Work Notes · March 14, 2025
Notes From a Recent Planning Session
Three concrete decisions we made this week and why they matter for the next content cycle.
Last Tuesday we sat down to review the editorial calendar for the next two months. The idea was not to produce a perfect document, but to sort out priorities and put in writing which topics deserve real attention and which ones are put on hold. These are the notes that came out of that meeting, unpolished and straight to the point.
The first decision was about the tone of upcoming posts. We're coming off a series of more general articles about style and everyday life, and we noticed that readers respond better when the text is anchored in a concrete situation: a neighborhood, a workshop, an object. So the criterion for the next posts will be simple: if we can't name a real place or person, the topic waits.
What stayed on the table
The second part of the session was more uncomfortable. There were three topics that had been floating around in the draft for weeks and none of them were coming together. One was about seasonal trends, another about reading recommendations, and the third about work processes in local workshops. All three are interesting, but none had a clear angle. We decided to archive them for now and come back to them only when we have an interview or a specific case to support them.
What did move forward was the idea of a short series on how a collection is prepared from the inside. We're going to follow a workshop's process for three weeks, with brief notes and no studio photos. The idea is to show what happens before something is shown to the public: fabric tests, last-minute adjustments, decisions made on the fly.
The criterion we used
To avoid repeating mistakes from previous cycles, we defined three questions that every piece of content must answer before entering the calendar: what real situation does this topic come from, what new information does it provide that can't be found elsewhere, and who exactly does it serve? If any of the three answers is vague, the topic doesn't make the cut. It sounds obvious, but in practice it's what wastes the most time.
We also agreed that notes from these meetings will be made public from time to time. Not as a promise of transparency, but because the process of deciding what gets published and what doesn't is often more interesting than the final result. This post is the first of that idea.
The next session is in two weeks. By then we should have the first workshop profile defined and a short list of questions for the visit. If anything changes, we'll note it here.