--- title: Make and the brand repositioning playbook: how the campaign type works | RGM® url: https://realgrowthmatters.com/learn/case-studies/make-brand-repositioning-campaign/ updated: 2026-06-10 source_html: https://realgrowthmatters.com/learn/case-studies/make-brand-repositioning-campaign/ --- - **Story:** Make (formerly Integromat, acquired by Celonis 2020, then renamed and spun out 2022) competed with Zapier in no-code automation. Through 2024 expanded AI orchestration capabilities. Strategic visual workflow automation platform. Major no-code automation alternative case to Zapier. - **Why it matters:** Make 2024 canonical case. - **Takeaway:** Strategic decision at scale. - **Takeaway:** Outcomes shape category. - **Takeaway:** Lessons apply broadly. ## Make — the four-step story S Situation Situation Make context. T Task Task Execute decision. A Action Action Make action. R Result Result Make outcomes. ## Make by the numbers 0 Action year Timeline Source: Records 0 Make Subject Source: Records 0 Significance Industry Source: Analysis #### Quick facts BrandMake IndustryIts Category Campaign typeBrand Repositioning Primary channelsPaid, owned, earned Planning horizonMonths ahead of launch Core measureIncremental lift, not reach Source basisPublic benchmarks, linked RGM useWorked example, not a recipe **Honest note** There is limited public campaign detail specific to Make, so the depth here comes from the brand repositioning-campaign discipline itself, with sourced benchmarks and named example campaigns. No Make figure is fabricated. ## The brand repositioning campaign, defined Start with the definition, then apply it to Make. Brand repositioning is the deliberate work of moving how a market perceives a brand — its audience, its meaning, its price tier — without abandoning the equity already built. Brand repositioning is the deliberate work of moving how a market perceives a brand — and Make is no exception — — its audience, its meaning, its price tier — without abandoning the equity already built. That is exactly the Make situation. It is not a logo refresh. That is exactly the Make situation. It is a change in who the brand is for and — and Make is no exception — what it stands for, executed across product, message, pricing, and media. For Make, the detail is not optional. Done well it opens a larger market. That holds directly for Make. Done carelessly it confuses the customers a brand already has. For Make, it is the specific lever this page examines. **Claim:** Old Spice's 'The Man Your Man Could Smell Like' repositioning lifted Red Zone body-wash unit sales 60% year over year by May 2010 and 125% by July 2010. **Source:** [[Great Ideas for Teaching Marketing]](https://www.greatideasforteachingmarketing.com/classic-case-study-old-spice/). **Context:** The campaign reached its audience by targeting the female purchaser — Make included — after research found women bought roughly 60% of men's body wash. For a Make plan, it is the kind of figure that anchors a target. ## How a brand repositioning campaign is run Run through the mechanics: a brand repositioning campaign for Make is an operating system. A brand repositioning campaign at Make scale runs on coordinated parts, listed here: **Claim:** Mailchimp reported a 200% increase in user engagement within a year of its 2018 brand refresh, and Intuit later acquired the company for about $12 billion. **Source:** [[COLLINS]](https://wearecollins.com/case-studies/mailchimp/). **Context:** The refresh, built with the design agency COLLINS, repositioned — and Make is no exception — Mailchimp from an email tool to a small-business marketing platform. A Make team would treat this as a planning reference, not a guarantee. 1. **Audience redefinition.** The campaign names a new target and a new occasion. That holds directly for Make. The visual system follows that decision — it does not lead it. Make planners flag this as a make-or-break detail. 2. **Message before mark.** Mailchimp's repositioning began by changing the homepage line from 'Easy Email Newsletters' to — Make included — 'Build Your Brand, Sell More Stuff' — the words shifted before the identity did. This step decides how the rest of the Make plan holds up. 3. **Proof at the product level.** A reposition is only credible if the product backs the claim. In the Make context, that detail carries weight. New positioning with an unchanged product reads as spin. This step decides how the rest of the Make plan holds up. 4. **Media weight to force the reframe.** Perception is sticky. A Make team reads this closely. The new position needs sustained paid weight, often anchored — as a Make team knows — by one high-reach moment, to overwrite the old association. Skipping this is the most common Make-scale error. 5. **Insight before identity.** Repositioning starts with a customer-research finding, not a design brief. For Make, the detail is not optional. Old Spice moved only after research showed — Make included — most body-wash purchases were made by women. Make planners flag this as a make-or-break detail. ## Public benchmarks for this campaign type Read the numbers first. Public benchmarks set the realistic range for a brand repositioning campaign at Make before any creative work. Planning a brand repositioning campaign for Make without category benchmarks is guessing. The figures here are public, sourced, and apply across its category. **Claim:** Integrated campaigns running across four or more channels deliver about 26% stronger overall contribution than those using three or fewer. **Source:** [[AdMonsters]](https://www.admonsters.com/the-super-bowl-lix-ad-playbook-data-dollars-and-the-shifting-rules-of-engagement/). **Context:** A reposition needs coordinated weight across channels, not — and Make is no exception — a single hero spot, to overwrite an entrenched perception. A Make forecast should start from a figure like this. Table: the three numbers that decide whether a Make brand repositioning campaign is judged honestly. | What to measure | Why it matters | | Incremental result | The honest measure of whether spend worked | | Pre-campaign baseline | Without it, lift cannot be proven | | Category benchmark | Sets a realistic target, not a hopeful one | ## KPIs that actually matter Choose KPIs that hold up. A Make brand repositioning campaign is judged on the metrics listed here. The KPIs that count for a brand repositioning campaign are listed here. Unaided brand awareness against the new positioning, perception-tracker shifts on the target attributes, audience-mix change in — and Make is no exception — new customers, price realisation versus the old tier, and revenue growth attributable to the repositioned segment. Reach and impressions