Helping startups to scale 🦄 ✦ Driving Halo Lab 7 → 8-figures ARR & having fun ✦ Founder with Design in ❤️

I run Design & Tech Agency helping brands become TOP 1%.

✦ $530 M raised + 9-figure exits by client startups 
✦ 500+ projects delivered
✦ 99+ international awards
✦ 4.9 / 5.0 average rating on Clutch from 80+ verified reviews

This is a real impact in numbers.

—

Over the past 15 yrs I’ve been shaping digital products and brands for category‑defining companies — from NOKIA and OPERA to high‑growth SaaS and Web3 start‑ups.

My core focus is design leadership at scale: I enter as a strategic partner, craft a vision, and lead multidisciplinary teams all the way from concept to launch.

—

I specialize in:

⤷  B2B SaaS Product Design | Guiding startups and enterprise spin‑ups from 0 to 1 — turning complex tech into intuitive, emotionally resonant experiences.

⤷  High‑Performance Digital Presence | Building conversion‑focused brand websites that turn first impressions into lasting growth.

—

Have BIG idea in mind?
Contact me directly: inquiry@halo-lab.com

Artem Borysenko

You can hire a designer.

Or you can hire a design brain.

One gives you beautiful screens.
The other gives you a product that thinks.

When you hire a single designer, you get skills.
When you hire a team that works as one brain, you get experience that compounds.

At Halo Lab — Your Digital Partner, our teams don’t work in silos.
The UX researcher sees what frustrates users.
The product designer connects it to business goals.
The UI designer turns it into clarity and trust.
The developer translates it into something fast and functional.

Each person covers a blind spot the others can’t.
And together, they don’t just design, they solve.

That’s the difference between design as a task and design as a system.
Between a pretty interface and a product that scales, converts, and feels effortless to use.

When founders realize this, everything changes:

1. They stop hiring portfolios.
2. They start hiring thinking systems - teams that anticipate problems before they appear, align design with ROI, and build products that last.

If you’re scaling your product, don’t just hire a designer.
Hire a brain that’s trained to think like your users and build like your business depends on it.

Find you team https://bit.ly/49wqB0p

🔔 Follow Artem Borysenko for more updates!

Founder @ Halo Lab ✦ Design & Tech Agency Helping Brands Become TOP 1%

You’ve raised your Series A.

Now you’re proving you can deliver at scale.

And every week of delay costs runway, users, and momentum.
The big question?
Who’s actually going to build this thing?
You have three choices and each comes with a hidden price.

1. The dedicated team.
(Agency/product squad model)
Fastest to launch.
Move as one unit.
Cross-functional by default.
→ Best for: founders who need traction now and can’t afford to spend 3 months hiring.

2. Freelancers.
They’re flexible, affordable, and perfect for low-risk experiments.
But you become the PM, the QA, and the glue holding everything together.
When people churn, rework kills speed.
→ Best for: quick feature spikes or marketing tests, not your core product.

3. In-house team.
The long-term bet.
You get culture, domain memory, and control.
But it’s slow and expensive.
Median SWE comp in the U.S. sits around $187 K/year, and that’s before benefits or churn.
→ Best for: protecting core IP and scaling once product-market fit is locked.

My take? Go hybrid by design.
1. Dedicated team: ship your core product in < 90 days.
2. In-house team: retain knowledge and own the moat.
3. Freelancers: plug niche gaps when speed matters.

Re-evaluate every quarter: velocity, cost per feature, defect rate.
Because at Series A, your biggest risk isn’t cost, it’s time.

✦ At Halo Lab — Your Digital Partner, we help Series A founders scale with dedicated product squads - ready to ship fast, adapt faster, and grow alongside your in-house team.

♻️ Share this to help make a good choice.
🔔 Follow Artem Borysenko for more updates!

 Dedicated Team vs. Freelancers vs. In-House 

“We need a redesign.”

This is how half of discovery calls begin.

However, 10 minutes into the discussion and it’s obvious - they need a problem statement.

