A design request that says “please check the attached” leaves the designer to reconstruct the job. Which proposal did the customer accept? Is the site image current? Was that equipment model confirmed or copied from an earlier quote? A folder can contain many files without answering those questions.
A useful PV design brief explains the request, links to its evidence and makes uncertainty visible. It lets the designer assess the inputs and ask focused questions before work proceeds. Preparing that brief is a valuable administrative task when its boundaries are clear.
The template below organises information. The responsible designer decides what evidence is sufficient, what additional investigation is needed and which technical decisions follow.
Start with the decision you need from the designer
State the purpose of the request in a sentence: an initial design, review of a proposed variation or clarification of a particular constraint. Identify the project, the requesting person and the person who will receive the response.
Describe the requested output and the proposed date for it. If the date relates to a customer commitment or booking, explain that dependency. It is a request to discuss with the designer, not evidence that the work can safely be rushed or that an installation date has been approved.
Name the responsible designer and confirm the appropriate engagement before assigning the work. The CER sets accreditation and design requirements for systems eligible for STCs, including SAA accreditation and compliance with the applicable scheme requirements. Administrative preparation does not replace those responsibilities. CER: rooftop solar installers and designers.
SAA publishes its current technical requirements and accreditation policies through its scheme-administration page. Use the current documents through the responsible professional instead of relying on an old office checklist as technical authority. SAA: requirements and policies.
Assemble a short brief with traceable inputs
Keep the main brief readable and link to source files. The fields below are suggested headings, not a claim that every project needs the same records.
| Brief field | What to record |
|---|---|
| Project and scope | Site reference, accepted proposal version, included work and known variations |
| Customer requirements | The requirement as supplied, its source and any unresolved interpretation |
| Available site information | Relevant records or images, capture dates and who supplied them |
| Equipment references | Proposed or confirmed model references, their source and unresolved substitutions |
| Network information | Applicable distributor, current application or agreement records and known conditions for review |
| Known constraints | Issues already raised and the person who raised each one |
| Missing information | The specific gap, person asked, request date and response status |
| Requested response | The question or output needed, recipient and proposed timing |
Attach the accepted scope rather than asking the designer to infer it from a sales note. Where a sales-to-operations handover already records the scope, link to that controlled record and identify its current version.
Keep personal information relevant to the task. A complete design brief does not require every customer document collected elsewhere in the business.
Label what is confirmed, proposed and still unknown
Use a small set of input labels that the team can apply consistently. “Confirmed from source” should identify the source and who checked it. “Proposed” means an option is being put forward. “Unconfirmed” means a question remains open.
These labels describe the information's origin and status; they do not certify technical suitability. An equipment reference can be copied correctly from a proposal and still need the designer's assessment.
For example, suppose a hypothetical job contains a roof image supplied six months ago and a recent customer message mentioning building work. Record both facts, link the message and ask the designer what further information is required. Do not silently treat the old image as a current site survey.
Preserve contradictions rather than choosing the value that appears most often. If the proposal and a later email specify different equipment, list the discrepancy and request a decision from the authorised people. That is more helpful than submitting an apparently tidy brief that conceals the change.
Turn missing information into answerable requests
Ask the designer to identify the missing information needed for their assessment. Then make each request specific: what is required, who can supply it, the preferred format and which decision is waiting on it.
Avoid a single task called “get more site details”. It is difficult to follow up and gives the person collecting information no clear completion condition. A request should be detailed enough for the recipient to understand without several rounds of interpretation.
Keep a question log beside the brief. Record the designer's question, the source of the answer and whether the designer needs to review the response. An administrator can coordinate the exchange without declaring that a photograph or answer establishes technical compliance.
If someone cannot provide the requested information, return that fact to the designer. Do not substitute a guess to keep the job moving. The professional responsible for the assessment should determine the next step.
Control the brief when the job changes
A brief is a versioned request. Save its issue date and revision, and keep the documents that were included at that point. When an input changes, identify the changed item and notify the person working from it.
Consider a hypothetical equipment substitution received after the brief was issued. The coordinator records the proposed change and its source, links the superseded reference and asks the responsible reviewer what further work is needed. They do not update one spreadsheet cell and assume every downstream person has seen it.
Record the response before presenting the change as settled. If it affects a quote, network record or installation pack, assign the necessary follow-up to the relevant owner. Our PV design support guide explains the division between preparation, professional review and sign-off.
Agree how the designer will return the work
Ask for a response that identifies the brief revision considered, the output supplied and any unresolved questions or conditions. Record the next responsible person and link the response to the job rather than leaving it in an individual inbox.
Review a few completed briefs with your designer. Which requests arrived with useful evidence? Which fields produced repeated questions? Improve the collection instructions around those patterns while leaving the designer to set the technical requirements.
A trained Filipino administrator can assemble source records, maintain the question log and coordinate revisions. Clear instructions make that support more valuable to the local technical team. Discuss solar administration support with Nexus and choose one part of the design intake process to organise first.
