Review-Process

Disclaimer

Some pages in this section are currently being updated. They describe the future (“to-be”) state of our new review approach, and certain parts of the supporting functionality are still under development. As a result, you may notice differences between the documentation and the current state of the software. We appreciate your patience as we continue to evolve both the product and its supporting materials.

Start here to learn about specific reviewing topics:

The Review and Approval Process

Depending on the customer’s needs, the review and approval process can be handled in different ways. For a more flexible, ad-hoc approach, teams can use the collaborative DAM features. This includes the annotation viewer within a collaborative collection and the collection’s commenting tools to gather feedback and align on changes. For a more structured and controlled process, customers can use Productivity Management. This approach provides a more formalized workflow to manage reviews, approvals, and task tracking.

Annotation Viewer, Review Checks (whether used in the context of preflighting or review assistance), as well as Claims Detection and Reference Tagging, are available in both collaborative and structured review and approval processes. This allows users to benefit from maximum flexibility. Teams can start with an ad-hoc, collaborative review and, if needed, transition to or combine it with a more structured approval workflow — without losing access to these capabilities.

That said, there are significant advantages to organizing a review and approval process in a structured way.

Customers typically choose a structured approach over ad-hoc reviews because it replaces fragmented and informal feedback with a controlled, transparent, and traceable workflow. Instead of relying on scattered comments, or verbal approvals, all feedback, voting results and rejection reasons are centralized in one system with a clear auditable process.

Structured review processes can be configured to match different needs — simple or complex, sequential or parallel, asset-based or work-request-driven (for example, in MLR scenarios). This ensures that the right stakeholders review the right materials at the right time, with clear accountability and documented decisions.

In addition to better organization, structured reviews strengthen compliance. Features such as document-level voting, consensus rules, substantiation workflows with reference tagging, and controlled approval permissions minimize late-stage surprises and unmanaged risk.

By supporting both online and offline annotation while maintaining a complete audit trail, organizations gain strong governance without sacrificing collaboration — something ad-hoc review processes cannot provide at scale.

Functionality Customers Benefit from When Using Structured Productivity Management Workflows

1. Smart Workflow Orchestration

Customers benefit from:

  • Configurable review processes that match their governance model — from simple approvals to complex multi-stage workflows

  • The flexibility to run reviews sequentially (step-by-step control) or in parallel (faster alignment)

  • The ability to trigger reviews directly from assets or from formal work requests (ideal for MLR environments)

  • Automated routing that ensures the right stakeholders are involved at the right time

  • Support offline annotation while maintaining a single system of record

Benefit: Governance is embedded into execution without adding manual coordination effort.

2. Centralized Review Visibility & Accountability

Customers gain:

  • A consolidated “My Reviews” dashboard showing all assigned approvals

  • Clear insight into pending, approved, or rejected items

  • Automatic notifications that prevent missed reviews

  • Defined ownership for every decision

Benefit: No more lost emails, unclear responsibilities, or approval delays.

3. Flexible & Controlled Decision-Making

Customers can leverage:

  • Multiple voting options (Approve, Approve with Changes, Reject)

  • Mandatory reject reasons for clarity

  • Document-level voting for multi-asset reviews

  • “Vote All” efficiency when appropriate

  • Consensus-based approval models for high-risk content

  • Locked decisions once a review is closed

Benefit: Clear, defensible decisions with governance aligned to risk level

4. Built-In Compliance & Substantiation Support

Customers operating in regulated environments benefit from:

  • Structured substantiation workflows

  • Reference tagging and claim-to-evidence mapping

  • Version control with documented approvals

  • A complete audit trail of decisions and comments

Benefit: Compliance is proactive, traceable, and audit-ready — not reactive.

5. Secure & Role-Based Approval Governance

Customers gain:

  • Role-based access to approve or reject

  • Controlled approval rights

  • Defined rejection logic

  • Documented review history for audit purposes

  • A complete audit trail of decisions and comments

Benefit: Decisions are secure, accountable, and aligned with organizational policies.