Why marketing requests and approvals so often slow teams down
Marketing teams are used to moving quickly. A campaign needs a landing page, email, social posts, design, sign-off and reporting. Then another request arrives before the first one is finished.
The problem is rarely a lack of effort. It is that work comes in through too many places, priorities are not always clear and approvals become a string of messages, reminders and changing feedback.
A stakeholder asks for "a quick update" in Teams. Someone else sends a half-complete brief by email. A design sits waiting because nobody is sure who gives the final sign-off. By the time it is approved, the campaign window has moved or the team has had to rework it several times.
A good marketing approval process should protect quality, brand consistency and compliance. It should not leave people guessing what happens next.
Why marketing requests get stuck before work even starts
Many delays begin at the request stage.
A request might say, "We need something for the event next month", without explaining the audience, objective, deadline, format, budget or who needs to approve it. The marketing team then has to chase the missing information before they can properly scope or prioritise the work.
That can feel like unnecessary admin to the person making the request. But without the right details, the team has two unhelpful options: start work based on assumptions and risk rework later, or pause the request and wait for information that should have been included from the start.
A clearer request process does not need to be complicated. It simply needs to ask for the information the team genuinely requires. What is the aim of the work? Who is it for? What needs to be created? When is it needed, and why does that date matter? Is there a budget, campaign or event attached to it? Who will provide feedback and final approval?
When requests arrive in a consistent format, marketing teams can triage them more quickly, decide what needs to happen next and make expectations clear to the people involved. The same principle applies to both in-house and agency teams, even though the source of requests may differ.
This is just one of the ways in-house teams can gain more control over campaigns, content and creative work.
Read our guide: How in-house marketing teams can get more control of campaigns, content and creative work >
Feedback and approval are not the same thing
One of the most common causes of delay is treating every comment as an approval decision.
Feedback can be useful. People close to a product, customer group or business area may spot an issue the marketing team would not see. But a process becomes slow when several people can give feedback and nobody knows whose decision is final.
That often creates familiar problems. Different stakeholders give conflicting direction. New opinions appear after work was thought to be complete. Reviewers focus on personal preferences rather than the agreed objective. The marketing team becomes responsible for resolving decisions it does not own.
It helps to separate three roles: the person who requests the work, the people asked to review it, and the person accountable for approving it.
Those roles may overlap in a small team, but they should still be clear. A reviewer can flag a concern. The approver makes the final call.
This is especially important for larger campaigns, regulated content or work involving several departments. Clear accountability is a core principle of effective project governance. The UK Government's project delivery standard also stresses that governance and controls should be proportionate to the work and risk involved.
In practice, that means a routine social post should not need the same approval route as a major campaign, customer announcement or paid media launch.
Too many hand-offs create waiting time
Marketing work often moves through several stages: brief, copy, design, review, revisions, approval and publication. Each stage can be sensible. The problem comes when work is passed from person to person with no clear owner, deadline or visibility.
A designer may be waiting for approved copy. A campaign manager may be waiting for legal feedback. A stakeholder may not realise a task is with them. Nobody sees the blockage until the deadline is close.
The work itself may take a few hours. The waiting can take days.
A better approach is to map the real route for each type of work. Not the ideal process written in a document somewhere, but the route the team actually follows, with clear dependencies marked out. A delay in a response will shift the entire project timeline.
Ask where the request enters the team, who decides whether it is a priority, what must be confirmed before work starts, which reviews can happen at the same time, who has final approval, how long each review should take and what happens if a response is late.
This usually reveals where work is looping or waiting unnecessarily. It also gives the team a practical basis for improving the process rather than simply telling people to respond faster.
Scattered feedback makes rework more likely
Email threads, chat messages, tracked changes, comments in presentations and verbal feedback can all have a place. Used together without a clear system, they make it difficult to know which version is current and whether requested changes have been resolved.
That creates avoidable rework. A copywriter or designer may update an old version. A stakeholder may repeat feedback that has already been addressed. A final asset may be published before the right person has seen it.
Keeping feedback with the work gives everyone one place to check the latest version, comments, decisions and next steps. It also makes it easier to see whether feedback is still outstanding.
