AlabamaCreates Studio
Brand Orientation Assessment Rubric
Cohort 1 · Both Project Cycles
12 Weeks · 2 Project Cycles · Opens Sat Jul 18, 2026 · Closes Sat Oct 17, 2026
How This Rubric Works
This rubric is used by the orientation lead to assess each brand director at two checkpoints: end of Cycle 1 (Week 6, Sun Aug 30, 2026) and end of Cycle 2 (Week 12, Sun Oct 11, 2026). The same categories are evaluated each time. The standard rises between cycles.
Each category is scored on a four-level scale:
| Level | Label | Meaning |
| 1 | Not Yet | Has not demonstrated this capability. Needs direct instruction. |
| 2 | Emerging | Shows early signs but inconsistent. Needs regular coaching. |
| 3 | Developing | Demonstrates capability with occasional gaps. Needs light guidance. |
| 4 | Independent | Demonstrates capability consistently without prompting. Ready to practice. |
The goal is not for every brand director to reach Level 4 in every category by Week 12. The goal is visible, documentable progression from wherever they started. A director who moves from 1 to 3 across two cycles has demonstrated significant growth. A director who stays at 2 across both has not.
Category 1: Strategic Thinking
Can they define why a brand exists, who it serves, and what makes it different?
| Level | Cycle 1 (End of Wk 6 · Sun Aug 30) | Cycle 2 (End of Wk 12 · Sun Oct 11) |
| 1 | Cannot answer the three strategy questions. Confuses positioning with taglines. | Still dependent on lead for strategic direction. No meaningful progression from Cycle 1. |
| 2 | Can answer the questions with coaching. Answers are vague or borrowed from the client's own language. | Positioning is adequate but not visually directional. Still occasionally vague. |
| 3 | Answers are defensible and grounded in discovery findings. Can explain why the positioning matters. | Positioning is specific, differentiated, and drives visual direction. Anticipates most questions. |
| 4 | Positioning is clear, specific, and directly informs all downstream decisions. Can defend it under pressure. | Anticipates every question. Defends positioning with evidence and conviction. Needs no coaching. |
What to look for
- Do they start with the three diagnostic questions or jump to visuals?
- Can they distinguish between what the client says about themselves and what is actually true?
- Is their positioning a statement someone could disagree with, or is it generic?
Category 2: Visual System Quality
Does the identity system serve the strategy, and does it hold together as a coherent system?
| Level | Cycle 1 (End of Wk 6 · Sun Aug 30) | Cycle 2 (End of Wk 12 · Sun Oct 11) |
| 1 | Visual choices are arbitrary. Cannot explain why a color, typeface, or composition was chosen. | Visual work does not demonstrate growth from Cycle 1. |
| 2 | Some choices connect to strategy but the rationale is thin. System lacks coherence across applications. | System is competent but lacks the intentionality that distinguishes professional work. |
| 3 | Most choices are traceable to strategy. System shows coherence. Can apply visual first principles when prompted. | Strong system with clear rationale. Self-critiques effectively before presenting. |
| 4 | Every choice serves the strategy. System is coherent, intentional, and extends naturally. Applies all five visual first principles without prompting. | Work is portfolio-ready. Defends every decision. The system speaks for itself. |
What to look for
- Can they walk through hierarchy, contrast, repetition, alignment, and balance/tension in their own work?
- Does the identity feel like a system or a collection of separate pieces?
- Is every visual choice traceable to the strategy, or is anything decorative?
Category 3: Creative Process and Self-Direction
Do they follow the process, manage their own work, and improve without being told?
| Level | Cycle 1 (End of Wk 6 · Sun Aug 30) | Cycle 2 (End of Wk 12 · Sun Oct 11) |
| 1 | Does not follow the six-phase arc (Discovery > Strategy Lock > Divergence > Convergence > Production > Delivery). Needs constant direction. | Cannot manage their own timeline or deliverables. No meaningful progression from Cycle 1. |
| 2 | Follows the process when guided. Needs reminders about sequencing (strategy before visuals). | Mostly self-directed but still looks to lead for validation on decisions they should own. |
| 3 | Follows the six-phase arc independently. Understands why strategy precedes visuals. Manages time within the cycle. | Fully self-directed. Sets and meets own standards. Seeks lead input for growth, not permission. |
| 4 | Process is internalized. Actively uses discovery to inform every downstream decision. Time management is strong. | Operates as an independent practitioner. The lead is advisory, not necessary. |
What to look for
- Do they start visuals before strategy is locked at the Friday QC review?
