Fohr Help CenterFohr Help Center

Customize the client view

Customize controls presentation only, so turning a metric off hides the number without removing the creator or changing any decision you have already recorded against them.

Before you start

Open the review in Build and select Customize under CUSTOMIZE & PUBLISH. The panel’s title is Review display settings, and its subtitle states the important thing about it: changes appear in Review immediately.

Work in this order: set the display settings, check the result in Client View, then confirm who has access under Reviewers.

Review overview settings

These five settings control the top of the review, the parts a reviewer reads before looking at anyone in particular.

SettingDescription
Goal ConfidenceShows the Goal Confidence KPI tile.
Predictive ViewsShows the Projected Views KPI tile.
Views baselineThe predictive baseline behind every projected figure, P50, P75, or P90.
Alternates LaneShows the Alternates column next to Top Picks in each section.
Portfolio Stats PanelShows the Predictive, Creator, and Audience Demographics panel on the review page.

Turning Alternates Lane off is the one here worth thinking about rather than defaulting. It hides your backup options entirely, which keeps a first round clean, and also means a reviewer passing on a top pick cannot see what you would replace them with.

Creator details settings

These five settings control what a reviewer sees inside an individual creator.

SettingDescription
RationalesShows the “Why” note you write on each creator.
Contribution %Shows the Contribution stat in a creator’s detail panel.
Sample ContentShows the sample content grid in a creator’s detail panel.
Criticality BadgeShows the Critical, High Impact, or Replaceable pill in a creator’s detail panel.
Single Hero ImageShows one hero image per creator instead of a photo mosaic. Off by default.

Rationales is the one to think hardest about. Turning it off leaves a reviewer comparing creators on statistics alone, with none of the reasoning you prepared in Build.

Review workflow settings

These two settings change what a reviewer can do, rather than what they see.

SettingDescription
Require Pass ReasonRequires a canned or written reason before a reviewer can pass on a creator. Off by default.
Unassigned CreatorsShows the creators not yet placed in a section. Off by default.

Require Pass Reason being off means a brand can pass on a creator without saying why. Turn it on when you need the reasoning to come back to the team, which is the usual case when a replacement round is likely to follow. It costs the reviewer a step on every pass, so it is a deliberate trade rather than a safe default to leave on.

Unassigned Creators being off means creators you never placed in a section are invisible to the brand. Leaving it off is the safer choice. Turning it on shares people you have not yet decided how to present.

Preview what the brand sees

Two previews exist and they show different things.

Switching to Review as an admin shows the review with the actions your own role permits. It is the presentation, not the client’s version of it.

Client View, in Review mode’s header, shows the same screen without the admin-only controls. That is what a brand reviewer actually gets, and it is the one to check before you share anything. You can copy its URL and send it directly.

Preview after every change to the display settings. Confirm the sections, rationales, sample content, metrics, and decision requirements are what you want this brand to work from.

Confirm who has access

Reviewers, under CUSTOMIZE & PUBLISH, opens Brand Users and manages who can access this review. The table lists each user with their role, their shared-link access, and the actions available on them, and Add User adds someone to the brand.

Access and publication are separate concerns, and confusing them is the most common way a round goes unnoticed. Publishing a round decides which creators exist for a reviewer. It does not decide who knows about them. Confirm this table lists the right people, and share the review link yourself rather than treating a successful publication as evidence that an email reached anyone.