How to Brief Designers for Demand Gen (Without Wasting 3 Weeks)

The problem isn't that designers are slow.

It's that the brief is unclear, incomplete, or disconnected from demand goals.

I've been on both sides of this for 9+ years:

As a designer at MNC and startup, I've received terrible briefs that set me up to fail.

As a creative lead managing design teams, I've watched marketing teams struggle to articulate what they actually need.

The result is always the same: Three weeks are wasted aligning, revising, and "going back to strategy."

Here's the truth: Most demand gen design fails before the first Figma file is opened.

This article shows how to brief designers so design directly supports pipeline, conversion, and revenue—not just looking good in the deck.

Why Most Demand Gen Design Misses the Mark

The pattern I've seen at every company:

Marketing asks for "assets."
Designers ask for "direction."
Everyone is busy. Nothing converts.

Here's what actually happens:

Monday morning Slack:

"Hey, can you design a landing page for our Q1 campaign? Need it by Friday. Thanks!"

Designer asks: "What's the campaign goal?"

"New product launch. Just follow brand guidelines."

Designer delivers something that looks good.

Marketing responds: "This doesn't match our messaging. Can you revise?"

Three weeks later: Campaign launches late with mediocre creative because everyone is exhausted.

The root problem?

Design is briefed as output ("make this thing").
Demand gen needs outcomes ("help us convert").

Key insight from 9 years of experience:

If the brief doesn't include decision-making context, design can't convert.

Design isn't decoration. It's the interface between your offer and your buyer's decision. Without understanding that decision, designers are just guessing.

The 5 Things Every Demand Gen Design Brief Must Include

This is the framework that actually works.

1️⃣ The Actual Business Goal (Not the Task)

Bad brief:

"Design a landing page for webinar registration"

Good brief:

"Increase webinar registration conversion from 2% to 4% for VP-level prospects in financial services"

Why this matters:

The bad brief asks for a deliverable.
The good brief defines success.

What changes when you include the goal:

• Designer knows what to optimize for (conversion, not just aesthetics)

• Design decisions have a clear framework (does this help us hit 4%?)

• You can measure success objectively (did conversion increase?)

Real example from my work at Moxo:

Original brief: "Create email template for product launch"

What I needed: "Drive 200 demo requests from enterprise accounts (currently getting 80 per campaign)"

How design changed:

• Original thinking: Pretty email with product image

• Goal-driven design: CTA-forward layout, benefit hierarchy, enterprise trust signals

Result: Demo requests went from 80 → 187 (2.3x increase)

The shift wasn't creativity. It was clarity.

2️⃣ The Stage of the Funnel

Design decisions change completely based on where the user is in their journey.

Top of funnel (awareness):

• Focus: Education, brand introduction, broad value prop

• Design: Visual, scannable, low commitment CTA

• Example: "Download the Guide"

Middle of funnel (consideration):

• Focus: Specific solutions, proof points, comparison

• Design: Benefit-driven, trust signals, case studies

• Example: "See How It Works"

Bottom of funnel (decision):

• Focus: Objection removal, ROI clarity, urgency

• Design: CTA-heavy, pricing transparency, high-touch offer

• Example: "Book Your Demo"

Why designers need to know this:

Real example:

At Moxo, marketing briefed me: "Design LinkedIn ad promoting our new feature."

No funnel context provided.

I designed an awareness-level ad (broad value prop, "Learn More" CTA).

Marketing's response: "This doesn't drive conversions. We're targeting warm leads who already know us."

The brief should have said: "Retargeting ad for webinar attendees → drive demo requests"

If I'd known it was bottom-funnel:

• Different headline (outcome-focused, not feature-focused)

• Different CTA ("Book Demo" not "Learn More")

• Different proof (ROI stats, not general benefits)

We lost 2 weeks because the funnel stage wasn't in the brief.

3️⃣ The One Decision the User Must Make

Every piece of demand gen content exists to drive one primary decision.

Not three decisions. One.

Bad brief:

"Create landing page with option to download guide, watch demo video, or book a call"

Good brief:

"User must decide to book a discovery call. Secondary: Watch 2-min product video if they're not ready."

Why this matters:

Multiple equal CTAs = decision paralysis = no action.

I've A/B tested this dozens of times:

• 3 equal CTAs: 2.1% conversion

• 1 primary CTA + 1 secondary: 3.8% conversion

• 1 CTA only: 4.2% conversion

Design hierarchy requires decision hierarchy.

