Creative production planning and review system
The creative team prepares task variants, collects notes and approves the final material. The client's decisions are visible as well as whether the content has already been transmitted for publication.
The client's goal, audience, message, formats, validators and measurement criteria are collected by email, documents and meetings. The team starts work with different understandings, increasing number of changes, delays and unpaid volume.
How the solution works
- Describe the goal, audience and transmitted outcome
- Prepare direction and agreed adaptations
- Gather a preview of a specific version and a customer's solution
- Check content, rights and channel requirements
- The team transmits or announces the approved piece and checks the recipient's or channel's response.
Key challenges
- Customer tasks and success criteria are formulated in different ways
- Comments and endorsements are managed through too many channels
- Content adaptations and repetitive production tasks are done manually
- Use of IoT-generated content is not consistently managed
Solution capabilities
Creative task
Purpose, message, audience, mandatory statements and formats remain visible throughout the course. The change has an applied version and volume preview.
Adaptation work
Text, image, language and format are combined according to the approved creative direction. The automatically altered size or translation is checked by the employee for readability, meaning and branding requirements.
Comments and Decision
The note is associated with a specific text or image location and version. Controversial responses from validators have a decider rather than an automatic preference for the last comment.
Facts and use of IoT
Artificial intelligence provides usable material, and the result is reviewed by a human. Product statements, quotes, and image details are verified against reliable sources.
Publication confirmation
The rights and version that are appropriate for a specific market and channel are used. Planned, accepted by the channel, published and rejected material has separate states and a repair action.
Business context
- Customer tasks and success criteria are formulated in different ways
- The client's goal, audience, message, formats, validators and measurement criteria are collected by email, documents and meetings. The team starts work with different understandings, increasing number of changes, delays and unpaid volume.
- Comments and endorsements are managed through too many channels
- Feedback is provided via email, messages, meetings and file comments, and the decisions of validators are not tied to a specific version. It is unclear which comment is valid, with an increase in re-corrections and volume disputes.
- Content adaptations and repetitive production tasks are done manually
- The same texts, designs and visual elements are applied many times to different formats, channels and languages. The team wastes time on mechanical changes, and version errors and brand discrepancies become more frequent.
- Use of IoT-generated content is not consistently managed
- Employees use different tools, upload customer information, and generate content without uniform sources, rights, fact-checking, and validation rules. There is an increasing risk of confidentiality, copyright, factual errors, and trademark mismatch.
- The client sees the path from task to approved material
- It is important for the marketing customer that the creative result is in line with the agreed goal and reach the channels in time. The notes seen in one go allow for a more accurate combination of changes. The agency can explain what has been approved and what solution is still needed to prepare the campaign.
Core features
- Creative task
- Adaptation work
- Comments and Decision
- Facts and use of IoT
- Publication confirmation
Key integrations
- Brand and Resource Library
- Valid guideline, component used and specific publishing rights.
- Publishing or transmission channel
- The real result of acceptance, publication, rejection and correction.
Potential impact (%)
The ranges indicate an illustrative relative change in the metric under the stated assumptions. Results depend on the starting position and actual use of the solution. Percentages for different metrics must not be added together.
Mechanical adaptation preparation work
12–36%Decreasing
This illustrative scenario assumes that 30-60% of manual data entry and handover work can be addressed. That share is assumed to fall by 40-60%. Company data is needed to verify both the addressable workload and the resulting change.
Measure working minutes for a comparable set of adaptations to the quality review of the previous result.
Revision or transfer error corrected publication
12–42%Decreasing
This illustrative scenario assumes that 30-60% of errors can be addressed through the data and rule checks described. That share is assumed to fall by 40-70%. Company data is needed to verify both the addressable share and the resulting change.
Count publications corrected for the wrong adaptation, unsubmitted comment or the rejection of an overlooked channel.
Part of the negative feedback on the combination of creative works
5–20%Decreasing
Indicative assumption: 20-40% of negative reviews are related to unclear alignment of creative versions and notes. The solution could reduce this share by 25-50%. This is a scenario of potential; the assumptions need to be verified by feedback collected by the company.
When a company starts collecting reviews, negative reviews about the matching of creative works are counted from all the assessments received on the topic. The same method of evaluation is applied before and after installation and similar customer groups are compared. Without initial data, the actual change is not determined.
Conditional calculation scenarios. The assumptions have not been validated against client measurements.
When this solution is relevant
- The creative material is applied to several formats and channels, and the tasks and versions are combined separately.
- Client notes do not always reach the final layout or publication.
Implementation requirements
Channels and language requirements, validators and limits of revisions are agreed upon for the course of creation. Changes to the client task and rejections of publication must maintain the history of the versions and the commercial responsibility of additional work.
Further development options
- Additional adaptation and publishing features after real-content quality and channel response check.