNOWN:
Consequence supported by the evidence:
What currently works and deserves protection:
Smallest useful correction or research step:
Dependencies and people required:
Priority and reason:
Action owner:
Review date:
Evidence that would show the action helped:
Baseline available before the change:
Result after the agreed review period, or NOT YET MEASURED:

Prioritise using your decision, evidence and capacity. A score can organise
a discussion; it cannot predict sales, search positions or the right design.
Keep an unresolved research question separate from a confirmed correction.

6. PREPARE A REDACTED SCOPE DISCUSSION

Public website and the service it explains:
Priority buyers and markets:
Main audit question:
Up to three public or redacted examples:
What you want to retain:
Decisions still open:
People who approve changes:
Preferred timing, time zone and review windows:
Budget range and currency, if known:
Access, language or specialist support to agree:
What you would need in the handover:

Suman Sharma leads the brand review remotely from India. Agree the materials,
depth, responsibilities, deliverables, timing and fee before work begins.
Technical SEO testing and revenue forecasting sit outside this brand review.
Website implementation or other specialist assessment needs its own scope.

Discuss the audit question:
https://brandingtatva.com/contact?service=brand-audit#write

Read the service scope:
https://brandingtatva.com/brand-audit

Use the checklist alongside this record:
https://brandingtatva.com/insights/brand-audit-checklist-before-rebrand