Skip to main content

Scenario

You have a product launch landing page, an email campaign, or a set of ads — and you need A/B variants. Typically you’d write variant A, then manually tweak tone and angle for variant B. That’s slow, and the “tweaking” often produces variants that are too similar to produce meaningful test results. This playbook produces genuinely different variants by changing the brand voice or persona — not just individual words. Variant A might use your bold, direct brand voice while variant B uses a warmer, storytelling voice. Or variant A is written for a startup founder persona while variant B targets an enterprise buyer. Same facts, different framing. Ready for your A/B testing platform.
Mavera-only. No A/B testing platform integration. This playbook produces the creative variants — you deploy them wherever you run tests.

Architecture


What You Need


The Flow

1

Create or select brand voices / personas

You need at least 2 differentiated voices or personas. Create brand voices from different source material (e.g. your blog vs. your support docs), or use personas with different psychographic profiles.
2

Define the shared brief

Write one brief with topic, audience, key points, and format. This brief is identical across all variants — the only variable is the voice or persona.
3

Generate variants

Call POST /generations once per voice/persona. Each call produces a variant shaped by its specific voice or persona context.
4

Compare variants

Use Chat with response_format to produce a structured comparison: tone analysis, readability, emotional appeal, and a recommendation for which variant to test first.

Strategy A — Different Brand Voices

Create 2–3 brand voices from different source material. Each voice encodes different tone, vocabulary, and style rules.

Generate A/B Variants

The brief is identical. Only the brand_voice_id changes.

Strategy B — Different Personas

Instead of (or in addition to) voices, use different personas. The persona changes the audience lens, not just the voice — the content adapts its value propositions, examples, and framing. Pass persona_id in extra_body when calling Chat, using the same brief content but different personas (e.g. persona_startup_founder, persona_enterprise_cto, persona_smb_ops). Each response is shaped by that persona’s priorities, pain points, and communication preferences.

Compare Variants

Use Chat with response_format to produce a structured side-by-side analysis.

Example Comparison Output


Variations

Combine both strategies: 2 voices × 2 personas = 4 variants. This lets you test voice and audience framing as independent variables in a 2×2 factorial design.
Before committing to a live test, run a Focus Group with your target persona to predict which variant will win. Ask “Which version would make you more likely to upgrade?” as a MULTIPLE_CHOICE question.
Generate variants, compare, then use the comparison’s weaknesses to refine the lower-scoring variant via Chat — “Rewrite to strengthen CTA while keeping the same tone.”

Credits Estimate

Persona-based A/B is dramatically cheaper than voice-based A/B (no voice creation cost). Use personas when you want to vary the audience framing; use voices when you want to vary the brand expression.

What’s Next

Brand Voice Content Library

Create a full content library from a single brand voice

Content Localization

Adapt variants for different regional markets

Message Testing Matrix

5 messages × 5 personas = 25 quantitative data points

Brand Voice

Create and manage brand voice profiles

Personas

Pre-built and custom persona reference

Credits & Budget

Track and manage credit usage