The product is not broken. 
The understanding of the problem is.

Founders say: “Our checkout flow is poor.” 
Users say: “I don’t trust this payment form.”

The difference? One adds a feature. The other builds the right feature.

A good problem statement is not an educated guess.
It’s that moment that your research turns into clarity. 
It translates chaos into focus.

Here is what strong product teams do completely differently:

1. They do not start their process around “what to build.” 
They start their process around “who’s struggling – and why.”

2. They use data and real voices, not assumptions. 

3. They state the problem in a way that the whole team- designer, PM, and CEO can read and ingest in an instant.

When you get the problem right the design almost builds itself.
Your next big UX breakthrough will not come from adding another feature. 
It will come from rewriting the question you are trying to answer.

♻️ Share if it resonates.
🔔 Follow Artem Borysenko for more updates!

The hardest thing about building an AI product is getting people to trust what it does.

You can create a great model all you want, but as soon as users feel the slightest bit of uncertainty, they are going to ponder, hesitate, and leave.

When founders build trust into the product experience, three things happen fast.

1. Users stop second-guessing and start exploring. First session activation goes up because they understand the what and whys.

2. Every click of trust compounds itself into usage, retention, and upsell. Without trust, the best AI feature will remain unused.

3. You do not have to wait for product market fit to learn how users actually feel. Trust patterns can save you weeks of guessing, and reduce the launch chaos.

4. Transparent UX with design-based trust cuts confusion before it even reaches support. No more "I am left wondering why it said that?" tickets or bad reviews for hallucinations.

Most AI products are built for power. 
The real winners are built for confidence.

✦

At Halo Lab — Your Digital Partner, we help founders design AI products users trust enough to actually use and pay for.
If that’s the stage you’re at, let’s chat.

♻️ Share this to help others build AI products.
🔔 Follow Artem Borysenko for more updates!

UI for AI products

Most companies still treat a design system as a visual asset.

In reality, it behaves more like infrastructure.

When a design system is used by a company, it can help reduce costs for all the products the company already has. Also, using a design system can reduce the costs of making new products by different teams in the company.

Here’s where the real financial return shows up:

1. Reduction of duplicated efforts across teams.

When multiple teams are rebuilding and recreating similar elements, there are three new associated costs for each team: a new design, a new coded version, and the need for each team to perform QA. With the implementation of a design token system, this cycle is not necessary.

2. Component scalability across product portfolios.

When a company builds a system to support a group of products, they make more money by creating one design and using it many times for all the products in the group. This is why companies have been able to reduce the time it takes to get products to market by 20-40% without adding more staff.

3. Patterns decrease cognitive load and time spent deciding.

Once an organization sets up design patterns to support their onboarding, dashboards, permission systems, navigational structures, and error state designs, teams won't have to argue about the most important design principles. 

4. The cost of change decreases dramatically.

With no design system: A rebrand, accessibility update, or micro-interaction change triggers weeks of redesign and recoding..
With a design system: Update the source → every product updates automatically.

✦

A strong design system improves:

- Time to market.
- Cross-platform trust.
- Developer throughput.
- Conversion and activation.

✦

Build your design system for the next three products you launch. 
You will begin seeing returns on your investment in the early years.

🔔 Follow Artem Borysenko for more updates!

Your product already makes users feel something.

The question is what?

If your users don’t feel the right thing, they won’t do the right thing.
They’ll bounce, hesitate, mistrust, churn.

Over 500+ products, I’ve learned that the best products aren’t the ones with the most features. They’re the ones with the clearest emotional tone.

Every product leans into one of three emotional modes.

1️⃣ Calm → “I feel safe here.”
Perfect for: health, finance, productivity, wellness.
How it’s built: soft palettes, clear language, gentle interactions, no pressure.

2️⃣ Competent → “I trust this.”
Perfect for: SaaS, B2B, dashboards, enterprise.
How it’s built: structured layouts, predictable behavior, strong signals of reliability (performance, clarity, proof).

