Link copied to clipboard
Designing a brand for family tech is rarely about speaking to one audience.
Often, the product is used by kids or teens, approved or paid for by parents, and evaluated or purchased by schools or institutions. Each group comes in with different expectations, concerns, and levels of power in the decision-making process. And all of them need to trust the product for different reasons.
This is where many family tech brands start to feel the strain. A brand that feels engaging and accessible for young users can feel too light for parents. A brand that reassures schools and administrators can feel cold or overly formal for families. Trying to solve this by “balancing” tones often leads to something vague that doesn’t fully work for anyone.
The real challenge isn’t that there are too many audiences. It’s that these audiences are interconnected, and the brand needs to speak clearly to each of them without losing coherence or credibility along the way.
When founders talk about “multiple audiences,” it can sound like a branding problem that needs clever segmentation. In family tech, it’s usually more human than that.
The same product can be experienced by a student discovering it for the first time, a parent deciding whether it belongs in their home, and a school administrator evaluating it through the lens of safety, credibility, and educational value. These aren’t just different demographics. They’re different roles, responsibilities, and emotional states interacting with the same brand.
For example, when I did a brand refresh for The Juice News, the product needed to feel engaging and accessible for teens and tweens, while also reassuring parents and signaling legitimacy to schools who would ultimately approve or purchase it. Designing for these groups as separate buckets would have fractured the brand. The challenge was understanding where their needs overlap, and where the brand had to communicate differently without losing coherence.
A common instinct in family tech is to make products for kids feel extremely playful in order to compete with entertainment platforms. But playfulness can quickly undermine trust, especially when the product is meant to inform rather than distract.
When I worked on the brand refresh for The Juice News, the goal was to create something students would want to engage with, without making it feel frivolous or unreliable. The visual language needed to feel modern and familiar, loosely aligned with what students are used to seeing online, while still remaining grounded and intentional.
Some assets were designed specifically for students, others for parents or schools, and a few leaned more serious than others. But the branding itself didn’t change. The tone flexed, not the identity. Just as important, the system needed to hold up over time and be easy for the internal team to use. Every decision came back to one question: how do we build a brand that resonates with students while building trust with parents and schools?
When a brand has to speak to students, parents, and schools, flexibility is unavoidable. But flexibility only works when it’s built on a stable core.
In the brand refresh for The Juice News, that meant defining what could never change, regardless of who the message was for. The values, the level of care, and the sense of credibility had to remain intact whether a student was scrolling, a parent was evaluating, or a school was reviewing the product. Without that alignment, every decision would have turned into a debate.
Once the core was clear, adaptation became easier. The brand could adjust tone, emphasis, or context without feeling inconsistent. Instead of designing three identities, the work focused on one system that could stretch without breaking. That stability is what allows a brand to meet different audiences where they are, without losing itself in the process.
Once the core was defined, the next challenge was figuring out how the brand could adapt without becoming inconsistent.
In the brand system for The Juice News, this showed up through different entry points rather than different identities. Student-facing assets leaned more visual and inviting, designed to feel familiar without mimicking social media. Parent- and school-facing materials were more structured and informational, giving space to questions around credibility, safety, and educational value.
What mattered was that these differences lived at the level of expression, not fundamentals. The colors, typography, and overall tone stayed cohesive, even as emphasis shifted. This made the brand easier to trust externally and easier to use internally. Instead of reinventing itself for each audience, the brand could meet people where they were while still feeling like the same product every time.
When a product serves multiple audiences, founders often ask which group matters most. But that framing tends to flatten a more interconnected reality.
A more useful way to think about it is to look at the role each audience plays, and what they need in order to trust the product. In a product like The Juice News, students need to feel drawn in and respected. If the experience feels boring, condescending, or overly institutional, they simply won’t engage. Parents, on the other hand, need reassurance before allowing the product into their child’s life. Schools need confidence that the product aligns with their educational responsibility and standards.
What made this work wasn’t choosing one audience over the others, but understanding how trust flows between them. Engagement from students supports adoption. Confidence from parents supports approval. Credibility with schools supports scale. Before refining a brand, it’s worth stepping back and asking not just who you’re designing for, but how belief in the product is built and reinforced across the entire ecosystem.
Designing a brand that speaks to different audiences isn’t about finding the perfect middle ground. It’s about building something grounded enough to hold nuance.
In family tech and other B2B2C products, complexity is not a flaw. It’s a reflection of real life. Students, parents, and institutions don’t experience a product in isolation, and a brand that acknowledges that reality is often the one that earns trust over time.
The goal isn’t to sound the same to everyone, or to be everything at once. It’s to be consistent in what you stand for, while being thoughtful about how that shows up in different contexts. When a brand is designed this way, it doesn’t just work at launch. It grows with its users, its team, and the ecosystem around it.
That kind of longevity rarely comes from trends. It comes from care, intention, and a willingness to design for real people in real situations.