Real example from a B2B SaaS landing page I designed:

Original brief: "Include all these CTAs: Free Trial, Request Demo, Download Datasheet, Contact Sales"

What I pushed back with: "What's the ONE action that drives the most revenue?"

Marketing's answer: "Demo requests."

New design:

• Primary CTA (large, high contrast): "Book a Demo"

• Secondary CTA (ghost button): "Watch 2-Min Video"

• Removed: Free Trial, Datasheet, Contact Sales

Result: Demo requests +34%

If the brief doesn't clarify the one decision, design will either:

1. Treat all actions equally (decision paralysis)

2. Guess which action matters most (probably guess wrong)

4️⃣ What Doubt Must Be Removed

Every demand gen asset exists to move someone from doubt to action.

If you don't tell the designer what doubt to remove, they can't design to remove it.

Common doubts in B2B demand gen:

Price doubt: "Is this worth the investment?"
→ Design must show ROI, cost comparison, or value proof

Credibility doubt: "Can I trust this company?"
→ Design must include customer logos, testimonials, case studies

Complexity doubt: "Is this too complicated to implement?"
→ Design must show simplicity, timelines, ease of use

Risk doubt: "What if it doesn't work for us?"
→ Design must address guarantees, trials, exit options

Real example:

Brief from marketing: "Design case study one-pager for enterprise prospects"

What was missing: What doubt does this case study need to remove?

I asked: "What objection are we hearing in sales calls?"

Marketing: "Prospects say 'This sounds good for startups, but we're enterprise-scale.'"

The doubt: Scalability.

How design changed:

• Headline: "How [Enterprise Brand] Scaled to 50,000 Users"

• Stats emphasized: User volume, data processing, uptime

• Visual: Infrastructure diagram showing enterprise architecture

If the brief had just said "design case study," I would have made it generic.

This connects directly to conversion rate optimization:

Remove the right doubt → Increase conversion.
Remove the wrong doubt → Waste design effort.

5️⃣ How Success Will Be Measured

No metric = no accountability.

Bad brief:

"Create ad creative for LinkedIn campaign"

Good brief:

"Increase LinkedIn ad CTR from 0.8% to 1.5% (industry benchmark: 1.2%)"

Why designers need the metric:

1. It defines "done"

Without a metric, "done" is subjective ("I think it looks good").
With a metric, "done" is measurable (CTR hit 1.5%).

2. It enables iteration

If CTR is 0.9% after launch, we know what to optimize.
If there's no metric, we're just guessing what to change.

3. It aligns design + marketing

Both teams are optimizing for the same outcome.

Real example from my work:

Original brief: "Design email nurture sequence"

Revised brief: "Increase email-to-demo conversion from 3% to 5%"

How this changed my design approach:

• Focus: CTA visibility, friction reduction, urgency

• Testing: A/B tested CTA placement, copy, design treatments

• Iteration: Adjusted based on performance data

Result: 3.2% → 5.4% conversion (hit goal, exceeded by 8%)

Common demand gen metrics to include in briefs:

• Landing page: Conversion rate (form submission, demo request)

• Email: Open rate, CTR, conversion rate

• Ads: CTR, CPA, ROAS

• Case studies: Downloads, time on page, sales influence

• Webinar pages: Registration rate, show-up rate

What Designers Actually Need (But Rarely Get)

Here's what most marketers think designers want:

• "Creative freedom"

• "Inspiration"

• "Moodboards"

Here's what designers actually need:

• Context (why does this exist?)

• Constraints (what can't we do?)

• Priorities (what matters most?)

What to Include:

Context:

• Who is this for?

• What do they currently believe?

• What do we need them to believe?

• What action drives revenue?

Constraints:

• Brand guidelines (link to them)

• Technical limitations (email client, ad specs)

• Budget/timeline

• Mandatory elements (legal copy, specific messaging)

Priorities:

• Most important: Conversion (primary CTA)

• Important: Trust signals, proof points

• Nice to have: Brand elevation, visual polish

• Not important: Internal opinions, subjective preferences

What Not to Optimize For:

This is underrated but critical.

