Campaigns underperform in new markets because the thinking that made them good — the customer research, the ICP documentation, the hours spent understanding who this product is for and what would make them care — stays behind when the creative crosses a border. The localization team receives the finished asset. They do their job. The campaign exists in a new language. And it lands at about 70% of what it could have been, because nobody told them what they were trying to achieve.
This post is about what needs to travel with the creative, and why most briefs do not send it.
A Good Campaign Is the Starting Point, Not the Problem
When a campaign arrives and it is clearly built for a specific audience — tight messaging, consistent tone, a CTA that makes sense for the buyer — that is a good sign. Someone did the work. They understood who they were talking to, what that person cares about, and what would move them.
That effort does not disappear when the campaign moves to a new market. It just stops being visible.
The localization team sees the output — the headline, the image, the CTA, the testimonial format — without the inputs that shaped it. The research that validated the message. The persona the copywriter had in mind. The feedback rounds that sharpened the CTA into something that actually converts.
All of that stays with the original team.
What the localization team receives is the answer without the working. You can reproduce an answer without the working. You just cannot be confident it is still right for a different context.
Cross-Cultural Marketing Runs on Audience Knowledge
Cross-cultural marketing done well is not about having better translators. It is about giving the translation team enough context to understand what they are translating for — not just what the words say, but what the campaign is trying to make someone feel, and who that person is.
The research that stays behind
Every campaign that performs well is downstream of research. Customer interviews. ICP documentation. Decisions made about what this audience responds to and what falls flat. That knowledge is exactly what a localization team needs — because their job in cross-cultural marketing is to find the equivalent resonance in a different market, not just reproduce the words that carried it in English.
Products are built for a buyer persona, not for a country. A logistics manager in Germany and a logistics manager in France have more in common with each other than either has with a consumer audience in their own country. The ICP knowledge is largely transferable. The local expression of it is not — and that is what the localization team adds, when they have a base to build from.
The more markets you add, the more that combined knowledge base is worth. But it only grows if the original research travels with the creative.
When it does, the work gets faster. Less back and forth. Fewer questions. Less time spent reconstructing what the client already knows. The localization team combines the audience knowledge they were given with their own understanding of the market, and that combination produces better output than either alone.
What localization teams are working with
Nielsen’s annual marketing report found that only 23% of marketers say they have access to quality audience data. What actually arrives with most campaign briefs reflects that gap: locked creative, a style guide, a glossary, a deadline, and sometimes a note that says “preserve the brand voice.” Surface-level audience instructions at best. Rarely anything about what the campaign was designed to make someone feel.
The localization team works with what they have. They translate accurately. They match the register as closely as they can. They make judgment calls about cultural fit where the brief does not answer the question.
Any change that goes significantly beyond the source needs to be justifiable. A notable adaptation needs a clear rationale, a comment explaining the reasoning, and usually a backtranslation for anything high-profile. Not because the adaptation is wrong. Because the client needs to understand what changed and why, without worrying about where the brand voice has gone.
It works. The campaign exists in a new language. But the cross-cultural marketing part — the part where the campaign actually connects with someone — is harder to guarantee when the team does not know what they were aiming for.
The Puzzle You Are Asking Them to Solve
Imagine you are putting together a puzzle, but only the client knows what the picture looks like.
You start with what you have. You ask: are there any more pieces? They give you some. You ask: are there corners? Edge pieces? They give them to you one by one, only when you know to ask for something specific. You make progress. Eventually something that looks like the picture takes shape.
Now imagine you had all the pieces when you started, and you could see the picture on the box.
That is the difference between a brief that includes the underlying audience research and one that does not. Not a difference in translation quality. A difference in how long it takes and how confident everyone can be in the result.
The back and forth is not inefficiency. It is the team trying to reconstruct the picture without the box. Every question they ask is a piece they were never given. Every feedback round is a correction to something that could have been right the first time, if the brief had included what the original team already knew.
This is what cross-cultural marketing actually costs when the knowledge does not travel. Not usually a failed campaign. A slower, less confident one. A version that is correct but not quite as sharp as it could have been. A process that leaves both sides tired.
Imagine you are putting together a puzzle, but only the client knows what the picture looks like. You ask for pieces one at a time. They give them when you ask. You get there eventually. Now imagine you had all the pieces from the start, and could see the picture on the box.
What Should Travel With the Creative
The brief that works for cross-cultural marketing is not more complicated than a normal brief. It has three additional inputs that let the localization team do the audience work themselves, rather than reconstructing it piece by piece.
-
01
Audience knowledgeWho this is actually for
Not the demographic summary. The texture underneath it — what this person cares about, what would make them skeptical, what success looks like for them in their own terms. If an ICP document exists, send it. Anything that helps the localization team imagine the person they are writing for makes their judgment sharper.
-
02
Emotional intentWhat the campaign should make someone feel
Not the feature list it communicates. The feeling underneath it — confidence, relief, recognition that this product understands a problem the reader thought nobody else had noticed. A localization team that knows the target emotion can aim for the same feeling through different cultural expression. One that doesn't is matching words.
-
03
What is locked and what can breatheWhich elements are fixed and which aren't
Confirmed taglines, tested headlines, legally reviewed claims — make it explicit. When localization teams know what is fixed and what has room for cultural judgment, they concentrate their effort where it matters. It also cuts feedback rounds. The team is not second-guessing whether a specific phrase can change. They already know.
