Why sign-off sucks (and what to do about it)
Struggling to get sign-off on that social post? Is your article stuck in sign-off limbo?
If so, you’re not alone. Not by a long way.
In fact, it’s become an ongoing internal joke for a lot of organisations, both big and small, public and private. Days or even weeks are needed to get all the people to do all the approvals, by which time whatever it is you’re trying to say has been diluted down to a bland, watery mess.
But yet, still the practice persists.
Senior managers insist on getting involved in reviewing tactical outputs that they should have nothing to do with, and in areas in which they have little expertise.
And I get it, I really do. Sign-off can be a great way to ensure consistency and accuracy, while also managing risk. But most processes aren't actually designed to do this. Instead they are a mixture of work-checking and arse-covering, and they slow everything down.
Put it this way, surely you would never intentionally design a process that…
Slowed output
Reduced efficiency
Increased frustration
Unnecessarily involved senior managers
Eliminated spontaneity
Produced less effective work
But yet, that’s exactly what a lot of sign-off processes do, and in that regard they are simply structured micromanagement.
If your sign-off process does more than just give the boss peace of mind (ie it genuinely improves and speeds up the output), then great.
If not, then that process might well be your organisation sending a signal that it doesn’t trust its staff to do the job they’re paid to do.
The hidden effects
The most insidious problem with a lot of sign-off processes? It feels like asking permission to do your job. And that's not great for team trust or individual confidence.
Having experts in your team jump through hoops just to carry out a core function of their job has never made sense to me. You’ve hired them to do a job, now trust them to do it.
For the expert, going cap in hand to the non-expert boss with that social post or article doesn't feel empowering. Instead, it can feel like asking permission, and that doesn't feel nice.
Bad sign-off processes can also:
Strain team dynamics by introducing an unnecessary hierarchical structure
Kill creativity and spontaneity by passing ideas through multiple layers of approval
Prompt team members to play it safe with their content or proposals due to fear of rejection
I have seen this last one so often, self-editing or paring back great ideas because they’ll ‘never get signed off’.
Finally, being bold generally gets you faster results. Playing it safe takes forever. The more people you give the chance to get nervous about that bold idea, the higher the chances someone will axe it.
What to do about it
The best thing to do is tackle it head on (surprise, surprise). Which means talking about it, openly and directly, rather than complaining about it privately.
If sign-off really is a major issue for you and your team, you need to be clear about that. It could just be that the people further up the chain don’t realise what that process is like for you. Be up front about it, and see if you can start an honest, constructive discussion about it.
If the problem is higher than your manager, it is your manager who should lead this conversation. If the problem is your manager, it might need to be you.
Explain what the effects are on time and effectiveness, but also on those hidden effects above, and bring plenty of concrete examples of wasted time, resource, money, and opportunity.
What if sign-off is here to stay?
Chances are it will be, in some shape or form, especially in the public sector. So here are some ways to make things less painful…
1. Never, ever send shared docs
Stick with read-only versions. That makes it much harder to tinker for the sake of tinkering, and any suggested changes can simply be emailed back to you for consideration.
2. Agree the direction and messaging before you start
Yip, 101 stuff, but super important. The draft shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone when they receive it.
3. If you’re not seeking suggestions, don’t ask for them
If the purpose of sharing that draft is just for quick review, make that crystal clear.
4. Be up front with timeframes
‘If I don’t hear back by x we’ll go ahead as is’. Otherwise it’ll be pushed to the bottom of their pile.
5. If it doesn’t need sign-off, don’t ask for it
If sharing that draft is more about arse-covering or reassurance than process, then you’re just wasting people’s time. Back your abilities and judgement and press play.
6. Push back if you need to
If the effectiveness of your content has been compromised by the alterations, then you have to point this out.
7. Refer back to your comms plan/strategy
If those changes mean your content is no longer to plan or on strategy, you’ve got a great argument for potentially changing it back.
And if you’re the problem?
If you’re the person signing off on that article/media release/post? Don’t be a roadblock or let your aversion to risk stifle effective content.
If you need to get involved, be bold, and challenge your team to push the boat out or innovate occasionally, rather than always asking them to dial it back.
As a leader, your ability to absorb some of the anxiety around how that content might land counts for a lot, and may give your team the confidence they need to do something truly great.
It won’t always go perfectly, but that is the trade-off.
Ultimately, as the person responsible for signing off on content, be a catalyst for innovation rather than a roadblock. Encourage your team to explore new ideas, push boundaries, and embrace the occasional imperfection.
The world won’t end, and you will start winning big.
Got any questions or comments? Email me at seamus@seamus.nz