3️⃣ Empowering → “I can do this.”
Perfect for: fitness, learning, creativity.
How it’s built: energetic visuals, progress celebrations, milestones, personalization.

When the emotional tone doesn’t match the product’s purpose:
1. A data tool feels playful → trust drops.
2. A wellness app feels intense → stress rises.
3. A learning app feels sterile → motivation dies.

Emotion either reduces friction or adds it. 
What to do before your next sprint.

✦ Pick your emotional tone before UI design.
✦ Build it into your design system (colors, spacing, motion, language)
✦ Test the gut reaction early (“How did this flow make you feel?”)
✦ Make sure every new feature reinforces that emotional mode.

We design products that make users feel the right thing.
It’s about building experiences users want to return to.

♻️ Share this to help others catch hearts.
🔔 Follow Artem Borysenko for more updates!

You didn’t just hire a team.

You hired a risk.

That’s what most founders realize by Sprint 2, but by then, momentum is already bleeding out.

What starts as “a good fit” quickly turns into:

→ Delayed updates.
→ Vanishing senior talent.
→ Quiet budget drift.
→ Process that feels more defensive than proactive.

It rarely breaks all at once.
It just slowly stops working.

At Halo Lab — Your Digital Partner, we’ve inherited dozens of these “almost there” projects.
And we’ve learned to spot the early signals that most teams ignore.

Here’s how experienced founders filter for risk before it shows up on a roadmap:

1. Ask who stays after kickoff.
Bait-and-switch team structures are common. 
Real partners show you the core team from day one.

2. Low prices don’t remove cost. 
Into rework. Into scope creep. 
Into things no one “thought about” until it’s too late.

3. Their process should flex around your product.
If their workflow can’t adapt to your stack, roadmap, or internal rhythm, you're buying overhead.

4. Silence isn’t a “working phase.” It’s a liability.
Communication isn’t a nice-to-have. 
It’s part of delivery.

5. IP, code ownership, and access - settle it early and in writing.
No smart founder leaves this vague.

6. Domain experience is a requirement.
A capable team isn’t enough. 
You need people who’ve solved your kind of problems before.

7. If there’s no post-launch plan, you’re the plan.
Support, iteration, and continuity should already be mapped.

We partner with founders who know that reliable execution is rare and valuable.
If that’s where you are, you’ll feel the difference from day one.

♻️ Share this to help others fint a right partner.
🔔 Follow Artem Borysenko for more updates!

I can’t remember the last time I used an app that didn’t ask me to share, rate, or “engage.”

Every product today (even in B2B) is designed for an algorithm.
Google’s. LinkedIn’s. App Store’s. TikTok’s.

We’ve quietly shifted from designing for people to designing for distribution.
The algorithm rewards speed, volume, stickiness.
And so we chase it - with notifications, widgets, and “viral moments.”

But something gets lost along the way.

When was the last time a product was designed for:
✦ Silence?
✦ Reflection?
✦ A human mistake that wasn’t punished instantly?

You've trained our teams to ask,
“How will this perform in search?”
“Will this trigger engagement?”
“Will this help retention metrics?”

Not:

“Will this make someone feel seen, understood, or at ease?”
We measure time-on-page, not peace of mind.
We optimize funnels, not flow.

And in doing so, we risk turning our users into an interface between two algorithms, feeding signals back and forth.

Maybe the next wave of great design won’t be about more engagement.
Maybe it’ll be about creating digital spaces that breathe.
Moments that respect our attention instead of stealing it.
Because the best products don’t just perform, they pause.
They make us feel something.

What’s one product you’ve used lately that still feels designed for humans, not algorithms?

♻️ Share this if it resonates.
🔔 Follow Artem Borysenko for more updates!

I sat in a meeting where a CEO said something I'll never forget:

“I don’t need it to look beautiful. I need it to make money.”

At the time, it stung a little.
We’d poured weeks into crafting the perfect interface.
But he was right.

