Multi-location marketing: a responsibility matrix
Assign ownership across a central marketing team and local branches. Includes a practical matrix for local offers, business profiles, reporting and urgent updates.
1. Start with decisions that keep getting stuck
A shared logo does not create a shared operating process. One location may approve a promotion within an hour while another waits several days for the head office. Customers still expect the same basic reliability from both. I would start by listing recurring decisions: changing hours, announcing an event, adjusting an offer, responding to a review and explaining a service interruption. Each needs a clear owner.
My portfolio includes EZ KATKA, a Russian esports venue network that reached 19 locations. My marketing leadership role covered 2023–2024, and the documented work includes building a team and franchise standards. That is historical context for this operating problem. It does not establish that the example matrix below produced any specific revenue or acquisition result. The original case retains its geography and historical platforms.
2. Separate proposing, approving, doing and checking
These are four different responsibilities. A local manager can propose a promotion, central marketing can approve its commercial limits, the branch can run it and an analyst can check the result. Assign one final decision owner for each outcome. Two approvers without a tie-breaking rule can leave a simple update waiting indefinitely. The matrix should tell an employee exactly what can proceed and what needs escalation.
Write down the boundary of local discretion and a backup person. Updating verified opening hours should not require the same process as changing the brand promise. An urgent closure needs a short operational path, especially outside the central team's normal hours. The table is a suggested starting point, not a universal organization chart. Match it to the people who actually have access and authority.
| Decision | Central team | Location |
|---|---|---|
| Brand name and visual rules | Approves | Applies |
| Hours and service availability | Defines format | Updates and checks |
| Local promotion | Sets boundaries | Proposes and delivers |
| Metric definitions | Maintains dictionary | Supplies source data |
| Review response | Defines escalation | Checks facts and replies |
3. Document real local differences
Create a location record containing its address, opening hours, available services, booking limitations, contact route and responsible person. This becomes the reference for its landing page, ads and business profiles. Google's Business Profile guidelines describe consistency requirements for chains while allowing relevant real-world differences. Adding keywords to a business name is not a substitute for maintaining accurate information.
For a US or Canadian business, confirm that the profile and booking page reflect the service available at that location. Check holiday hours separately. Ask local teams to support claims about a different audience with actual inquiries, booking patterns or customer feedback. The positioning-map tool can draft market axes from the description you provide. It cannot verify branch utilization, retrieve customer records or administer business profiles; a person still needs to validate the proposed distinctions.
4. Pilot one ordinary promotion
Illustrative example: a six-location studio network wants more bookings during quiet daytime hours. This is a teaching example, not an EZ KATKA result. Central marketing defines the service, offer boundaries and measurement plan. Two locations confirm available capacity, adapt the local message and assign someone to handle inquiries. Before launch, run a test booking through the ad, page, form, confirmation and internal record.
Choose a consistent definition of a completed visit before reviewing results. Cost per inquiry alone can reward a location that advertises unavailable slots. Keep spend, confirmed bookings, attended visits and rejection reasons visible by branch. If the pilot has no credible comparison group, call the result an observed change. Staffing, weather, timetable changes and competitor availability could also affect it. The matrix solves ownership; it does not remove measurement uncertainty.
5. Fix reporting mismatches before ranking branches
The most damaging reporting error is using the same label for different events. One location may call the first inquiry a new customer while another requires a first payment. Combining those numbers produces a network acquisition cost that cannot guide a decision. Agree on the customer definition, reporting period, included costs and treatment of repeat visits. Keep newly opened locations separate from established branches when their operating conditions differ.
Local context also disappears easily. Head office may have an advertising dashboard without knowing that a location was closed for two days. Add a dated exception log for closures, service shortages, phone failures and rescheduled events. Record events when they happen, with an owner and evidence. The log should make comparisons more useful, not provide explanations invented after a disappointing report.
6. Test whether the matrix works without you
Start with five recurring tasks from the downloadable template. In the weekly review, discuss missed handoffs, unresolved exceptions and decisions that require central authority. Keep proposed changes to the standard in a separate list. If every location bypasses the same rule, inspect a few examples before assuming a training problem. The process itself may be too slow for the operational task.
Replace role names with actual owners, dates and links to working documents. Then ask someone from another branch to complete a scenario using the matrix alone. Add the missing instruction wherever they need clarification. This small test reveals whether the process can survive a busy week, an absent manager or a new franchise partner. It is a more useful rollout criterion than whether everyone attended the presentation.
Location responsibility matrix
Illustrative operating model. Replace roles with names and agree on deadlines. This is not the historical EZ KATKA playbook.
Download the working CSV template
Open in Excel or Google Sheets. Replace example rows and empty fields with your own data.
Frequently asked questions
How many locations justify a responsibility matrix?
Use one when the same decision involves multiple people and ownership becomes unclear. Two locations can be enough. Different services, franchise arrangements and reporting systems often add more complexity than the location count itself.
Does every branch need its own website page?
A real location can justify a useful page when it has specific information such as services, opening hours, directions, staff or booking conditions. Build around verified local needs. Replacing the city name in an otherwise identical page is not a strong reason to publish it.