Every extra round of feedback doesn’t just frustrate teams – it costs time, money and momentum. The longer work sits in review cycles, the slower campaigns get to market, and the harder it is to keep creative energy high.
Right now, the norm is five rounds before approval (source: the BetterIdeas Project). And every one of them chips away at focus, budgets and the quality of the final idea.
That’s a big jump from the last time this was measured in 2007 by the Institute of Practitioners in Advertising (IPA), which found the norm to be three rounds. With each round costing thousands upon thousands in agency head hours, it’s a serious financial problem, especially when that’s multiplied by the number of projects going through an agency every month.
Of course, it’s not just financial – the toll is emotional too. Extra rounds mean extra work, which means late nights and weekends, because their other projects aren’t slowing down either. Each round is one step closer to, “I just want to get this off my desk.” So, it’s not surprising that the quality of work doesn’t necessarily improve with each round of feedback.
So, why do agencies and marketers need so many rounds to get to the final result?
Uncontrollable factors
A few factors are hard to control; competitor activity can sometimes require a brand to change tack during the campaign development. Market dynamics and shifting policies can also cause unforeseen issues. But a good brief can still set teams up to navigate these uncontrollable factors, so they’re not the main culprits that lead to rework.
Controllable factors
Ironically, the main causes of extra rounds of feedback and rework are found closer to home:
- - Too many stakeholders involved in sign-off;
- - Briefs that lack clear strategic direction;
- - No agreed-upon criteria for evaluating ideas;
- - Uncertainty about which brief should guide the evaluation.
How to actually take control of the controllable factors
These factors can be overcome - it just takes a little discipline. Here are four guidelines:
1. Limit the decision-making committee
Many of the world’s best marketers have mastered the art of avoiding decisions by committee. Unilever famously put it: “S/he who briefs, decides.” Fewer, empowered decision-makers lead to clearer direction and faster approvals. Or as legendary marketer Daryl Fielding warns, “Many hands make impeccably mediocre work.”
2. Make the strategic direction crystal clear
A brief should do more than list deliverables or unrelated goals – it should provide a sharp, strategic lens that guides creative thinking. When agencies understand the problem for communications to solve, the audience and the objectives clearly, they can produce work that hits the mark, rather than going through repeated cycles of clarification. It’s easier to hit a bullseye when the target isn’t moving.
3. Agree on evaluation criteria upfront
Without predefined criteria, reviewing creative work quickly becomes a personal opinion contest, usually won by the HIPPO - the Highest Paid Person’s Opinion. Teams that do have defined criteria to help them assess the work will keep discussions (and work) focused on what matters.
4. Clarify which brief is the reference point
There are usually two briefs: the marketing brief (a.k.a. client brief) and the agency brief (a.k.a. creative brief). When evaluating whether the work is “on brief”, which one is considered THE brief? Agreeing on this from the outset keeps feedback focused and actionable, saving unnecessary rounds of changes.
The upsides of fewer rounds
Fewer rounds don’t just mean saving time, money and energy. It leads to the conditions for better, more effective work. When agencies aren’t drowning in rework, they can focus on pushing ideas further. And the benefits ripple out. Marketers who improve briefs and feedback are three times more likely to feel proud of the work they produce.
In conclusion
Better briefs mean better ideas.
Better feedback means better collaboration.
Together, they create a smoother, more efficient process.
And most importantly, a greater return on investment.
Image 'Upstairs and Downstairs' by M.C. Escher (1960; lithography).