Starting with why projects collapse
When you are juggling more than one client at a time, everything feels fine until the second someone says “Can you update that file?” and you realize—you have no idea which version of the file is the actual final one. I learned this the hard way when I had three separate Trello boards, all named nearly the same thing, and half the team was using the wrong one. The issue wasn’t even the missing data; it was that nobody knew what single thread to follow. Once you reach that point, your so called project management process is basically a stack of sticky notes pretending to be organized :P.
The collapse often begins silently. A client drops new requests over Slack, someone logs updates in Google Sheets, another person thinks Asana is still in use—it’s chaos. What I eventually realized was this wasn’t just “too many tools.” The real issue was people did not have one shared workflow. Without intentionally building checkpoints, even something as small as “where do I drop daily updates” can spiral.
Building one central project hub
The fastest fix I ever pulled off was forcing all project communication through a single hub. In my case, it was ClickUp because I liked seeing tasks inside lists, but it could have been Basecamp or even Notion. The key wasn’t what tool, it was the fact that everyone knew the hub was the only source of truth. Conversations could still happen in Slack, but if a file or task wasn’t logged in ClickUp, it may as well not exist. That moment instantly cut down on the endless “where is that file” cycle.
Here’s what I literally did:
– Created one parent folder per client.
– Inside that, each campaign or deliverable became a list.
– At the top of every list, I pinned a short description explaining what it’s for.
– Tasks were never allowed in DMs. They had to go into the hub or they didn’t exist.
The first week, I caught myself forgetting my own rule. I tossed a deliverable into Slack only to realize later I couldn’t find it in ClickUp. Breaking my own rule was embarrassing but also clarifying. Now I force stuff back into the system even if it annoys me in the moment. The initial friction paid off in sanity once the hub became a habit.
Color coding projects by urgency
This sounds like a gimmick until you see three red tasks stacked above seven green ones and your brain instantly knows what will catch fire first. I assigned categories: red for urgent today, yellow for due soon, green for normal, and a gray muted color for whenever. This tiny visual signal works better than dates alone. Half the time, no one checks the deadline inside the task because, honestly, when you’re burned out, you stop clicking anything. The color stops you before you can ignore it.
I also experimented with emojis in task titles for a while. Like, 🔴 at the start for urgent. But then, file sync tools stripped them out in exports and it got messy. Color labels inside the platform ended up being the simpler and cleaner solution. Still, the period of everything covered in emojis did make the team laugh, so it wasn’t entirely wasted time 🙂
Making timelines less overwhelming
I learned quickly that big agency timelines only sort of help. When you stretch a campaign calendar across twelve weeks, it looks neat, but ask someone on the team “what do you actually do today?” and the answer is a shrug. The macro view is good for clients; the micro is what keeps your team sane. My fix was running both—one high level calendar in Google Sheets for show, and a separate board view with daily tasks in ClickUp.
The problem was syncing those two. I tried Zapier, but sometimes the Zap would just die and stop pushing updates without alerting me. Classic. For a stretch I had to manually copy dates over every morning while I rebuilt the automation. Not fun, but the end result—everyone seeing just today’s tasks—was worth it.
Think of it this way: big timelines are like a wall map of the country, good for overview, but no one uses a map of the United States to actually get to work in the morning. They use the street map. Switching between the two intentionally saved me from dumping long term deadlines on teammates who just wanted their three tasks for the day.
Delegation that prevents silent failure
Most of my early problems in multi project agencies weren’t people forgetting tasks, they were people silently not understanding what was actually theirs. An item tagged “team task” without someone’s face on it will sit there forever. The fix was obvious but painful to enforce: one task, one owner. If multiple people have to be involved, I break it into multiple tasks. Yes, it doubles my list of tasks. But at least each task ends up done.
I also started adding a simple status tag like “waiting on” or “ready for review.” Before that, I would get pings: “Is this still with you or is it my turn?” That back and forth wasted more time than just tagging it clearly in the first place.
Managing multiple client expectations
Internally we can survive with messy boards for a little while, but the client output is what matters. For multi project setups, setting shared expectations upfront actually saved me from meltdowns later. I used to promise clients updates every Friday, until I realized three clients meant writing three Friday emails back to back. Horrible. Over time I switched to staggering them—one on Tuesday, one on Wednesday, one on Friday. Same rhythm for me, but space to breathe.
When a client insists they need daily updates, I push them to accept a view-only link from the project tool. That way they can check whenever without burning me out writing recaps. Some people resist at first, but once they see tasks moving in real time, they let go of the extra emails.
Using automation without losing control
Zapier, Make, whatever tool you use—these things save time until the moment they stop working. I had a Zap set up to create new tasks from client form submissions, and one morning none of them showed up. Zero. The clients thought we were ignoring them. Turns out, my Zap exceeded the task limit and Zapier just quietly froze it. No warning email I could find, nothing.
I now run a test task every Monday: I submit a test form and check if it makes it into our board. If not, I catch it before clients notice. That small ritual is now built into my Monday routine with coffee. I cannot stress this enough—always assume your automations will silently break sooner or later. Run manual spot checks.
Quick fixes when things spin out
At least once a month, our neat multi project system falls apart in some corner. Files in the wrong Drives, teammate on vacation with incomplete handoff, Zap glitch. I keep a “triage checklist” for these moments:
– First, identify the single most urgent client item stuck.
– Move THAT into the main hub manually.
– Notify anyone waiting on it immediately.
– Worry about the rest after the fire is contained.
Basically, when I panic, I grab the burning piece of wood before thinking about the entire forest :P. It does mean some things get messy, but clients see problems solved fast, and I can clean later when pressure drops.
Scaling without more headaches
The dream is to add more clients without the chaos growing equally. My current system uses one tool as the single hub, strict one owner per task rules, dual calendars (macro and micro), and color coding. On top of that I keep the Monday automation check. It’s not perfect, but it holds up. The unglamorous truth is scaling is mostly about enforcing boring rules over and over. Every time I’m tempted to break one “just this once,” I already know it will come back to haunt me.
If you want to poke around software options, a straightforward place to look is Trello, ClickUp, or even Notion at notion.so. They all serve the same core job once you pick your setup—what matters far more is whether your team treats one of them as the one source of truth.
Sometimes, I look at my setup and think it’s still duct tape holding pipes together, but the fact that fires get caught faster now tells me it’s at least the right duct tape.