Why Brand voice is the hardest part to systemise

Brand voice is often treated as a writing problem.

Tone of voice guidelines are drafted. Adjectives are chosen. Examples are added.

Along the way, the assumption is made that if voice can be described clearly enough, it can be applied consistently.

In practice, this is where many brand systems begin to strain. Often this is because voice is more than just language.

Voice is an Outcome [It isn’t an input]

Unlike visual identity or layout systems, brand voice doesn’t exist independently of decision-making.

It reflects:

• What an organisation is willing to say - and what it avoids

• How it handles uncertainty

• Where it draws boundaries

• What it considers worth explaining

In other words, voice is the expression of clarity, not a substitution for it.

When clarity is present, voice tends to feel natural and consistent, even without strict rules. When clarity is missing, voice guidelines become brittle - either overly prescriptive or frustratingly vague.

Why Voice Resists Codification

Most systems work by reducing variability.

They define acceptable ranges, repeatable patterns, and clear constraints. This works well for elements that can be standardised without losing meaning.

Voice doesn’t behave that way.

It shifts with context. It responds to nuance. It relies on judgement rather than rules. Attempts to fully systemise voice often failes because they try to freeze something that is inherently relational - shaped by audience, intent, and circumstance.

This is why tone of voice documents are frequently:

• Overwritten but underused

• Technically accurate but emotionally flat

• Followed in form, but not in spirit

The system exists, but confidence is hard to find.

Where Voice Breaks First

When voice feels inconsistent, the instinct is to correct the language.

But inconsistency usually shows up first in decisions, not sentences.

You’ll see it when:

• Similar situations are handled differently without a clear reason

• Messaging becomes cautious or generic

• Teams hesitate over phrasing that should feel obvious

• Content is edited heavily but still feels “off”

They are not writing problems, but signals the underlying clarity hasn’t fully settled.

The Limits of Guidelines

Guidelines are useful. But work best when describing something already in motion.

When voice guidelines are asked to create coherence rather than reflect it, they struggle. The document grows, the examples multiply, and the rules become more specific - yet confidence remains elusive.

At that point, the issue isn’t a lack of detail but a lack of shared reference. Without share reference no amount of documentation will make voice feel natural.

A Different Way to Think About Voice

A more sustainable approach would be to treat brand voice as something developing through deliberate intent and anticipation rather than left to chance:

• Clear design

• Clear parameters

• Clear decision making principles

When those are in place, voice doesn’t need to be tightly controlled. It needs to be recognised, reinforced, and occasionally corrected.

The work shifts from policing language to maintaining clarity.

Why This Matters More in Digital Work

Digital environments amplify inconsistency.

Content is produced quickly, often by different people, across different contexts. Small misalignments accumulate fast. When clarity is weak, voice is one of the first things to fracture - and one of the hardest to repair later.

This is why voice often feels like the most elusive part of a brand system. It tends to fracture first when the relationship between clarity and scale hasn’t been properly resolved. Not because it’s misunderstood but because it’s sitting on top of everything else.

In Context

This is why brand voice rarely improves through better guidelines alone.

It improves when the conditions that shape it become clearer.

This is why voice sits adjacent to - but not inside - broader clarity work. It’s a reliable indicator of if the foundations are holding and not something which should be engineered in isolation.

Virtual Casual is a digital studio working at the intersection of clarity, systems, and calm decision-making.

Header image: Photo by uve sanchez on Unsplash