This does not mean marketing teams need to turn every conversation into a formal task. It means the important decisions should not be lost in a separate chat message.
monday.com can help address many of these issues by giving teams a clearer view of requests, owners, deadlines and approvals. It can be tailored to the way the team works, rather than forcing people to work around a generic template.
The answer is not to remove every approval
Approval processes exist for good reasons.
A brand team may need to protect tone and visual consistency. A legal or compliance team may need to check claims. A senior stakeholder may need to approve a major investment or public announcement. Removing those controls in the name of speed would create different problems.
The aim is to make approval proportionate.
Low-risk, repeatable work may only need one named approver and a short review window. Higher-risk work may need more formal checks, but the people involved should still know what they are reviewing and when a decision is due.
A useful question is: "What could go wrong if this is published without this particular review?"
If there is a clear answer, the review has a purpose. If the answer is simply "that person usually likes to see everything", it may be worth reconsidering.
What a practical marketing approval workflow looks like
A practical workflow does not need dozens of stages. It needs a clear route that people will actually follow.
For many marketing teams, that route might include:
Structured intake. Requests come through one agreed channel with the key information needed to assess them.
Triage and prioritisation. The team decides what is urgent, what is important and what needs more information before work starts.
Clear ownership. Each task has an owner, a deadline and a visible status.
Relevant review stages. The right people are promoted to review the right work at the right time, rather than everyone being copied into everything.
One final approver. The final decision sits with a named person.
A visible publishing step. Everyone can see whether the work is approved, scheduled, live or blocked.
Simple reporting. The team can identify overdue approvals, bottlenecks, workload and recurring request types.
Some of the chasing can also be automated. Reminders for overdue feedback, notifications when an item moves to approval and updates when a campaign is ready to publish can reduce manual follow-up. monday.com automations are most useful when they support an agreed process, rather than adding more notifications to an unclear one.
Better visibility helps teams have better conversations
When marketing requests and approvals are visible, conversations improve.
Instead of saying, "We are too busy", the team can show what is already planned, what is waiting for feedback and where capacity is being used. Instead of blaming a stakeholder for a delay, they can identify that a particular approval stage regularly takes too long.
That changes the discussion from personal frustration to practical improvement.
Clear reporting can help leaders understand the volume and type of work coming into marketing, how long it takes to complete, and where it gets stuck. A useful dashboard and reporting setup can turn that information into something the team can act on.
Start with one recurring problem
There is no need to redesign every marketing process at once.
Choose one type of work that regularly causes frustration, such as campaign requests, social content, event materials or website updates. Map the current process from request to publication. Then look for the points where work waits, changes hands, receives conflicting feedback or has to be redone.
The first improvement might be as simple as a better request form, a named approver or a single place for feedback.
Small changes can make a noticeable difference when they remove confusion around work that happens every week.
If your marketing team is dealing with constant requests, unclear priorities or approval delays, our Internal Marketing Requests Masterclass looks at practical ways to bring more structure, visibility and control to the work.
Or get in touch to discuss how a tailored monday.com setup could support the way your team actually works.
Frequently asked questions
Why do marketing approvals take so long?
Marketing approvals tend to take too long when briefs are unclear, too many people are involved, feedback is scattered across different channels or nobody has clear final authority. Delays are often caused by waiting and rework rather than the work itself.
How can a marketing team speed up approvals?
Start by defining who provides feedback, who approves the final version and how long each review should take. Use a consistent request process, keep feedback with the work and create different approval routes for low-risk and high-risk work.
Should every marketing request follow the same approval process?
No. The process should match the level of risk and complexity. Routine work may need one quick approval, while major campaigns, regulated content or public announcements may need more formal checks.
Can monday.com help manage marketing approvals?
Yes. monday.com can give marketing teams one place to manage requests, assign owners, track deadlines, collect feedback, automate reminders and report on where work is waiting.
Working with Naomi & The Workflow People was an absolute game changer. She completely transformed our use of monday.com... I can't recommend her enough! She’s efficient, insightful, and genuinely great to work with. Total pro.
Rihana Carey - Brand Manager, Keep Hammering Collective