If your design doesn't move revenue or retention, it's wallpaper.
That moment changed how we work at Halo Lab — Your Digital Partner.
Now, every design decision starts with a business question:

1. What does this screen earn?
2. How does this feature reduce churn?
3. Can this interaction build trust faster?

We stopped chasing “nice-to-have” visuals and started designing for impact: shorter time to value, higher conversion, more clarity.

Last quarter, applying this thinking helped a SaaS client cut trial-to-paid time by 40%. Design decisions became revenue decisions.

What's one screen in your product that looks great but doesn't move the needle?

🔔 Follow Artem Borysenko for more updates!

👋 Hi, I'm Luis Camacho - Founder @ GetAds (getads.co)

We help brands and agencies scale their conversion-driven creative output with our team of heavily vetted designers & video editors, expertly trained in advertising & consumer psychology.

Our team has worked with agencies and brands in various industries and business models. From DTC in the CPG space to biotech and B2B Service and SaaS in the fintech industry and mental health space to everything in between. If you're an agency or brand struggling with creative output, our team can help.

Here are some testimonials: 

"Spent a lot of time and money looking for a solution to our agency's ad creative output. I'm happy to say I think we've found the answer. Not only are GetAds ad creatives top quality, but they actually perform better than anything/anyone we've used before! Highly recommend!" - Mike W. ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️

"As an ad agency owner, I need unlimited creative that’s affordable, easy to use, and delivers high-quality results for my clients. GetAds is that. Their web portal is super easy to use, the price is the best in the business, and their team of designers are the best there is, bar none. I’m even impressed with their turnaround time. That’s all I need. Thanks, GetAds!" - Carlos C. ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️

"We are very very satisfied and will continue to use Get Ads for our business. They are almost fully integrated into our business via slack which is amazing and learn over time what we like and dislike." - Jake S. ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️

"GetAds has been a fantastic addition to our design suite. We are able to get strong B2B creative graphics/videos quickly with the GetAds team." - Josh L. ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️

Side note, our newest product helps media buyers & creative teams organize, collaborate, and save ad inspiration in one place. If you want to supercharge your ad creative workflow, sign up, it's free (forever) → getads.co/app

Want to chat? Shoot me a DM :)

Luis Camacho

AI is decimating my company and it’s probably doing the same to yours without you even realizing it…

Here’s the crazy thing I learned…

12:07 pm. I ask ChatGPT  “best UGC ad agency..”

It lists my competitors. We are not there. My coffee goes cold.

And the scary part?

This wasn’t a “research” query.

This was a buyer query.

Someone with intent. Someone deciding who to trust.

And AI confidently sent them elsewhere.

My first reaction was anger.

Then it turned into something worse.

How many people are doing this every day?

How many CMOs, founders, brand managers are asking AI who to hire and then seeing our competitors?

So I did what most founders do when they’re scared and pissed at the same time.

I went down the rabbit hole.

I wanted to understand how the h*ll you get seen by AI when AI is the one making the decision.

And that’s when I found a platform called Meridian.

It doesn’t try to get you traffic.

It shows you whether AI even knows you exist then gets you ranked higher. 

I don’t want other founders or CMOs to have that same moment:

Sitting there.

Watching AI confidently recommend your competitors.

Realizing deals are happening without you ever being in the room.

That feeling sucks.

So I’m sharing this to hopefully help one of you. 


Meridian lets you see things you literally cannot see anywhere else:

↳ Which brands AI recommends instead of you
↳ What sources AI is actually reading
↳ How often you show up across ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Google AI

One more thing.

I'm giving away the world's first AI visibility tracker that shows you exactly how you're ranking right now. Be aware, it may scare you.

Comment on Meridian, and I'll send it to you.

And yes, I am a Meridian partner because I believe in what they're doing.

Conversion-Driven Creatives On-Demand for agencies & brands with our streamlined process & platform. ⚡️

Stop writing briefs. Start publishing hypotheses.

Most briefs are mood boards dressed up as strategy. That’s why design teams make beautiful guesses and your ad account pays for them.

