feat: pivot to social media workflow app
This commit is contained in:
90
docs/use-cases/review-workflows.md
Normal file
90
docs/use-cases/review-workflows.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,90 @@
|
||||
# Review Workflows
|
||||
|
||||
## Status
|
||||
|
||||
Active
|
||||
|
||||
## Use Case 1: Internal Review Before Client Review
|
||||
|
||||
### Actors
|
||||
|
||||
- Content contributor
|
||||
- Provider
|
||||
- Internal reviewer
|
||||
- Manager
|
||||
|
||||
### Scenario
|
||||
|
||||
1. A contributor or provider creates or updates a draft.
|
||||
2. The team links assets and updates the content item metadata.
|
||||
3. An internal reviewer leaves comments or requests changes.
|
||||
4. Revisions are linked or uploaded.
|
||||
5. A manager decides the content item is ready for client review.
|
||||
|
||||
### Outcome
|
||||
|
||||
- the content item has an internal review history
|
||||
- revisions are traceable
|
||||
- the item advances to client review only after internal readiness
|
||||
|
||||
## Use Case 2: Client Approval
|
||||
|
||||
### Actors
|
||||
|
||||
- Social media manager
|
||||
- Client approver
|
||||
|
||||
### Scenario
|
||||
|
||||
1. The team sends a content item for client review.
|
||||
2. The client reviews assets, caption/copy, dates, and notes.
|
||||
3. The client records a decision:
|
||||
- approve
|
||||
- reject
|
||||
- request changes
|
||||
4. The team responds with comments or revisions when necessary.
|
||||
|
||||
### Outcome
|
||||
|
||||
- the decision is captured in the system
|
||||
- the audit trail shows who decided what and when
|
||||
- the team knows whether the item is approved, blocked, or requires changes
|
||||
|
||||
## Use Case 3: Revision Loop
|
||||
|
||||
### Actors
|
||||
|
||||
- Provider or internal contributor
|
||||
- Reviewer
|
||||
|
||||
### Scenario
|
||||
|
||||
1. A reviewer requests changes.
|
||||
2. The owner of the work creates a revised asset or revised copy.
|
||||
3. The new revision is linked to the content item.
|
||||
4. The reviewer can compare current state against prior feedback context.
|
||||
|
||||
### Outcome
|
||||
|
||||
- the latest revision is identifiable
|
||||
- older revisions remain traceable
|
||||
- feedback does not get detached from the work item
|
||||
|
||||
## Use Case 4: Ready For Publishing Handoff
|
||||
|
||||
### Actors
|
||||
|
||||
- Manager
|
||||
- Publishing owner
|
||||
|
||||
### Scenario
|
||||
|
||||
1. All required review and approval work is complete.
|
||||
2. The content item transitions to `Ready to publish`.
|
||||
3. The downstream publishing owner uses the item as the approved handoff package.
|
||||
|
||||
### Outcome
|
||||
|
||||
- publishing handoff is based on an approved state
|
||||
- the approved revision and metadata are clear
|
||||
- the workflow history remains visible
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user