Creative Project Postmortem / Action kit
Creative project review & postmortem template
Compare the brief, process, feedback, and final delivery to improve future work.
Made for designers reviewing a completed creative engagement.
Price and availability
Catalog price: $9 USD
One-time purchase · No subscription
- FilesZIP with five editable Markdown documents, an offline HTML workbook, a reading edition. A five-document worked case follows one fictional project.
- To useExtract the ZIP. Open the workbook in a current desktop browser; edit Markdown in a text editor. No account needed for the workbook or Markdown files.
- LicenseUse for your own or client work; do not redistribute the original templates or tools. Full terms.
- SupportProduct questions and corrections by email; no custom implementation or professional review. 14-day refund policy.
Checking the live price and secure checkout…
The task
What you'll make
A project review translated into practical rules for the next brief.
Gather before you start
- Original brief
- Milestone record
- Delivery feedback
Mark missing information so you can check it before using your work.
When to skip this kit
- You need a native Excel, Canva, or Word template. This download contains Markdown documents and an offline HTML workbook.
- You need autosave or cloud sync. Export Markdown or save a backup before closing the offline workbook.
- You need someone to complete the work. These are worksheets to fill in yourself.
Read the first worksheet below to see whether its questions help with your task.
Included files
What's inside
- 01Brief comparison
- 02Process timeline
- 03Feedback analysis
- 04Delivery review
- 05Next-project rules
Each document has instructions, questions, and space for your answers. The final document includes a common mistake to check for before using your work.
The worked case contains five completed documents, one for each worksheet. Follow the evidence, decisions, and corrections across the same fictional project. The case is included in the workbook, reading edition, Markdown example.
Your completion check
Compare the actual brief and handoff, reconcile planned, logged, and reconstructed effort, retain receiving-task failures and production limits, and give each proposed next-project rule an owner and untested trial plan.
Before you finish
Check this before you use it
The review records frustrations without changing a repeatable practice.
Tie each proposed improvement to an observed event and an owner.
Use the final worksheet to record what needs fixing and what you still need to check.
Free worksheet
Start with worksheet one
Brief comparison
Jump to a section
{{project}} / review owner {{business}} / client/approver {{contact}} / review {{deadline}}
Purpose: establish what was actually agreed before deciding whether the engagement succeeded. Baseline: signed/approved brief and version [ ]; objectives [ ]; audience/tasks [ ]; deliverables [ ]; exclusions [ ]; approval roles [ ]; original due dates [ ]; changes authorized during the project [ ]. Put private contract details in the appropriate restricted record. Comparison register: original requirement | final artifact/version | relevant check | result/evidence category | gap or qualification | owner. Distinguish delivery, approval, ability to use the artifact, and downstream business results. A received folder does not establish usability or audience effectiveness. Separate the designer's output from supplier manufacture, publication, or a client-controlled task. If final delivery carries a production hold, state the precise boundary and the person who must resolve it. Do not call an unfinished dependent task a completed outcome. Requirement changes: source/date | authorized decision | reason | effect on time/outputs | acknowledgement. An informal request is not automatically an agreed scope expansion; confirm the actual record and do not invent contract terms. What met the brief: requirement and evidence [ ]. What missed or remains unproven: [ ]. Which goal was never measured: [ ]. Preserve the successful elements rather than converting the whole review into a list of complaints. Review scope and participants: voices present [ ]; missing receiving/user/supplier perspective [ ]; whether recollections were checked against contemporaneous records [ ]; redaction and sharing rights [ ]. Label every fictional or reconstructed record. Decision: engagement delivered within the defined boundary / revise a named item / resolve a dependency / evidence missing. Keep commercial, creative, and operational outcomes distinct.
Your decision
Which original objective was met or missed? My answer: [ ] Source and date: [ ] Still to check: [ ] Next action, owner, and due date: [ ]
Before you start
- Original brief: [Source or notes]
- Milestone record: [Source or notes]
- Delivery feedback: [Source or notes]
What you will make
A project review translated into practical rules for the next brief.
View plain worksheet text
{{project}} / review owner {{business}} / client/approver {{contact}} / review {{deadline}}
Purpose: establish what was actually agreed before deciding whether the engagement succeeded.
Baseline: signed/approved brief and version [ ]; objectives [ ]; audience/tasks [ ]; deliverables [ ]; exclusions [ ]; approval roles [ ]; original due dates [ ]; changes authorized during the project [ ]. Put private contract details in the appropriate restricted record.
Comparison register: original requirement | final artifact/version | relevant check | result/evidence category | gap or qualification | owner. Distinguish delivery, approval, ability to use the artifact, and downstream business results. A received folder does not establish usability or audience effectiveness.
Separate the designer's output from supplier manufacture, publication, or a client-controlled task. If final delivery carries a production hold, state the precise boundary and the person who must resolve it. Do not call an unfinished dependent task a completed outcome.
Requirement changes: source/date | authorized decision | reason | effect on time/outputs | acknowledgement. An informal request is not automatically an agreed scope expansion; confirm the actual record and do not invent contract terms.
What met the brief: requirement and evidence [ ]. What missed or remains unproven: [ ]. Which goal was never measured: [ ]. Preserve the successful elements rather than converting the whole review into a list of complaints.
Review scope and participants: voices present [ ]; missing receiving/user/supplier perspective [ ]; whether recollections were checked against contemporaneous records [ ]; redaction and sharing rights [ ]. Label every fictional or reconstructed record.
Decision: engagement delivered within the defined boundary / revise a named item / resolve a dependency / evidence missing. Keep commercial, creative, and operational outcomes distinct.
Your decision
Which original objective was met or missed?
My answer: [ ]
Source and date: [ ]
Still to check: [ ]
Next action, owner, and due date: [ ]
Before you start
- Original brief: [Source or notes]
- Milestone record: [Source or notes]
- Delivery feedback: [Source or notes]
What you will make
A project review translated into practical rules for the next brief.This is the complete first worksheet from the current edition. The full kit adds the remaining four documents, a worked scenario, and the offline editing workbook.
Worked example
See the worked-case summary
Fictional example included in edition 2.49.1.
Fictional case: the Fold Bakery identity engagement delivered six screen exports and two label PDFs, while sign production remained held. A review reconciles 38 planned hours with a 46-hour closeout estimate: 44 logged and two reconstructed coordination hours. Five extra presentation hours include three associated with late advisory input and two from underestimated clarification; the review does not blame one stakeholder for the entire overrun. A failed client file-selection task leads to a corrected usage guide, and three owned next-project rules remain untested proposals.
Before you choose
What should I have ready for this kit?
Bring original brief, milestone record, delivery feedback. Mark anything you still need to check.
How do I know the work is finished?
A project review translated into practical rules for the next brief. Check your answers against the original records and note anything unresolved before sharing your work.
Does it include a spreadsheet or native app template?
No. You receive editable Markdown documents and an offline HTML workbook. These are not native Excel, Canva, Notion, or Word templates. Extract the whole ZIP before opening the HTML files. Mobile file managers may not run local scripts; the text files and reading edition remain available.
Will this do the work for me?
The kit supplies structure, questions, and examples. You provide the facts, make the decisions, and adapt the finished output. You are responsible for checking the finished work. Custom implementation and professional review are not included.
Created by Pagemage with AI-assisted writing and development. Read how the content and tools are checked. Questions or corrections: hello@pagemage.tech. 14-day refund policy.