Here’s the brief that actually drives performance:

1️⃣ 3-Second Belief  
↳ One sentence the viewer must believe in 3 seconds. Example: "This snack keeps my toddler full until lunch."

2️⃣ Fail-Fast Conditions  
↳ Define what counts as failure in 48-72 hours. Example: "If Reels CTR < 0.4% and CPA > $45, kill creative."

3️⃣ Audience Micro-Story  
↳ Persona + context + motivation. Example: "Urban runner, 28-40, hurt by joint pain, wants quick recovery."

4️⃣ One Measurable Outcome  
↳ Pick one metric and timeline. Not 'brand awareness' — pick CPA, ATC rate, or ROAS in 7 days.

5️⃣ Next Experiment Ask  
↳ Give the team the exact variable to try next (hook, shot type, offer). Don’t leave them guessing.

Bonus: include the primary objection verbatim from customer research. If you can’t say the objection, you don’t understand the buyer.

Controversial truth: a brief that treats creative like a lab yields more winners than throwing money at "vibes." Briefs are your cheapest scaling tool.

Found this useful? Like, follow, and repost ♻️ so others can too!

ps. Want the one-page brief template we use to halve revision cycles? DM me.

Here’s an unpopular truth: swapping creative partners every time an ad set dips is the most expensive growth strategy in marketing.

If you want speed, scale, and compounding returns, stick with a good outsourced creative partner—especially one that owns part of the creative strategy. Here’s why:

1️⃣ Creative memory wins  
↳ Teams that stay together build institutional memory of audiences, hooks, and sequencing. Tests become data, not noise.

2️⃣ Strategy alignment reduces churn  
↳ When a partner helps set strategy, they optimize for LTV and journey, not just the next cheap conversion. That shifts every creative decision from short term to compounding value.

3️⃣ You get an R&D engine, not a vendor  
↳ A partner who tests, documents, and standardizes learns faster. You get libraries, templates, and playbooks that scale, cutting production cost per variation dramatically.

4️⃣ Faster algorithm adaptation  
↳ Partners who see patterns across brands adapt to platform shifts before your in-house team catches up. That’s the difference between reactive fixes and proactive wins.

Controversial bit: if you treat them like a transactional vendor you will get transactional results. Pay them to act like a partner—retainers, outcome bonuses, or equity align incentives and multiply focus.

Your creative partner should feel like an extension of your company, not an external checkbox. When they do, creative becomes an asset, not a cost.

Found this useful? Like, follow, and repost ♻️ so others can too!

ps. struggling with creative bottlenecks? We can help.

If you want Andromeda to love your account, confuse it on purpose.

Yeah, seriously.

Meta’s new algo rewards novelty. Feed it the same hero ad for months and it learns a narrow map of who will convert. That sounds good until the map runs out of roads.

Here’s a different way to think about creative testing: treat it like maintenance, not discovery.

1️⃣ Recalibration pulses  
↳ Every 7–14 days, launch 2 net new concepts that are intentionally different from your current winners. Different hook, different creative grammar, different CTA.

2️⃣ Temperature reset - allocate 10% of spend to exploration  
↳ Small budget. Big informational return. Let the system explore without risking your main CPA.

3️⃣ Shock and feed sequence  
↳ Shock with 2 radical concepts. Identify signals fast. Feed winners with 3-5 micro-variants to compound learning.

Why this works (and most brands miss it): Andromeda builds user embeddings over time. New concepts expand those embeddings. That lets the model personalize better, which improves match quality and reduces wasted reach. You are not just finding a single winner. You are expanding the pool of people who can become winners.

Stop treating testing like an afterthought. Make novelty part of your cadence.

Found this useful? Like, follow, and repost ♻️ so others can too!

ps. struggling with creative throughput? We can help.

Most teams don’t have a scaling problem.

They have a decision problem.

Every week, the same questions come up:

Which ads should we scale?
Which ones are lying to us?
Where are we wasting budget?