Tell designers what to ignore:

• "Don't optimize for executive approval"

• "Don't optimize for design awards"

• "Don't optimize for brand guidelines if they conflict with conversion"

Real example:

At a previous company, I designed a landing page optimized for conversion:

• Large, bold CTA ("Start Free Trial")

• Benefit-focused headline

• Trust signals above fold

Feedback from internal review: "This doesn't feel premium enough. Can we make it more elegant?"

The problem: We were optimizing for internal aesthetics, not user conversion.

Result: "Premium" version converted 40% worse than my original.

If the brief had said "optimize for trial signups, not internal approval," we wouldn't have wasted 2 weeks.

Real Example: Before / After Brief

Before Brief (What Doesn't Work):

Why this fails:

• No business goal

• No funnel stage

• No user decision

• No doubt to remove

• No success metric

• "Modern" is subjective

Outcome: Designer guesses. Marketing revises. 3 weeks wasted.

After Brief (What Actually Works):

Result with this brief:

• Designer delivered on first draft (minor revisions only)

• Conversion rate: 2.1% → 4.3%

• Timeline: 5 days (not 3 weeks)

• Marketing + design aligned from day one

Why This Saves 3 Weeks (And a Lot of Frustration)

Here's what happens with a good brief:

Week 1 (Before):

• Day 1: Vague brief submitted

• Day 2: Designer asks 15 clarifying questions via Slack

• Day 3: Waiting for answers

• Day 4: Designer starts (still unclear on goals)

• Day 5: First draft delivered

Week 2 (Before):

• Day 1: Marketing review: "This isn't what we wanted"

• Day 2-3: Alignment meetings to clarify direction

• Day 4: Designer revises

• Day 5: Second draft delivered

Week 3 (Before):

• Day 1: Still not right

• Day 2-5: More revisions, frustration building

• Result: Mediocre work, everyone exhausted

Week 1 (After - With Good Brief):

• Day 1: Comprehensive brief submitted

• Day 2-4: Designer executes (no clarifying questions needed)

• Day 5: First draft delivered, 90% there

• Day 6-7: Minor revisions, done

Total time: 1 week instead of 3 weeks

Why good briefs work:

1. Reduce back-and-forth:

• No endless Slack threads asking "What did you mean by..."

• Designer has context from day one

2. Prevent scope creep:

• Clear priorities = no random additions mid-project

• "Can we also add..." gets answered by "Is it in the brief?"

3. Avoid subjective feedback:

• Feedback is tied to metrics, not opinions

• "I don't like the color" → "Does this color improve conversion?"

4. Align design + marketing:

• Both teams optimizing for the same goal

• No surprise misalignment at delivery

Speed comes from clarity, not pressure.

Telling a designer "I need this faster" doesn't help.
Giving a designer a clear brief makes them faster naturally.

How GRODE Approaches Demand Gen Briefs

At GRODE, we don't start with "What do you want us to design?"

We start with:

• What decision are you trying to drive?

• Where is the user in their journey?

• What's stopping them from acting?

• How will we measure success?

Design and marketing are briefed together because they're solving the same problem: moving someone from doubt to action.

We don't create "assets." We create decision interfaces.

This is why GRODE's work converts:

Not because we're better designers (though we're good).
But because we brief design as a conversion tool, not a creative exercise.

The difference:

Traditional agency: "We'll make you beautiful landing pages"
GRODE: "We'll design landing pages that increase your conversion rate by 30-50%"

One is output-focused. The other is outcome-focused.

A Simple Demand Gen Design Brief Template

Use this framework for every demand gen design project:

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
DEMAND GEN DESIGN BRIEF TEMPLATE
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

PROJECT NAME:
[What are we creating?]

BUSINESS GOAL:
[What specific outcome are we driving?]
Example: Increase demo requests from 50/month to 80/month

FUNNEL STAGE:
[ ] Top of funnel (awareness)
[ ] Middle of funnel (consideration)
[ ] Bottom of funnel (decision)

USER DECISION:
Primary action: [What's the ONE thing they must do?]
Secondary action: [Optional fallback action]

DOUBT TO REMOVE:
[What objection/concern is stopping them from acting?]
Source: [Sales feedback / user research / data]

SUCCESS METRIC:
[How will we measure if this works?]
Current baseline: [X%]
Target: [Y%]

USER CONTEXT:
Who: [Role, seniority, company type]
Current belief: [What do they think now?]
Desired belief: [What do we need them to think?]
Current behavior: [What are they doing instead?]

