Change is good, except when it's change to already-approved creative. Those changes can cost a bundle and generate too much stomach acid. They're still necessary, of course, if there's a real problem, but costly nonetheless. Any way to keep this to a minimum? Some thoughts:
- Plan the review process. Will the CEO have to see the final creative after everything is layed out? Will copy reviewers really take the copy seriously before they see it in layout? Does Legal have to put its stamp of approval on everything at the last minute? All of these mean more rounds of creative review. Build them into your schedule so there are no surprises -- and, if the resulting schedule has you launching your campaign two months too late, get agreement all 'round to shortcut some reviews.
- Give reviewers a job aid. This is easier than you think -- simply make a lists of every copy, design, or layout issue that comes up. Then turn them into checklists for everyone's use in reviewing creative.
- Designate a dictator. Some changes aren't worth the cost of making them. Figure out who in your team should have the power to say "we're not making that change" and honor his or her decisions.
- Pass on the true cost of changes. Every change has immediate costs -- more work and time for creatives, coordinators, proofers, and reviewers -- plus there are indirect costs associated with delays, some of them quite large. Let all the stakeholders in a project know what those costs are, then publish the changes and costs incurred. Do this regularly and people will start reviewing things more carefully earlier in the cycle.
Okay, that's what I can think of. Any other ideas?
Comments