The answers are usually scattered across dashboards, channels, and gut instinct.

That’s why most creative testing slows down as spend grows.

Not because teams stop testing, but because decisions start lagging behind performance.

GoMarble built a set of AI agents to solve that exact gap.

Each agent is designed to look at your data the way a senior strategist would, but without the bottlenecks. They analyze patterns across accounts, creatives, and performance signals to surface what actually matters.

The agents show how this works in practice.

It breaks down how GoMarble’s agents:

• Identify which ads are safe to scale and which ones are about to break
• Spot creative patterns that are working across campaigns, not just one
• Flag false positives before teams over-allocate budget
• Turn raw performance data into actionable creative direction

It’s about compressing weeks of analysis into minutes, so creative and media teams can move with confidence instead of hesitation.

That’s the difference between reacting to performance 
…and staying ahead of it.

Comment ‘'GOMARBLE’’ to get access to the agents.

Your 50 variations aren’t creative diversity. They’re just the same idea with different lipstick.

Here’s the real difference most teams miss:

Variation = tiny tweaks inside one concept family
↳ Color, thumbnail, wording, timing. Useful. Fast.

Diversity = net new ad concepts
↳ New hooks, new stories, new formats, new entry points. Feeds the algo real novelty.

Why Andromeda prefers diversity (and why you should too)
↳ The model doesn’t just reward better thumbnails. It rewards new signals it can stitch into journeys. Give it small tweaks and it learns one story. Give it new concepts and it builds new journeys.

A simple operating system to win the Andromeda era:
1️⃣ 3:1 Rule
↳ For every 3 micro-variations you launch, create 1 net new concept. Stop bloating the same idea.

2️⃣ Batch net new concepts
↳ Launch 5–7 executions of each new concept (UGC, discrediting angle, authority piece, demo). Let the model recognize the pattern.

3️⃣ Measure signal, not just CPA
↳ Track reach lift, sequence engagement, and cohort conversion paths. Novelty shows up in upstream signals before CPC beats appear.

Controversial take: obsessing over micro-optimizations trains your account to be narrow. If you want algorithmic distribution, feed it variety, not redundancy.

Found this useful? Like, follow, and repost ♻️ so others can too!

ps. struggling with creative bottlenecks? We can help.

Controversial take: Outsourced creative strategy should run your ad tests for the first 90 days. Not just execute. Lead.

Here’s why most brands hire agencies for production and then wonder why nothing changes:

1️⃣ Outsiders force hypotheses  
↳ External strategists question sacred assumptions. That friction exposes which ideas are actual opportunities and which are brand myths.

2️⃣ They turn variety into learning velocity  
↳ Good outsourced teams deliver 30 to 60 micro-experiments in a quarter, not 3 "polished" concepts. Volume + structure = compounding wins.

3️⃣ They trade perfection for signal  
↳ Agencies can afford to push ugly, native-feeling hooks that reveal real user intent faster than an in-house team obsessed with pixel perfection.

4️⃣ They scale operationally  
↳ Fractional teams specialize in repeatable testing frameworks. You get a creative multiplexer that feeds the algorithm diverse inputs without blowing your budget.

How to make it work

1. Pay for learning, not assets. Fees tied to insights and validated winners.  
2. Give access, not approvals. 48-hour feedback windows. No endless iterations.  
3. Demand a public learning log. Weekly takeaways, winner templates, failed hypotheses.  
4. Treat them as a partner, not a vendor. Data access beats design notes every time.

If your agency refuses a learning-based contract, they want to stay comfortable. You want results.

Found this useful? Like, follow, and repost ♻️

Offers are lazy.

They ask customers to transact. Angles get customers to care.

Here’s why scaling with angles, not offers, wins long term:

1️⃣ Offers compress intent, they attract deal hunters
↳ 50% OFF gets clicks, not loyal customers. Cheap offers scale CPA but tank LTV.

2️⃣ Angles scale perception, they pre-qualify buyers
↳ Angles speak to identity, context, and urgency. They filter for buyers who stick around.

