The brief, and how
the drafts map onto it
Two documents — a designer brief and a content-system document. What they ask for, the eight categories they name, and where the drafts already answer them, adopt them, or have to be rebuilt.
What the brief asks for
Square primary, plus a 1200 × 628 landscape for link-style posts. 60 px safe margin.
An editable source file the marketing team can duplicate, plus PNG/PDF of each variant.
Locked logo, footer bar, CTA style and fonts. Only the category tag and content zone change.
“Let’s Discuss Your Project” plus energyplusny.com, in the existing button style.
With the neon green accent from the Vue and LL97 material. White typography.
Bold job-site photography, minimal text, generous negative space. Not icon-and-bullet stock.
The eight categories
Named in the brief, each with an accent colour, a headline formula and finished post copy already written.
How the drafts map onto it
Four things carry straight across, three have to be rebuilt, one needs an answer from the client.
| Item | Brief | Drafts | Action |
|---|---|---|---|
| Canvas | 1080 × 1080 + 1200 × 628 | 1080 × 1350 | Recommend 1350, test it |
| Deliverable | Editable Canva / Figma | HTML design lab | Rebuild |
| Category tag | 8 named categories | 9 service chapters + 4 post types | Adopt hers |
| Post copy | Written for all 8 | Content bank from the brochure | Adopt hers |
| CTA | “Let’s Discuss Your Project”, fixed | Per-post CTA | Adopt hers |
| Logo position | Top-left, locked | Top-left, locked | Already done |
| Photography-led, minimal text | Premium editorial | Same | Already done |
| Light / dark alternation | Not mentioned | Core to the system | Keep, propose |
| Research and legal findings | Not covered | Cadence, reach, 179D, FTC, jurisdictions | Keep, propose |
| Palette | The two documents contradict each other | Sampled palette + hue confined to the badge | Ask the client |
The two documents give opposite instructions on colour.
Designer brief: “No new colors outside this palette. If a category needs visual distinction, use icon + label + tint of the existing green — not a new hue.”
System document: assigns each of the eight categories its own accent — green, orange, blue, red, teal, purple, charcoal, gold.
One forbids new hues; the other introduces eight. Our proposal resolves it without breaking either: the category hue lives only inside the tag pill and its icon — never as a background, never colouring a headline, never touching the photograph. The layout stays green, charcoal and white; the category is still identifiable at a glance.
We recommend 1080 × 1350, and we do not think it costs anything. Checked against the 2026 specs: the portrait posts to LinkedIn, Facebook and Instagram feeds without resizing, exactly as the square does. Neither format requires per-network adaptation, so the choice is not about effort.
What it is about is screen. The portrait occupies roughly a quarter more of the mobile feed than the square, and that is precisely why it earns more engagement — the extra area is filled with the post, not with margin. For a brief whose purpose is visibility, that is the whole argument.
The case for the square rests on one claim: that portrait may be cropped on desktop. We could not find a source for it. The specs we can cite say LinkedIn accepts ratios from 3:1 to 4:5 and renders portrait in full — and note that LinkedIn publishes no official pixel specification for 2026 at all, so every guide on either side is second-hand.
The 60 px margin in the brief is separate and we will keep it: it protects the small thumbnail shown in notifications and search, and it is good hygiene at any ratio.
Rather than argue it, settle it. Publish the same post twice from the Energy Plus account — once at 1080 × 1350, once at 1080 × 1080 — and look at how each renders on desktop and mobile, and what each earns. It costs two posts and a week, and it replaces an opinion with the client's own data. If the portrait is cropped on desktop, we move to the square with no argument.