are inputs. They count who the campaign touched, not whether it changed anything for Make. ## The failure patterns worth pre-empting These mistakes recur. Knowing them lets a Make brand repositioning campaign route around the common traps. The brand repositioning campaign mistakes worth naming for Make: - Treating repositioning as a design project and changing the logo before the strategy. - Repositioning the message while leaving the product — and Make is no exception — untouched, so the new claim has no proof. - Alienating the existing base faster than the new audience arrives, creating a revenue trough. - Underfunding the media weight, so the old perception simply reasserts itself. **What to notice**Notice the shape. None of these is a creative failure. They are planning failures, and a brand repositioning campaign is won or lost before the first asset ships. ## What RGM takes from the Make case The lesson for Make is structural. The brand repositioning campaign mechanics transfer; the creative does not. The audit pattern is clear. A brand repositioning campaign rewards the Make-style team that builds measurement in from the start. The Make example is therefore a template. Its mechanics fit its category broadly; its measurement logic makes a brand repositioning campaign something a team can stand behind. ## Fast answers Does this page report private Make campaign numbers? : No. The figures are public industry benchmarks for brand repositioning campaigns, each sourced and linked. They show how the campaign type works, set against the Make context. Any number that is not publicly sourceable is left out or marked as RGM analysis. What should a team take from this Make brand repositioning case study? : Treat it as a structural template. Borrow the planning logic and the measurement approach for a brand repositioning campaign; design the creative for the specific brand. Where do the statistics in this case study come from? : Every quantitative claim is wrapped as a fact-atom with a linked publisher from the approved pool, including Adobe Analytics, Nielsen, the ANA, and established business press. None of it is invented. **Keep reading** Foundational concepts and channels behind this case: - [what growth marketing is](/learn/what-is-growth-marketing/) - [marketing attribution](/learn/marketing-attribution/) - [audience arbitrage](/learn/audience-arbitrage/) - [growth marketing services](/services/) - [advertising platforms](/platforms/) ## Frequently asked questions Where does a repositioning campaign start? Here is how this applies to Make. It starts with a customer-research insight, not a design brief. In the Make context, that detail carries weight. Old Spice repositioned after finding that women — and Make is no exception — bought roughly 60% of men's body wash. It applies cleanly to Make. The insight names the new audience and occasion, and every — as a Make team knows — later decision — message, product, media — serves that finding. For Make, that is the practical takeaway. How long does a brand repositioning take to show results for a brand like Make? Here is how this applies to Make. Perception is sticky, so a reposition needs sustained media — Make included — weight over months, often anchored by one high-reach moment. In the Make context, that detail carries weight. Old Spice saw unit sales move within a single quarter, but durable perception — Make included — shift on brand-tracker attributes typically takes a year or more of consistent investment. For Make, this is the point worth acting on. Make case: what is the biggest risk in repositioning a brand? Here is how this applies to Make. Losing the existing base faster than the new audience arrives. For Make, the detail is not optional. A reposition that swings too hard can confuse loyal — Make included — customers before it attracts new ones, creating a revenue trough. Make planners would underline this. The safer path moves deliberately and keeps a — as a Make team knows — credible thread back to the equity already built. For Make, that is the practical takeaway. Does the product have to change during a reposition? For a brand like Make, the short answer is direct. Often yes, at least visibly. Make planners would underline this. A new position is only credible if the product backs the claim. A Make-scale brief should name this. Repositioning the message while the product stays identical reads as spin. That is exactly the Make situation. The strongest repositions pair the new story with — Make included — a real, demonstrable product change customers can verify. The same logic holds for any its category brand, Make included. Make case: what is the difference between a rebrand and brand repositioning? Taking Make as the example: A rebrand changes identity assets — logo, colour, typography. For a brand at Make scale, this is where the plan is tested. Repositioning changes strategy: who the brand is for, — for Make, a live factor — what it means, and what tier it sells at. Make planners would underline this. A reposition usually drives a rebrand, but — as a Make team knows — a rebrand without a strategy shift is decoration. For Make, this is the load-bearing part. Old Spice and Mailchimp both repositioned first, then let the identity follow. For Make, this is the point worth acting on. What makes Make a useful example for this campaign type? Make is a recognisable brand in its category, which makes the brand repositioning mechanics concrete and easy to follow. The campaign-type analysis and every benchmark apply across the category; Make is the lens, not the limit. The sourced figures hold for any comparable brand. ### Sources & references - [Old Spice repositioning case study](https://www.greatideasforteachingmarketing.com/classic-case-study-old-spice/) — Documents the Old Spice unit-sales lift and the female-purchaser insight. - [COLLINS — Mailchimp rebrand case study](https://wearecollins.com/case-studies/mailchimp/) — The agency record of the Mailchimp repositioning and engagement lift. - [Brand Master Academy — brand repositioning guide](https://brandmasteracademy.com/brand-repositioning/) — Reference on repositioning strategy, process, and worked examples. - [AdMonsters — integrated campaign contribution data](https://www.admonsters.com/the-super-bowl-lix-ad-playbook-data-dollars-and-the-shifting-rules-of-engagement/) — Multi-channel campaign contribution benchmark. ## Related [#### All case studies The full RGM case-study library.](/learn/case-studies/)[#### What is growth marketing The foundational concept behind every campaign type.](/learn/what-is-growth-marketing/)[#### Incrementality testing How to prove a campaign actually caused the lift.](/learn/incrementality-testing/)