How do agencies get creatives approved faster?

Most approvals do not stall because the work is bad. They stall because nobody is quite sure what is being asked of them. The client opens an email with three attachments, forwards it to a colleague, replies with “looks good but can we try the logo bigger?”, and the designer is left wondering whether that is a yes.

Speed comes from removing that uncertainty. Over years of running creative approvals at my agency, the fixes that actually moved timelines were not clever. They were five plain habits, applied every time.

Why do creative approvals take so long?

Approvals take long because feedback, decisions and files live in different places, so every round needs someone to collect, interpret and reconcile them. The creative itself is rarely the bottleneck.

Look at where time actually goes in a typical round:

• Waiting for a reviewer to open the file at all.
• Translating vague comments (“make it pop”) into specific changes.
• Merging conflicting notes from two people who never saw each other’s feedback.
• Checking whether a comment refers to the current version or an older one.
• Fixing basic errors (wrong logo, missing legal line) that should never have reached the client.
• Chasing a final yes from someone who said “looks good” two days ago but never formally signed off.

None of these are design problems. They are process problems, and each one has a fix.

How does putting feedback on the creative speed things up?

Feedback placed directly on the creative removes the translation step. When a comment is pinned to the exact headline, button or frame it refers to, the designer does not have to guess what “the text at the top” means.

Compare two versions of the same note:

The right column needs no follow-up question. That alone removes a full exchange of emails per round, because the designer can start working instead of writing back for clarification.

It also helps reviewers. When people can see each other’s comments in one thread, they stop repeating the same note and they notice disagreements early. Two stakeholders debating the headline colour in a shared thread is annoying, but it is far better than discovering the conflict after you have already made one person’s change.

In Yesquill this is the default: reviewers click to drop a pin or drag a box, and on video the comment sticks to the frame. Any proofing tool worth using does something similar. Even a marked-up PDF is better than a paragraph in an email.

Why should each reviewer give one clear decision?

Each reviewer should give one clear decision because comments are not approvals. A thread full of notes tells you what people think, but it does not tell you whether you can ship.

Ask every assigned reviewer to land on one of three answers:

1. Approve. Ship it as is.
2. Approve with changes. Make the small fixes noted, no need to send it back.
3. Changes required. Another round is needed before this can go out.

The middle option matters more than it looks. Without it, a reviewer who wants one comma fixed has to choose between approving something imperfect and blocking the whole job. Most people block. “Approve with changes” lets them say “fine, just fix the comma” and keeps the project moving.

Make the rule explicit: one “Changes required” from any assigned reviewer means the creative goes back, and it is only approved when everyone assigned has approved. That is how Yesquill sets status, and it is a sensible rule whatever tool you use, because it ends the “I thought Sam had signed off” conversation.

Also be clear about who is assigned. Five people can comment. Two people decide. Write the names of the deciders in the brief so nobody waits for an approval that was never needed.

How do you keep versions from slowing approvals down?

Keep every version of a creative in one place, stacked in order, so reviewers always land on the latest one and can see what changed. Version confusion is one of the quietest time sinks in agency work.

When versions live as separate attachments or loose files in a shared folder, people review the wrong one. They comment on version 3 when version 4 is out. They approve something that has since changed. Then someone has to untangle it.

A good version setup does three things:

• Shows the newest version by default, with older ones still reachable.
• Keeps old comments attached to the version they were made on, so history is clear.
• Lets reviewers compare two versions side by side, so they only check what changed instead of reviewing the whole thing again.

When a new version is uploaded, decisions should reset. Approval of version 3 is not approval of version 4. That sounds strict, but it is what protects you when a client later asks why something changed. I wrote more about this in the real cost of version 7_FINAL.

What should be checked before a human reviewer sees it?

Basic, rule-based errors should be caught before a human reviewer ever opens the file. Wrong brand colours, an off-brand font, a missing legal disclaimer or a banned word are not matters of taste. They are mistakes, and every one that reaches a client costs a round and a little trust.

You can catch these in two ways. The first is a checklist the designer or account lead runs before sending. Our creative review checklist is a good starting point. The second is an automated check against written brand rules.

Yesquill’s AI brand check does the second: an admin writes the rules once (colours, fonts, required legal lines, words to avoid, tone), and the AI checks each upload and pins issues with a severity before anyone reviews it. It can run on every upload automatically. Whether you use software or a printed list, the point is the same: people should spend their review time on judgement, not on spotting the wrong hex code.

How do you make approvals easy for clients?

Make approval the easiest possible thing for the client to do: one link, no account, the latest version on screen and a clear way to give their decision. Every extra step is a reason to postpone.

Clients are busy and your project is one of many. If approving means creating a login, downloading a ZIP and writing an email, it will wait until Friday. If it means opening a link on their phone between meetings, it might happen right away.

Things that reduce friction for clients:

• A review link that opens straight to the creative, with no sign-up.
• A clear ask in the message: what to review, what kind of decision you need, and by when.
• A due date they can see.
• Only the files they need to decide on, not the whole project folder.
• A password or expiry date on the link if the work is confidential, so security does not become an excuse for email attachments.

The message that goes with the link matters as much as the link. If clients routinely ignore your requests, the problem is often the email itself. See why clients ignore your approval emails for what to change.

What does a faster approval round look like in practice?

A faster round is short, predictable and a little boring. Here is the shape I aim for:

1. The designer runs basic checks (manually or automatically) and fixes anything flagged.
2. The creative is uploaded as a new version in the same place as the previous ones.
3. Internal reviewers comment on the creative and each gives a decision.
4. Once internal approval is in, the client gets one link with a clear ask and a due date.
5. The client comments on the creative and picks one decision.
6. If changes are required, the designer works from the pinned comments and uploads the next version. Decisions reset and the loop repeats.

Nothing here is new. What makes it fast is doing all of it every time, so nobody has to think about the process and everyone can focus on the work. For a fuller walkthrough with roles and timing, see our creative approval workflow guide.

Where should you start?

Start with the habit that causes the most rework in your team right now. For most agencies, that is feedback arriving in email instead of on the creative. Fix that first, then add clear decisions, then tidy up versions.

You do not need to change everything at once. One clear habit, used every round, will save more time than a perfect process nobody follows.