Two logos beside each other can say “equal partnership,” “sponsor,” “delivery partner,” or merely “we both approved this.” If the relationship is unclear, pixel-perfect alignment will not fix the message. Agree on the relationship and the audience's likely interpretation before making a lockup.

Write the relationship in plain language

First ask the partners to finish a sentence: “This campaign is led by ___, with ___ as ___.” The answer might be jointly presented by, in partnership with, supported by, or delivered for. Those phrases have different meanings. Use the one that matches the actual arrangement and get both parties to approve it. Do not let a large logo imply responsibility that a smaller organization has not accepted.

The Commonwealth Scholarship Commission's visual identity guide makes this distinction explicit: its delivery partners use CSC branding alone for certain external materials, while joint branding with other partners has separate rules, including descriptor text to explain the relationship. That is one organization's policy, not a universal hierarchy. It shows why a partnership type belongs in the brief.

Turn the relationship into three layout rules

Make a one-page agreement that answers:

  1. Order and prominence: Which mark appears first? Are they equal, or does one lead? Agree how optical size will be judged, since two marks with the same pixel height can feel very different.
  2. Separation: Will the marks sit in one lockup, opposite ends of the canvas, or a primary header with a partner footer? Keep each mark's required clear space and minimum size.
  3. Words: Where does the relationship descriptor go, and what is its exact wording in every language used?

The UK Space Agency's published brand rules put its logo at the top with partner logos below where possible, and give a different arrangement for constrained banners. The CSC guide instead specifies first position and relative size for its particular lead or equal partnerships. These are useful examples of documented decisions; copy neither arrangement without checking both partners' own rules.

Test the smallest real format first

Build the proposed system in a wide page header, a narrow story frame, a poster footer, and a presentation title slide. In each, ask an unfamiliar reviewer: “Who is behind this, and what is each party's role?” If they cannot answer, change the descriptor or hierarchy. Do not simply shrink both logos until they fit. A partner credit can become text in a constrained placement if the agreement permits it; where a logo is contractually required, choose a different composition.

Also decide who supplies approved vector files, who reviews variations, and which events trigger a new approval: a new partner, new market, new language, or a change in the relationship. Keep the approval record with the final assets. That extends the broader brand handoff and rights inventory into the specific problem of joint campaigns.

A designer can then create a flexible identity system rather than one frozen “two logos plus slash” graphic. ARCHV can apply the approved hierarchy across brand, campaign, digital, and event work, while the partners retain a clear way to check that each public version represents the relationship accurately.