Are Clients Getting Too Involved In The Creative Process
Clients have always had opinions about the creative process. What is new is that they can now arrive holding a version of the work itself.
The old asymmetry did useful work. A client described a want, an agency interpreted it, and the gap between the two was where the idea got better. Neither side could skip the interpretation, so both had to talk.
How The Creative Process Changes When Both Sides Can Make
A brief that arrives with three generated executions attached is no longer a brief. It is a comparison, and the agency's job silently shifts from proposing to justifying difference. That is a harder conversation to have well, and it starts from a defensive position.
It also anchors. Once a marketing team has seen a version of their own idea rendered, every subsequent route is measured against it, including routes that are better.
The problem is not that clients can make things. It is that a made thing ends a conversation earlier than a description does.
Why Some Of This Is An Improvement
Not all of it is loss. A client who has tried to express something and failed often understands the difficulty better, and arrives more precise about the feeling they want. Briefs written after an hour of attempts are frequently sharper than briefs written from nothing, because the attempts eliminated the obvious answers before the meeting started.
What Agencies Can Reasonably Ask For
The workable request is about sequence rather than restraint. Share the attempts as context, before the routes are shown, and label them as an articulation of intent rather than a starting proposal. That preserves the information and removes the anchor.
Agencies that have set this expectation early report calmer reviews. Those that have not are having the argument mid-presentation, which connects directly to the end of the first draft.
Advertisement
