A few observations on how Thread
is currently positioned

I spent time reviewing your website — particularly the homepage and About/Who We Are page — to understand how the practice is currently positioned and perceived before someone ever makes contact.

This isn’t about the quality of the work — that’s evident from the projects you share.

What’s less clear is how a potential client, at first glance, immediately understands why Thread, over other capable practices.

That gap typically shows up in:
— broad, exploratory enquiries
— long conversations before alignment
— clients needing more explanation to feel confident
— hesitation around fees before value has fully landed

These aren’t signs of poor work — they’re signs that positioning isn’t doing enough decision work up front.

Where the clarity weakens

1.
Language that describes process
more than client context

The About/Who We Are copy uses thoughtful, reflective language about practice values and creative interests.

That’s legitimate and well-written.
But it doesn’t yet clearly signal:

— who benefits most from working with Thread
— where your thinking excels in a way that matters commercially
— what client situations you solve with the greatest confidence

When clients can’t immediately see whether they are your type of client, early conversations get consumed by qualification rather than decision.

2.
Broad capability without
a tight filter

Your site presents a range of sectors — residential, workplace, community — and an interest in context and outcomes.

The challenge is that without a strong client filter, all of these possibilities sit side-by-side rather than in a strategically ordered hierarchy.

That often translates into:

— enquiries from people outside your ideal brief
— early conversations focusing on project type instead of fit
— a sense of “reasonable for everyone, perfect for none”

Strong positioning helps reduce that noise.

3.
Outcomes are implicit,
not explicit

You talk about design thinking and responsive architecture, but there’s less early language about:

— confidence in project decision-making
— clarity around value before fees are discussed
— reduced risk for clients when engaging you

Potential clients want to feel what working with you actually solves for them. Not just what you do.

Why this matters

In a landscape where many practices use similar positive descriptors — thoughtful, collaborative, context-aware — the difference between likable and decidable comes down to how clearly your positioning signals fit before any conversation begins.

If that clarity is absent early, the cost is:

— more time spent explaining
— early conversations drifting into negotiation
— potential clients defaulting to comparison

That’s not a problem with your work.
It’s a function of how early language sets expectations.

A practical way to address it

If this resonates with you, there’s a way to sharpen this quickly and cleanly.

The work isn’t about rewriting everything.
It’s about:

— telling the right people they’re in the right place
— using language that filters, not just describes
— cutting ambiguity where possible

Done well, this reduces misaligned enquiries and increases confidence before the first call.

How I’d help

I offer a short, done-for-you positioning reset that focuses on:

— a clear positioning statement for Thread
— a rewritten About / Who We Are page that does more decision work
— language you can reuse across proposals, emails, and profiles

This is not a long process.
Most of the work happens without meetings and is delivered in 3–4 days.

It’s £995 + VAT, and there’s no pressure at all — it’s simply an option if you want it.

If you’d like to talk it through briefly, I’m happy to.
If not, no worries — I hope the observations above are useful in their own right.

I've worked alongside architecture practices for 25+ years. Helping them clarify position, attract better work, make fewer reactive decisions. Last year, a founder I'd done a positioning reset for asked why I wasn't doing this for all architects.

So I am.
This work is about thinking clearly, not shouting louder.

Led by Ben Holroyd.