Whoever bears the cost approves the budget; exactly one person approves the design — and those must be separate decisions, because merging them is what turns a three-week project into a three-month one. Consultation is fine and useful. Approval by committee is not.
The moment it happens
Who should approve the website budget — you, your partner, or the whole family becomes a live question when the quote arrives. Suddenly your brother has views on the price, your wife has views on the colours, and your son has views on both.
Everyone’s input is well-meant. The project has now acquired four approvers and no decision-maker, and this is where website projects go quiet.
Separate the two decisions
They get merged constantly and they’re completely different in nature.
The budget decision is a business judgement: is this amount worth spending, given what it’s expected to do? It belongs to whoever bears the cost — you, or you and your business partner.
The design and content decision is a taste-and-fit judgement: does this represent our business well? It belongs to one nominated person, ideally whoever knows the customers best.
Merging them produces a specific failure: the budget conversation keeps reopening because someone doesn’t like a colour, and the design conversation keeps stalling because someone wants to renegotiate the price. Neither ever closes.
Who should hold each role
| Decision | Who | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Whether to buy at all | Owner, or partners jointly | It’s a business call with a cost |
| The budget | Whoever bears the cost | Same |
| Vendor selection | Owner, with input from anyone technical | Judgement about a person plus a scope |
| Single point of contact | One person, available daily | The developer needs an answer within a day |
| Design and content approval | One nominated person | This is the role that must not be shared |
| Who keeps it updated | Named, in writing | The commitment that decides long-term value |
The fifth row is the one that matters most for delivery. One approver. Everyone else may comment; one person decides.
The conversation that settles it
Fifteen minutes, before you contact any vendor. Get agreement on four things:
1. The number. What we’ll spend on the build, plus the yearly cost afterwards, plus something for getting found. Three figures, agreed once.
2. The purpose. What the site must achieve — send to clients, satisfy tender forms, publish prices, take enquiries. Write it down in one line. This ends most later design arguments, because you can test any suggestion against it.
3. Who approves. One name for design and content approval. Say it out loud, to the people who’ll otherwise be commenting.
4. When we stop. A date after which we don’t accept new suggestions and we launch. This is the term that prevents a permanently unfinished project.
Written down, those four fit in a WhatsApp message to whoever is involved.
Handling the people who aren’t approvers
They still matter, and cutting them out creates its own problems. Two things work:
Consult before, not during. Ask for input before the design starts — what our customers care about, what our competitors do badly, which photographs to use. Genuinely useful, and it happens at the point where it costs nothing.
Show once, mid-build, for comments only. Frame it explicitly: “Have a look — send me anything that’s factually wrong or missing. I’m deciding on the design.” This distinguishes error-checking, which you want from everyone, from taste, which you want from one person.
There’s a longer piece on what happens when this isn’t managed. The short version: family design review is the most common cause of stretched timelines, ahead of anything a developer does.
When approval is genuinely joint
Some situations warrant two approvers:
- Equal business partners. Both bear the cost, both approve the budget. Still nominate one for design approval.
- A family business where a parent holds the money and a child holds the technical understanding. Split it: money approves the budget, technical becomes the point of contact, and agree who approves design before starting.
- Large spends relative to your turnover. Reasonable to have a second signature on the number.
Even here, split budget approval from design approval. Two people can agree a number. Two people approving every design decision doubles every round.
What to do this week
- Hold the fifteen-minute conversation before contacting any vendor.
- Agree three numbers: build, yearly, and reach.
- Write the site’s purpose in one line.
- Name one person for design and content approval, out loud.
- Set the date after which no new suggestions are accepted.
If you want it done the certain way
We’ll ask who approves before we start, because a project with four approvers doesn’t land — and we’d rather have that conversation on day one than in week five. Published price, year-two cost stated, and a delivery date that assumes one decision-maker. WhatsApp us; we reply in about five minutes between 9am and 7pm.
Related reading
- When the whole family reviews your website design
- “My son says we need a website”
- Is a website a marketing cost or an IT cost?
- The content stall that delays most websites
FAQ
Who should approve a small business website budget?
Whoever bears the cost — the owner, or business partners jointly. Design and content approval should sit with exactly one nominated person, kept separate from the budget decision.
Should the whole family be involved in website decisions?
Consult them before the design starts, and show the work once mid-build for factual corrections. Shared approval on design is the most common cause of stretched timelines, ahead of anything the developer does.
How do I stop a website project from stalling on approvals?
Agree three numbers, write the site’s purpose in one line, name a single design approver out loud, and set a date after which no new suggestions are accepted. All four before contacting a vendor.
