We’re trying to scale a campaign from the US into Russian and LATAM markets, and we’re stuck on a pretty fundamental question: how much should we actually change the creative and messaging for each market?
Right now, we’ve got two approaches getting argued internally:
Approach A (Minimal Localization): Keep the core message the same, just translate it. The product benefits are universal, so the creative can be mostly the same. Faster to execute, cheaper, less room for error.
Approach B (Heavy Localization): Adapt the entire brief to each market. Different creators, different cultural references, different angles on the product benefit. More authentic regionally, but slower and way more expensive.
We tested both with one product. The minimally localized version (same creative translated, same messaging angle) actually performed decently in all markets. The heavily localized version performed better in some markets and worse in others—it was inconsistent.
But I’m skeptical about drawing conclusions from one test. The product might have been one of those rare “universal appeal” things.
So here’s my real question: what actually needs to change when you’re moving a campaign from US to Russian/LATAM markets? Is it:
- Just the language?
- The cultural references?
- The creator archetype (different influencer profile for each market)?
- The entire value proposition angle?
- All of the above?
And how do you know going in whether a market will need minimal or heavy localization without running expensive tests?
What’s your decision framework?
This is where I think most brands overcomplicate things.
Here’s what I’ve learned working with creators across Russia, US, and LATAM: the product category matters way more than people think.
If you’re selling something needs-based (deodorant, phone charger, productivity software), the core message can stay the same. The benefit is universal. Just translate it and find creators who are relevant in that market.
If you’re selling something lifestyle/taste-based (fashion, beauty, home decor), you NEED localization. The aesthetic that works in the US doesn’t automatically work in Russia. Different color preferences, different style codes, different lifestyle aspirations.
My decision framework:
- Is the product appeal universal or cultural? That determines how much localization is needed.
- Find the right creator for the market—not a clone of the US creator, but someone who has similar credibility in THEIR market. A US fashion influencer and a Russian fashion influencer will have different audiences and aesthetics.
- Brief them on the product benefit, not the exact execution. Let the Russian creator adapt the angle based on what they know their audience responds to.
I’ve seen campaigns do better when creators had freedom to adapt, not when they were asked to replicate an exact brief.
What type of product are you working with?
There’s a data-driven way to approach this:
Before you spend money on heavy localization, test the audience response with minimal changes. Take your original brief, translate it, find relevant creators in each market, and run a small batch of campaigns.
Then measure: do the conversion rates stay consistent across markets, or do they drop significantly?
If conversion rates stay within 10-15% of each other: minimal localization probably works. The message is translating culturally.
If conversion rates drop 30-50% in certain markets: that market needs localization. The message isn’t resonating.
After the initial test, you can make more targeted changes based on WHERE the performance dropped.
Also, segment your analysis by creator profile:
- Does the same type of creator (by follower count, niche, engagement pattern) perform similarly in each market?
- Or are certain creator types much better suited to certain markets?
That tells you whether the issue is the message or the audience/creator mismatch.
What’s your sample size so far? How many creators/campaigns have you tested in each market?
I’m navigating this exact problem right now. We’re a Russian-origin tech company entering Western Europe, and what I’ve learned is that assumptions about “similar enough” markets often blow up.
The US and Russia are actually pretty different markets from a buyer mentality perspective. American consumers want lifestyle/emotion-focused messaging (“be the person you want to be”). Russian consumers often want efficiency/logic-focused messaging (“this solves your problem faster”).
So even with the same product, the angle changed dramatically.
My advice: spend time with users in each market BEFORE you launch the campaign. Do 5-10 customer interviews in each region. Ask what problems they’re trying to solve, what language they use, what resonates with them.
Then brief the creators based on THAT insight, not on what worked in the US.
It’s slower upfront, but it saves you from wasting money on campaigns that don’t land.
How much customer research have you done in the markets you’re entering?
Okay so from the creator side—when I get a brief that’s too rigid about how to execute it, I actually create worse content because I’m trying to fit a mold instead of creating naturally.
What works best is when a brand gives me the core message and the product benefit, then lets me figure out how to present it in a way that feels authentic to my audience.
A US influencer had a specific aesthetic and lifestyle. A Russian influencer has a different one. If you try to make the Russian creator copy the US creator’s aesthetic, it looks forced and inauthentic.
But if you say, “Hey, here’s the product. Here’s the benefit. Here’s the audience you’re talking to. Create what you think will resonate,” you get way better content.
So my recommendation: don’t over-localize the message, but DO let creators have creative freedom. That’s where the authenticity comes in.
The best performing campaigns I’ve been part of were ones where the brand trusted the creator to know their own audience.
Here’s the framework I use, built from managing campaigns across multiple regions:
Tier 1: No Localization Needed
- B2B products
- Technical/functional benefits with no cultural element
- Testing or awareness-only campaigns
→ Translate, find relevant creators, brief on the core benefit
Tier 2: Light Localization
- Consumer products with universal appeal but different usage contexts
- Beauty/wellness (benefits are similar, but preferences differ)
→ Keep the core message, adapt color/aesthetic/lifestyle references, let creators have creative input
Tier 3: Heavy Localization
- Luxury/lifestyle goods
- Products tied to local culture or preferences
- Market-specific competitive landscapes
→ Different messaging angle, different creator archetypes, custom briefs per region
How you decide which tier:
- Is the product category already established in the market? If yes, lighter localization. If no, heavier.
- Does the US market have a different competitor landscape than Russia/LATAM? If yes, you need localization.
- Is the product usage context different? Different climate, different income level, different lifestyle—all signal the need for localization.
Most brands fall into Tier 2: keep the core benefit, adapt the expression.
Your test results (minimal localization performing decently) suggests you might be a Tier 1 or low-Tier 2 product. Run a few more tests to confirm, then scale based on what you learn.
The strategic approach:
Start with a positioning analysis for each market:
- How is your product category positioned in Russia vs. US vs. LATAM?
- What are the top 3 competitors in each market and what’s their messaging?
- What are the price points and consumer expectations in each market?
- What regulatory/compliance issues might affect messaging?
Then ask: does your value proposition need to shift based on this analysis?
If everyone in the Russia market is highlighting “premium quality” and you’re trying to position as “value,” you need localization. If the market positioning is similar, lighter touch is fine.
Test structure I recommend:
- Run a minimal localization test with 5-8 creators per market
- Track conversion rate, CAC, and ROAS by market
- If performance is within 15% variance: scale with minimal localization, just with different creators
- If performance drops significantly in certain markets: dig into what content performed vs. didn’t, then adapt
The mistake most brands make is doing “heavy localization” upfront without testing. That’s waste. Test light first, add localization only where the data says you need it.
What’s your typical customer LTV, and how big is the budget for this test?