Better work on the back end from better work at the front end

In the daily rush to respond to client demands for faster and cheaper, agencies pay less and less attention to one of the strongest predictors of success: investing time at the front end in order to get a better result at the back end.

This calls to mind the frustrated copywriter who said “There’s never enough time to do it right the first time, but there’s always enough time to do it over.”  Artificial deadlines, whether imposed by the client or the client service manager, are always counterproductive.  This is not only because it keeps everyone in a constant “rush” mode, but because it’s not an effective approach to problem solving.

Do it now, or you’ll just end up doing it later

The fact is that you and your team will have to collect a certain amount of information, uncover a certain amount of insights, and answer a certain number of questions about the assignment at some point in time.  The problem at most agencies is that these questions are answered only after a number of false starts and misfires; so why not just devote the time upfront and improve the odds of getting the work right the first time?

This phenomenon has been studied by Peter Keen in the insightful book, The Process Edge, in which he describes the “process” required to complete an assignment effectively as “thrashing.”  You can choose to do your “thrashing” towards the end of the project development timeline if you want, but you’ll end up doing much more thrashing and much less productive work, because you’ll probably have to take another run at the  assignment – maybe several times.

Much better to do your “thrashing” at the beginning of the project development timeline and thereby increase the amount of productive work moving forward. 

thrashing

In an agency context, this means:

Clarfying client expectations

Yes, the client has a budget and a deadline, but that’s hardly a definition of an expected outcome.  Time spent answering the question “What specific outcome are you seeking” is extremely well invested.

Clearly defining scope

Have you mapped out the exact scope of this assignment, including timelines, milestones, and number of allowed revisions?

Collecting more complete information

Far too many jobs are opened at agencies with incomplete information.  Telling your team to “Just get started” without providing them with the information is practically a prescription for redos and revisions.

Writing more complete briefs

As most agency professionals would admit, most briefs are pretty unhelpful beyond providing specs for the job.  A better brief not only produces better work, it again improves the odds of getting the work right the first time.

Giving better briefings

E-mailing a brief to a creative or media team (now almost standard practice) is a poor way to inform and motive your associates.  An in-person briefing provides the forum they need to ask questions and get clarifcations around information and insights related to the assignment.

Breaking the work out in phases

The most effective work is always the result of working in phases.  Approved brief before concepts.  Approved concept (in rough form) before any kind of finished production.  This takes more time, but results in better work and far fewer revisions.

Previewing the direction with the client

Sadly, a lot of agency work is simply turned into a PDF and emailed to the client with inadequate setup and explanation.  This is counter-intuitive, but investing time to get client buy-in early in the process will save you time in the long run.


All of these activities are designed to avoid false starts, which cost the agency money and erode agency-client relationships.  You’ll be more respected, do better work, and make more money if you invest the necessary time at the front end.  In fact, this is one of the distinguishing characteristics of great agencies; they do a far better job of this than their competitors.

Questions or feedback? Contact us.

Copyright © 2011 Ignition Consulting Group, Inc. Terms of Service