10 Key Questions to Ask Before Choosing an FMCG Artwork System

Buying artwork software for an FMCG business in Europe is not the same as buying a generic proofing tool. You’re dealing with many markets and languages, strict labeling rules, fast product changes, and a long list of stakeholders: brand, regulatory, quality, packaging development, agencies and printers.

Vendor demos tend to look alike, so the questions you ask matter more than the features they show. Here are ten that separate a good fit from an expensive mistake.

1. Does it manage the full artwork lifecycle, or only approvals?

Why it matters: An approval step is only one moment in an artwork’s life. Before it comes briefing and creation. After it come release to print, archiving, and the revisions that follow every recipe, regulatory or design change.

What good looks like: Artwork Lifecycle Management (ALM). Every artwork has one record that holds its full history from brief to archive and back into revision.

Red flag: The tool is a proofing viewer bolted onto a file share, and history disappears once a job is closed.

2. How does it handle multi-market and multi-language packs?

Why it matters: A single EU SKU can carry five or more languages, or exist in separate country variants. Each variant needs the right reviewers, and one change to the master often has to flow into all of them.

What good looks like: You can structure artwork by market, language and variant, and send each one to the right local reviewers.

Red flag: Every variant is handled as an unrelated file, so a change to one has to be reproduced by hand in every other.

3. Is it clear what the system checks, and what your regulatory team still owns?

Why it matters: Allergen emphasis under EU FIC (Regulation 1169/2011), nutrition and health claims, and PPWR labeling requirements all need expert judgement. No software can guarantee that a label is legally compliant, and a vendor that suggests otherwise is selling risk.

What good looks like: The system enforces the process around regulatory review. Mandatory approvers can’t be skipped, final release is blocked until every required sign-off is in, and rejection reasons are logged. Any automated or AI checks are presented as aids for reviewers, not as verdicts.

Red flag: Claims like “automatic compliance” or “PPWR-ready artwork” with no explanation of who makes the actual decision.

Ask the vendor: “What exactly does your system check, and what does it leave to our people?”

4. What does the audit trail show, and how fast can we get it out?

Why it matters: When a retailer, authority or internal auditor asks who approved a label, the answer has to be immediate and complete.

What good looks like: Every comment, revision, approval and rejection is recorded permanently, tied to a named person and to the exact revision it applies to. Nothing can be overwritten.

Red flag: Approvals are stored as a status field, with no record of who decided, or on which version.

Ask the vendor: “Show me the complete history of one artwork, live, right now.”

5. How does version control work in practice?

Why it matters: Most costly packaging errors trace back to the wrong version: an outdated allergen statement, an old barcode, a claim that was supposed to be removed.

What good looks like: Every revision is kept. Reviewers compare versions side by side or as an overlay, so they see exactly what changed instead of re-reading the whole pack.

Red flag: Versioning means “upload a new file with a new name.”

6. Does the approval model match how decisions are really made?

Why it matters: In FMCG, brand, regulatory, quality and marketing all review the same pack, and they don’t always agree. If every comment goes straight to the designer, you get conflicting revisions and extra rounds.

What good looks like:

• Reviewers work in parallel, not in a queue.
• One decision-maker turns the feedback into one clear brief for the designer.
• After a small change, only the approvers it affects need to look again.

Red flag: A strictly sequential approval chain, where every change restarts the full round.

7. How do agencies and printers work in the system?

Why it matters: External partners create the files and put them on press. If they work outside the system, the source of truth breaks exactly where errors are most expensive.

What good looks like: Agencies and printers get controlled access, see only their own projects, upload revisions without email attachments, and always get the latest approved file. You can see when the printer has actually received it.

Red flag: External partners need full paid licenses, or files still travel to them by email.

8. Where is our data hosted, and how is GDPR handled?

Why it matters: Unreleased artwork, launch plans and recipes are commercially sensitive. EU businesses also need a clear GDPR position for every user, internal and external.

What good looks like: Clear answers on hosting, encryption, backups, access control, single sign-on and data processing agreements, plus a clear exit path for your files and history.

Red flag: Vague answers about where data lives, or no clear way to take your data with you.

9. How quickly can reviewers and partners start using it?

Why it matters: The real competitor for any artwork system is “doing nothing”: email and spreadsheets. If brand managers and regulatory reviewers find the tool harder than email, they’ll go back to email.

What good looks like: Reviewers work in the browser, with no design software and little or no training. Suppliers can join without creating accounts, and rollout can grow category by category.

Red flag: Reviewers need desktop software or long training, or the interface is built only for power users.

10. When something changes, can we find every artwork it affects?

Why it matters: A supplier change, a new allergen rule or a PPWR labeling update can touch hundreds of SKUs. If you can’t see which artwork is affected, you’re guessing.

What good looks like: Artwork is linked to product data such as GTIN, the library is searchable, and you can start controlled revisions from the current approved versions, in bulk.

Red flag: Impact analysis means someone exporting lists and checking them by hand.

Quick checklist for your vendor shortlist

How Cway answers these questions

Cway is an Artwork Lifecycle Management (ALM) platform for packaging teams, developed by Cway AB in Gothenburg, Sweden.

Bring these ten questions to a Cway demo, and we’ll answer them live, using your own workflow.