- Are they managing their own timeline or waiting to be told what to do next?
- By Cycle 2, are they asking the lead for direction or for feedback?
Category 4: AI Fluency
Are they directing AI tools to execute their vision, or curating output and hoping something works?
| Level | Cycle 1 (End of Wk 6 · Sun Aug 30) | Cycle 2 (End of Wk 12 · Sun Oct 11) |
| 1 | Does not use AI tools, or uses them with generic prompts and accepts whatever comes back. | No meaningful progression from Cycle 1. |
| 2 | Uses AI tools but prompts are broad. Generates many options and picks the best one (curating). | Prompts are specific but not consistently vision-led. |
| 3 | Prompts reference specific strategic and visual decisions. Reaches vision in 2–3 iterations. Knows when to redirect. | Precise, iterative, vision-led prompting. Uses AI as a tool, not a creative partner. |
| 4 | Directs AI with the specificity of a creative brief. Output matches vision on first or second iteration. Knows what they are trying to say before touching any tool. | Full directorial control. Could teach someone else how to prompt for brand work. |
What to look for
- How many iterations does it take them to reach something they are satisfied with?
- Can they describe what they want before they start prompting?
- Are they selecting from AI output or directing AI toward a specific outcome?
Category 5: Client Communication and Presentation
Can they present work to a client, defend their decisions, and handle pushback?
| Level | Cycle 1 (End of Wk 6 · Sun Aug 30) | Cycle 2 (End of Wk 12 · Sun Oct 11) |
| 1 | Cannot present work clearly. Does not connect deliverables to strategy in the presentation. | Presentation skills have not improved. |
| 2 | Presents work but reads from notes. Connects deliverables to strategy when prompted. Struggles with client questions. | Competent presenter but lacks conviction on difficult questions. |
| 3 | Presents clearly with strategy-to-visual connection. Handles most client questions with rationale. | Strong presenter. Leads the room. Defends decisions with evidence. |
| 4 | Commands the room. Every deliverable is framed in terms of what the client needs and why. Handles pushback with ease. | Could present to any client in any context. The program's proof of concept. |
What to look for
- Do they present the "what" or the "why"?
- When the client pushes back, do they cave, defer, or defend with rationale?
- By Cycle 2, does the presentation feel like a professional agency delivery?
Category 6: Team Integration
Does the brand work connect to motion and interactive, or is it operating in isolation?
| Level | Cycle 1 (End of Wk 6 · Sun Aug 30) | Cycle 2 (End of Wk 12 · Sun Oct 11) |
| 1 | No coordination with teammates. Brand work exists in isolation. | Team integration has not developed. |
| 2 | Shares finished work with teammates but does not coordinate during development. | Coordinates but does not drive integration. |
| 3 | Shares strategy early. Checks in with Motion and Interactive during development. Output feels connected. | Full integration. The team output feels like one vision, not three tracks. |
| 4 | Brand work is the strategic foundation the team builds on. Proactively ensures Motion and Interactive are aligned. | The team is indistinguishable from a professional creative team. |
What to look for
- Is the brand system informing motion and interactive work, or are they developing in parallel?
- Does the brand director see themselves as the strategic anchor for the team?
Assessment Record Template
Director Name: ____________________
| Category | Max | Cycle 1 (End Wk 6 · Aug 30) | Cycle 2 (End Wk 12 · Oct 11) |
| Strategic Thinking | /4 | | |
| Visual System Quality | /4 | | |
| Creative Process | /4 | | |
| AI Fluency | /4 | | |
| Client Communication | /4 | | |
| Team Integration | /4 | | |
| Total | /24 | | |
Narrative assessment (required at end of Cycle 2)
- Where did this person start?
- What changed?
- What is their realistic 90–180 day path forward as a working creative?