THE GOOD BRIEF | Episode 1 – Perfect brief vs. failed brief: feedback on this creative divide
After more than 10 years of freelance commercial illustration, I have worked with startups, large companies, German, Dutch, and Spanish studios, and French agencies. This experience has taught me one essential thing: the quality of the brief determines the quality of the final result.
In this three-part series, I share my recipe for creating a perfect brief. We’ll see how to cook up an effective brief, and how a multifunction robot can ruin everything.
On the menu for this series:
Episode 1: Perfect brief vs. failed brief: the creative divide
Episode 2: Red flags of a brief that will go wrong
Episode 3: The recipe for a perfect brief
Let’s start at the beginning: what really distinguishes a good brief from a bad one?
Recently, I had two diametrically opposed experiences that perfectly answer this question.
When everything runs smoothly: the example of the German studio
First case: a German studio contacted me for an illustration assignment for animated promotional spots. An hour-long briefing via videoconference. Time for me to understand the graphic charter, the elements to be respected, the complete script, and the creative intention. I asked my questions, and we explored the subtleties of the project together.
The result? Once I had received and absorbed the brief, I had almost no questions during the three months of our collaboration. No need for Slack or constant exchanges. Just the occasional email if necessary, and that was it.
The brief contained everything: a summary of the client and their intention, a precise mood board outlining the graphic expectations, the color scheme, and the script in detail. It was truly carte blanche, based on respect and trust.
About fifteen pages, one concept per page. I didn’t ask how much time the team had invested in its preparation, but the effort was evident. (For confidentiality reasons, I can’t share any excerpts here, but the level of quality was comparable to the SNCF Réseau brief that I detail in this article.)
When things get stuck: the AI-generated brief
Second case: a large French company contacts me and I receive a brief entirely constructed using generative AI. The text hastily sets out intentions, accompanied by artificially generated images. Some even include fragments of my old illustrations retrieved from the web. What a mess! This is already a likely indication that the client is not a communications professional.
The problem? Ultra-conventional representations: the light bulb for innovation, the handshake for partnership… The client thought they had done all the work, but in reality, they would have been better off spending time clarifying what they wanted to illustrate rather than trying to figure out how to represent it.
The result: a brief that stifles both the client’s and my imagination. And back-and-forth exchanges to clarify the real intention.
That said, the end result was satisfactory. I suggested some less obvious ideas, which they initially rejected, as they were attached to their original ideas. But as we worked together, by rephrasing, expanding, and simplifying some of their proposals, I managed to get them to approve more relevant solutions.
This project reminded me of the importance of establishing a real dialogue with teams that do not include visual communication professionals. It just goes to show that a failed brief can be salvaged through good collaboration.
The fundamentals of a successful collaboration
These two experiences illustrate a principle that I observe regularly: a clear brief improves team alignment and execution efficiency. In short, the less ambiguity there is at the outset, the smoother the collaboration. It seems obvious, but it’s worth remembering.
So how can you recognize the warning signs that point to a complicated collaboration? In the next episode, I’ll share the red flags I’ve learned to spot and the two fundamental questions every client should ask themselves before writing a brief.