MANDATORY ELEMENTS:
- [Element 1]
- [Element 2]
- [Element 3]

CONSTRAINTS:
- Brand: [Link to guidelines]
- Technical: [Platform, specs, integrations]
- Timeline: [Realistic deadline]
- Budget: [If relevant]

PRIORITIES:
Most important: [What must be optimized?]
Important: [What should be included?]
Nice to have: [What's optional?]
Not important: [What to ignore?]

HOW SUCCESS IS MEASURED:
Primary metric: [Conversion rate, CTR, etc.]
Secondary metrics: [Supporting metrics]
Tracking: [Analytics setup, attribution]

Copy this. Fill it out. Send it to your designer.

You'll save 3 weeks on your next project.

Common Mistakes (And How to Avoid Them)

Mistake 1: Overloading Designers with Context

The problem:

Some marketers send 40-page strategy decks as "the brief."

The fix:

Designers need context, not your entire company history.

Keep it to:

• 1 page for simple projects (email, ad)

• 2-3 pages for complex projects (landing page, campaign)

Focus on:

• Decision context (what should user do?)

• Success metric (how do we measure?)

• Constraints (what can't we do?)

Skip:

• Company history

• Market analysis

• Internal politics

Mistake 2: Vague Feedback Like "Make It Pop"

The problem:

"Make it pop" / "Make it more modern" / "It doesn't feel right"

This is subjective, not actionable.

The fix:

Tie feedback to the goal.

Bad: "I don't like this color"
Good: "Will this color improve conversion with enterprise buyers?"

Bad: "Make it more exciting"
Good: "The CTA isn't standing out. Can we increase contrast?"

Bad: "It doesn't feel premium"
Good: "Our users expect trust signals. Can we add customer logos?"

Mistake 3: Briefing After Copy Is Already Locked

The problem:

Marketing finalizes messaging, then asks design to "make it look good."

Why this fails:

Design should inform copy.
Copy should inform design.
They're not sequential—they're integrated.

The fix:

Brief design and copy together.

Or, if copy is done first:

• Give designer flexibility to suggest copy changes

• Allow headline/CTA adjustments based on visual hierarchy

• Treat copy as "directional" not "final"

Mistake 4: Optimizing for Internal Opinions Instead of Users

The problem:

Internal stakeholder: "I don't like the headline"

Why this is dangerous:

Your opinion doesn't matter. Your user's behavior does.

The fix:

Make decisions based on:

1. User research

2. A/B test data

3. Conversion metrics

Not based on:

1. Personal preferences

2. Executive opinions

3. What competitors are doing

If there's disagreement:

"Let's A/B test both versions and let users decide."

Closing: Design Isn't Slow. Bad Briefs Are.

If design takes 3 weeks longer than expected, the problem probably started on day one.

The brief is where campaigns succeed or fail.

Good designers can't save a bad brief.
But a good brief makes even average designers effective.

The difference between 1-week delivery and 3-week delivery?

Not talent.
Not tools.
Not timeline pressure.

Clarity.

Next time you brief a designer, ask yourself:

• Do they know the business goal?

• Do they know the funnel stage?

• Do they know the one decision to drive?

• Do they know what doubt to remove?

• Do they know how success is measured?

If any answer is no, you're setting them up to fail.

Design isn't decoration. It's the interface between your offer and your buyer's decision.

Brief it like it matters.

Book a Free Demand Gen Design Audit

At GRODE, we've optimized demand gen creative for B2B SaaS companies and D2C brands across industries—increasing conversion rates by 30-50% through strategic design that drives decisions, not just looks good.

We'll review your current brief (or campaign) and show:

• What's missing from your brief

• What doubt your design isn't addressing

• What to fix first (prioritized by impact)

No sales pitch. Just actionable feedback.

Book Your Free Audit →

About the Author

Ram Prakash is the Founder and Creative Director of GRODE, an integrated design and growth marketing agency for B2B SaaS companies and D2C brands. With 9+ years of experience on both sides of the design-marketing divide, Ram has helped companies increase demand gen conversion rates by 30-50% through strategic design briefs that drive decisions, not just aesthetics. His approach combines conversion psychology, funnel strategy, and data-driven design to create demand gen assets that actually convert. Previously led creative teams at Moxo Solutions and Accenture, working with enterprise clients on high-stakes demand gen campaigns. Based in Bangalore, India.

Connect with Ram:
LinkedIn | Email | Portfolio