Why the Best Strategy Documents Are Short

There’s a line that gets passed around design studios, usually credited to David Ogilvy.

“Give me the freedom of a tight brief.”

Nobody has traced it to a specific page or a specific speech, so hold the attribution loosely. Hold the idea tightly.

Because on its face it’s backward. Freedom and tight don’t belong in the same sentence. A tight brief is supposed to be the thing creative people complain about. Fixed budget, fixed format, somebody else’s rules.

Then you work under one, and you understand.

The problem with an open field

Hand a designer a blank page and no boundaries, and the first stretch of the project goes to deciding what the project is.

Bold or quiet. The customers you have or the customers you want. Are we keeping the name? Does this need a blog? Every one of those gets answered, then unanswered, then answered again three meetings later by whoever spoke last.

Nothing is settled, so nothing stays settled.

That isn’t a creativity problem. It’s a decision problem, and it costs real money. Not in the obvious way, as a line item, but in rework, in second-guessing, in the version four that looks suspiciously like version one.

A tight brief doesn’t restrict the work. It ends the arguing so the work can start.

Most people ask for the opposite

Here’s where it gets uncomfortable, because almost nobody asks for a tight brief.

Business owners ask for options. Three homepage directions instead of one. A few different angles on the messaging. It feels like more value. You’re getting more for the same money.

You aren’t. What you’re getting is the decision handed back to you.

Three directions means somebody has to choose, and that somebody is now you, in the room where you have the least practice, on a Tuesday, based on which one you happen to like. The expertise you paid for stopped one step short of the hard part.

Options are what a vendor gives you when they don’t want to be responsible for being right.

The section people read twice

The Clarity Brief that comes out of a Discovery Phase has a section near the end called What we’re not doing.

It’s almost always the shortest section on the page. It’s the one people go back and read again.

It says things like: you don’t need a rebrand, the name works, and nobody ever chose a mechanical contractor for its logo. You don’t need the blog two people have told you to start, because your buyers aren’t researching; they’re finding out whether you’ll pick up the phone. This is a positioning problem, not an identity problem, and scoping it larger would be selling you work you don’t need.

Every one of those lines closes a door.

That’s the point. A closed door is not a loss. It’s a thing you never have to think about again, an argument you don’t have to have with your business partner, a proposal you don’t have to go get.

Count what a single open question actually costs you. It costs a meeting, sometimes two. It costs the mental space it occupies between those meetings. It costs the risk that six weeks in, the design is finished and someone finally says the quiet thing about the name, and now you’re deciding it late, expensively, with work already built on top of the assumption.

A “maybe” is not free. It’s the most expensive word in a project.

Why a tight brief is harder to write

Here’s the part that took me a while to see.

A loose brief costs nothing to produce. You list every possibility, you note every consideration, you hand it over. It looks thorough. It’s twelve pages. It reads like value.

It isn’t a brief. It’s an inventory.

A tight brief is harder because every exclusion has to be earned. Writing “you don’t need a rebrand” means you looked hard enough to be sure, and you’re willing to be wrong in front of the client. Writing “consider whether a rebrand might be appropriate for your goals” means you looked at nothing and risked less than nothing.

The second one protects the person who wrote it. The first one is useful.

So when a strategy document comes back short, that isn’t the strategist being lazy. Short is what it looks like when somebody did the work of removing things. The length is the tell. Two pages of decisions took more effort than twelve pages of considerations, and it’s the two pages you can actually build from.

What the constraint is really doing

Ogilvy’s line, whoever said it first, isn’t really about briefs.

It’s about the difference between a project with a fence around it and a project without one. Inside the fence, you can move fast, take real swings, and try the strange version of the idea, because the ground is settled and nobody is going to reopen the foundation halfway through.

Without the fence, every choice stays live forever. That isn’t freedom. It’s just an unfinished decision wearing a nicer word.

The brief isn’t what limits the work.

It’s what lets the work begin.

If this sounds familiar, that’s what the Discovery Phase is for. A focused diagnostic session and a written Clarity Brief you keep whether you work with me or not.

Not ready yet? Get new essays by email →