Audience Knowledge
Who this is actually for. Not the demographic summary — “marketing managers at B2B SaaS companies” — but the texture underneath it. What does this person care about? What would make them skeptical? What does success look like for them in their own terms?
If an ICP document exists, or a customer interview summary, or even a well-written persona card, send it. Translation teams who receive this kind of context produce better work faster, because they can imagine the person they are writing for. Anything that helps them understand what it would feel like to meet and talk to this kind of person makes their judgment sharper.
Emotional Intent
What was this campaign designed to make someone feel? Not the feature list it communicates. The feeling underneath it. Confidence. Relief. Recognition that this product understands a problem the reader thought nobody else had noticed.
This is the hardest thing to put in a brief and the most valuable thing to include. Ipsos research across 1,700 ads found that ideas grounded in empathy — reflecting audience identity, emotions, or values — are 79% more likely to drive brand choice. A localization team that knows the target emotion can make different decisions than one inferring it from the asset. They are not matching words. They are aiming at a feeling. And the path to that feeling looks different in every market.
What is Locked and What Can Breathe
Some elements in a campaign have been through multiple rounds of review and are not up for adaptation — a confirmed tagline, a specific product claim with legal sign-off, a headline that was tested and won. Make that explicit.
When localization teams know which elements are fixed and which have room for cultural judgment, they concentrate their effort where it actually matters. It also cuts feedback rounds. The team is not second-guessing whether a specific phrase can change. They already know.
This is also where a good marketing localization partner earns their keep — not just in executing the translation, but in knowing which questions to ask before the work starts, and helping you identify the decisions that will make the biggest difference.
The Goal Is the Same Feeling, Not the Same Words
There is a version of brand consistency that means every market looks the same — same images, same phrases, same structure. That is achievable and in some contexts it is the right call.
But there is a more valuable kind of consistency in cross-cultural marketing, and it is harder to brief for. The sense that a brand communicates the same thing about itself in whatever context it appears, regardless of language. Not the same words. The same feeling.
Coke at Christmas is the clearest example. The Latvian campaign and the German campaign do not look identical. The cultural references are different, the visuals are adjusted, the copy is written for each audience. But both feel like Coke at Christmas. A Latvian watching the German campaign and a German watching the Latvian campaign would both recognise what the brand is doing, even across the language barrier.
That kind of consistency is worth a lot for a global brand. Kantar BrandZ analysis across 20 years of brand data shows a measurable growth advantage for brands that maintain consistent perceptions across markets — not because it makes anyone’s job easier, but because it compounds over time.
For that result, the localization team needs to know what feeling they are aiming for. Not what words the original used. What the original made someone feel. Then they can find the expression that produces the same feeling for a different audience, using whatever references, register, and cultural context actually work in that market.
That is not a translation task. It is an audience task. And it starts with the brief.
When the concept itself is so tied to a specific cultural context that adapting it would mean rewriting the idea entirely, that is a different problem — and a different service. That is transcreation. But most campaigns do not need that. They need the localization team to understand what they were trying to achieve, and enough context to find the equivalent path there.
The Brief Is Where It Starts
Most localization briefs arrive with the answer but not the working. The creative is locked, the deadline is set, and the team is expected to produce the same emotional result in a different language — without knowing what that result was supposed to feel like in the first place.
If your international campaigns are landing at 70% of what the original achieves, that is usually the reason. Send us what you are currently handing over to your localization team and we will tell you what is missing.
Related Content
How to build a content program that works across languages without losing quality or burning through budget.
Your brand guidelines work in English. Here’s how to make them work for every language your team localizes into.
Your campaigns are only as strong as the team behind them understands your audience. Here’s how we handle the full picture.
FAQ
Cross-cultural marketing is the practice of adapting campaigns so they connect emotionally with audiences in different markets — not just translating the words, but ensuring that a different audience feels what the original campaign made its audience feel. The goal is the same emotional response, achieved through different cultural expression.
Translation converts words from one language to another accurately. Cross-cultural marketing is about transferring emotional resonance — ensuring that a campaign achieves the same effect for a German audience that it achieved for an English one, using whatever references, register, and cultural context actually work in Germany. Translation is one part of that. Understanding the audience is the other part, and it starts before the translation does.
The most effective practice is to brief the localization team with the same depth used to build the original campaign. Share ICP documentation, customer research, and a clear statement of what the campaign is designed to make someone feel. The more context the localization team has about the audience, the less back and forth is required and the closer the output gets to what the original achieved.
By separating brand identity from brand expression. The identity — what the brand stands for, what it makes people feel, the problems it solves — stays consistent across every market. The expression adapts to what resonates in each context. Coke’s Christmas campaigns do not look identical in every country, but they all feel like Coke at Christmas. That emotional consistency is more valuable than visual uniformity. If you want to understand how that separation works at the brand level before it reaches campaigns, brand localization covers it in more depth.
When the concept itself does not transfer. If adapting a campaign for a new market would require rewriting the idea — not just the language — because the emotional core relies on a cultural reference or association that does not exist in the target market, that is transcreation. Localization adapts what exists. Transcreation rebuilds the concept so it achieves the same effect in a different cultural context.
Usually because the knowledge that made the original campaign work — the audience research, the persona, the emotional intent — did not travel with the creative. The localization team received the locked asset without the context that shaped it. They produced an accurate adaptation. But accuracy and resonance are different things. Resonance requires knowing who you are talking to and what you are trying to make them feel. That has to be in the brief.
