Creative approvals stall when too many people can say no, nobody owns the final decision, and feedback arrives after the work has moved on. The fix is structural: name one person who decides, split approval into stages so earlier choices are locked before later ones begin, and agree rules for how feedback is given. This article sets out a workable process for small and mid-sized teams.
Why approvals go wrong
- Unclear ownership: several people believe they hold the final say.
- Late stakeholders: someone senior sees the work for the first time at the end and reopens decisions.
- Vague feedback: “make it pop” gives the creator nothing to act on.
- Conflicting feedback: two reviewers ask for opposite changes and nobody resolves it.
- No brief to judge against: reviewers rely on personal taste instead of agreed objectives. A good creative brief fixes this at the start.
Define roles first
Two common frameworks help. Atlassian’s team playbook describes DACI: a Driver who coordinates and makes sure a decision is reached by the agreed date, an Approver who is the one person who makes the decision, Contributors who give recommendations but do not vote, and Informed people who are told the outcome. Asana’s description of RACI uses Responsible, Accountable, Consulted and Informed, and states there should be only one Accountable role per task.
Both reach the same conclusion that matters here: one decision-maker, with input routed through advisers rather than extra sign-offs.
| Role in a creative review | Typical person | What they do |
|---|---|---|
| Driver or Responsible | Creative lead or producer | Runs the process, collects feedback, makes revisions |
| Approver or Accountable | Brand owner or marketing lead | Makes the final decision at each stage |
| Contributors or Consulted | Legal, product, sales, regional teams | Give expert input within their area |
| Informed | Wider team, partners | Receive the outcome |
Split sign-off into stages
Approving everything at the end is the costliest way to work. Use stage gates so each decision is made once.
- Brief: objectives, audience, constraints, success measures. Sign off before any creative work.
- Concept or direction: the idea and tone, shown as boards, references or short treatments. See storyboarding commercials for an example of a low-cost stage at which to settle structure.
- Draft: layouts, rough cut or first design pass. Feedback here is about structure and content, not fine polish.
- Refinement: detailed changes, with a limited number of rounds.
- Final checks: legal and compliance review, technical specifications, accessibility.
- Release: final approval and archive of the approved version.
Each stage has an Approver and a stated deadline. Once a stage is approved, reopening it is a formal change request that explains the cost to time and budget.
Rules for feedback
- Give feedback in one consolidated list from each department, not scattered messages.
- Tie comments to the brief: say which objective a change serves.
- Describe the problem rather than prescribing the solution. “The product is hard to see against the background” is more useful than “make the background red”.
- Mark each comment as must fix, should fix or preference.
- Set a review window, such as two working days, and state that silence after the window means no objection.
- Cap revision rounds and agree what counts as a round.
Use guidelines to remove routine approvals
If your brand guidelines are clear, many decisions on colour, type and logo use no longer need senior review. Pre-approve templates, and reserve approval for work that departs from them. This single change often removes the most repetitive bottleneck.
Handle legal and compliance sensibly
Bring legal, regulatory or compliance reviewers in at the concept stage for sensitive claims, not only at the end. Late legal changes are expensive. This is general process advice and does not replace professional review of what your industry requires.
Tools and records
A shared tracker or review tool matters less than one source of truth. Keep a log of each version, who approved it, and when. When disputes arise, the log shows what was agreed.
Common traps
- Adding a reviewer “just to be safe”, which turns an informed role into a veto.
- Letting the Approver delegate informally without telling the team.
- Accepting feedback after a deadline without a formal change.
- Treating all comments as equal when some are preferences.
Where Radiance Impact fits
Radiance Impact’s Studio produces commercials, brand films and animation, and its work depends on clear briefs and staged reviews. To talk about structuring a production workflow, see the Studio page or contact us.
Sources
- DACI: a decision-making framework, Atlassian Team Playbook
- RACI chart, Asana