3️⃣ One offer, many angles is exponential leverage
↳ Keep the same pricing or promo. Test 12 angles across the same audience. Winners compound when you multiply creative formats.

How to operationalize it (practical playbook):

1. Map 3 core personas
2. For each persona, create 4 context angles (fear, aspiration, scarcity, social proof)
3. For each angle, craft 3 intensity levels (tease, proof, close)

Result: 3 x 4 x 3 = 36 distinct angles to feed the algorithm

Metric that matters: Angle Velocity
→ How fast you can validate an angle and create 3 creative variants for it. Faster velocity = faster scale.

Controversial take: If you’re rotating offers every week to chase volume, you are masking bad angle work. Fix the message first, then scale the spend.

Found this useful? Like, follow, and repost ♻️ so others can too!

ps. struggling with creative bottlenecks? We can help.

Faster creative is a productivity problem. No, wait. It’s a decision problem.

You can crank out 100 ads a month and learn nothing if each one is opinion dressed up as art. What actually wins is high decision density — more meaningful learnings per dollar spent.

Decision density = insights gained / ad spend

Here’s how to crank that number up fast:

1️⃣ Start with a single hypothesis  
↳ Know exactly what you want to prove. Hook, offer, or audience. Not all three.

2️⃣ One change per variant  
↳ Swap only the headline, or the thumbnail, or the CTA. If it wins, you know why.

3️⃣ Run 48-hour sprints, not month-long marathons  
↳ Fast early signals beat polished stagnation. Iterate daily, not weekly.

4️⃣ Use modular templates and pre-approved palettes  
↳ Swap copy and product shots in seconds. Cut feedback rounds to near zero.

5️⃣ Always log the takeaway, not just the winner  
↳ “This hook beat control by 18% — because it framed X.” Record it. Reuse it.

Controversial take: perfect creative is a marketing hobby. Testing is a business function. If your process worships polish over proof, you are funding your competitors’ experiments.

Want a ready-made 48-hour creative sprint template? Like, follow, and repost ♻️ — I’ll share the playbook.

Controversial take: hiring more creatives is not the fastest path to better ad performance.

What wins is importing the right creative playbooks from outside your category.

Here’s how top agencies actually scale performance by stealing ideas, not headcount:

1️⃣ Hunt outside your lane  
→ Political micro-targeting, mobile game UA, retail window design. Each has one repeatable superpower you can steal.

2️⃣ Translate playbooks into hooks, not assets  
→ Don’t copy visuals. Convert the tactic into a 3-word hook + pre-story + testable angle. Hooks drive the algorithm. Design amplifies them.

3️⃣ Run cultural experiments in controlled batches  
→ 5–7 variations per playbook. Learn fast, document the rule, then scale what changes user quality, not just CPA.

4️⃣ Price the import, measure the lift  
→ Charge a Creative Import Fee: scouting + translation + sequencing. Benchmarks should be LTV uplift, retention, and funnel quality, not just day-1 CPA.

Why this works: outside playbooks change who clicks. That changes who stays. Changing audience quality compounds revenue more than shaving a few cents off CPA.

If your agency growth plan is "hire 5 more creatives," you are scaling costs. If it is "import 3 new attention systems this quarter," you are scaling advantage.

Found this useful? Like, follow, and repost ♻️ so others can too!

ps. Need help importing a playbook? We help agencies do exactly this.

taplio

The Battle

Artem Borysenko

Luis Camacho

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance ScoreArtem Borysenko's LinkedIn Performance

Performance ScoreLuis Camacho's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

taplio

The Battle

Artem Borysenko

Luis Camacho

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance Score.css-goub6s{font-size:var(--chakra-fontSizes-md);font-weight:500;color:var(--chakra-colors-gray-600);display:block;margin-top:var(--chakra-space-1);}Artem Borysenko's LinkedIn Performance

Performance ScoreLuis Camacho's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

Performance ScoreArtem Borysenko's LinkedIn Performance