Why brand projects die in the approval round
It's not that the designer did something wrong. It's that the leadership team did not agree on the criteria before reviewing anything.
Brand projects with multiple approvers often fail because each leadership member applies a different measure to the same outcome. The solution is to hold a workshop to gather evaluation criteria before design begins. When everyone agrees to measure by the same standard, the approval loop becomes a logical comparison rather than an emotional debate.
Sinh Vũ has witnessed many brand projects go through all the steps systematically: a clear brief, a solid strategy, and well-founded design. Then comes the presentation to the leadership team, and everything comes to a halt. Not because the design is wrong. But because six people in the room are using six different measures to evaluate the same outcome.
The approval round does not fail due to poor design
One member says, "it doesn't look luxurious enough." Another says, "the logo needs to be stronger." A third says, "our competitor does it differently." They are not contradicting the design. They are contradicting each other. They have not agreed on what "luxurious" means, what "strong" entails, and whether the competitor is relevant to the brand's direction.
The designer receives a list of revision requests from various directions. Version two is created to please one person, inadvertently losing what another person approved in version one. The third round repeats this structure. No one is wrong in each individual step, but the project keeps going in circles due to one missing element: a common set of criteria agreed upon beforehand.
Criteria must be established before design
The issue cannot be resolved by adding more options. Introducing additional samples only makes the meeting noisier, as now everyone can choose a sample that suits their taste and call it "feedback". It cannot be resolved by having the director make the final decision either. A top-down imposed decision will leave hesitation in implementation at lower levels.
The only way to make it work is to ask the right questions at the right time: before any images are drawn. When there is nothing to like or dislike, people are forced to discuss using objective language rather than subjective feelings.
A brand is not what you say it is. It's what they say it is.
Marty Neumeier, The Brand Gap
Neumeier reminds us that a brand exists in the perception of outsiders, not in the feelings of insiders. Similarly, the criteria for approving designs must stem from the question "What will the target audience feel?" not "How do I feel about it?".
Workshop structure gathers criteria
Sinh Vũ often suggests a separate working session, before the design phase, with all those who have final approval authority. This session does not discuss colors or fonts. It addresses fundamental questions whose answers will serve as the benchmarks for all subsequent design decisions.
The first part of the workshop focuses on clarifying the business context: what problem does this brand need to solve in the next twelve to twenty-four months? This is a question about market positioning, not aesthetics. You want the target customers to change their perceptions in what direction after engaging with the new brand.
The second part presents opposing pairs to force the group to choose a position. For example, does this brand want to stand at one extreme between "solid tradition" and "modern innovation"? Between "friendly closeness" and "professional distance"? There are no right or wrong answers, but there must be a consensus. When the group cannot agree at this stage, it signals a strategic conflict that needs to be resolved before spending any money on design.
The third part builds a list of five to seven evaluation criteria. Each criterion is written as a specific statement, and the entire group signs off in agreement. For example, a criterion: "Looking at the logo, customers in the financial sector perceive stability and control." This criterion is measurable and does not depend on personal taste.
The criteria document is an internal contract
The outcome of the workshop is a short criteria document, one to two pages long, not a PowerPoint summary. The document clearly states the business objectives of the project, the brand position to be achieved, and the profile of the target customer. It also lists the evaluation criteria in order of priority, along with the signatures of each participant.
This document serves as an internal contract. When the design is presented, the conversation will no longer be about "I like it or I don't like it" but rather "does this option meet criteria two and five?" If it does not meet the criteria, the designer knows exactly what needs to be adjusted. If it meets the criteria, those who personally dislike it will find it difficult to veto since the criteria were signed off by them beforehand.
When is the workshop insufficient
The criteria workshop addresses the issue of multiple approvers, but there is a prerequisite: those in the room must truly represent the final decision-making authority. If the workshop is held at a mid-level and the results must be presented to someone else who did not participate, the measure will not bind the actual decision-maker. The emotional loop will repeat.
The second scenario where the workshop fails to resolve issues is when disagreements among leadership members are not about brand criteria but about the strategic direction of the company. If two founders have different visions for the target market in the next five years, brand design cannot bridge that conflict. The workshop will reveal this, and that is a valuable outcome, even if it is sometimes uncomfortable.
Design to amplify the existing reality of the organization, not to hide it.
Wally Olins, On Brand
When you invest in a brand project serious enough to invite the entire leadership team to the approval round, remember this. The cost of a workshop to establish criteria beforehand is the smallest investment in the entire project. It is also the quickest return on investment. It does not extend the overall timeline but shortens the number of loops afterward.
References
Marty Neumeier, The Brand Gap (New Riders, 2003). Wally Olins, On Brand (Thames & Hudson, 2003). Adobe, Content Authenticity & Brand Consistency Report (2022). Marq / Demand Metric, The State of Brand Consistency (2021). McKinsey & Company, The Business Value of Design (2018).
Frequently asked questions
How long does the workshop criteria last and who needs to attend?
An effective criteria workshop typically lasts three to four hours and requires the presence of all final approvers. If a key member is absent, the workshop results will not bind them, and the emotional loop will repeat during the subsequent presentation. Sinh Vũ often suggests that clients confirm the list of attendees before scheduling.
What if the members of the leadership team cannot agree during the workshop?
Disagreement in the workshop is a good sign. It is the moment when conflicts are brought to the table before any designs are available for debate. Resolving this at this stage is much less costly than arguing after investing in multiple design rounds. The facilitator's task is to acknowledge the conflicts and ask questions to align them with business objectives. Then, the facilitator helps the group reach a minimum consensus before moving on to the next step.
Can we skip the workshop if the project is small or if there is only one approver?
For a project with only one decision-maker, the workshop can be condensed into a structured discussion lasting about an hour. The core step must still be present: establishing evaluation criteria in writing before presenting the design. When there is only one approver but the criteria have not been documented, the risk remains that on-the-spot feelings replace sound reasoning.