Client approval for social posts: a workflow that doesn't depend on WhatsApp

The slowest part of producing content for a client is hardly ever the producing. It's waiting for the answer, working out what they meant, and being sure it was that version they approved.

What goes wrong

• Feedback arrives scattered: a voice note, a screenshot with a red circle, a "looks great, just change that part".
• "That part" doesn't say which. In a 40-second video, without the exact second, the editor guesses.
• The version gets lost. The client approves v1 while the team has already uploaded v2, or the other way round.
• "Approved" is ambiguous. Does a "👍" in the middle of another conversation count as approval?
• Nobody knows what's stuck. If the client hasn't answered, nobody notices until the day it's due.

The principles of a good workflow

1. One place to decide. The client opens a link, sees the pieces and decides there. No decision counts just because it was said in another channel.
2. One decision per file. "Approve the post" hides that the cover is great and the video needs a fix. Each file is approved or comes back with what to change.
3. The comment pinned to the right spot. On a video, at the exact second; on an image, next to the file. "At 0:12, drop the music" leaves no doubt.
4. Numbered versions. The fix becomes v2 of the same file, with the history beside it. Nobody approves the wrong version.
5. An agreed deadline. "Approvals by Wednesday 6pm to go out next week" avoids the Friday-night message.
6. What's stuck, in plain sight. The team needs to see, without asking, which files are waiting on the client and for how long.

A message that works

With the link, a short message that's always the same helps the client build the habit:

Hi! Next week's pieces are at this link. On each one, just approve it or ask for a change — on a video, pause at the spot and comment there. If you can, by Wednesday at 6pm. Thanks!

What changes in practice

The time between "sent for approval" and "approved" drops because the client doesn't have to look for anything. The team stops asking "so, can it go?" because they can see the answer. And when somebody asks, months later, why that post went out the way it did, the decision is on record — the version, the date and who decided.

In Tucan, the client joins as a Reviewer and approves through the link, without learning the app. See how in Send it to the client for approval.