What an approval workflow prevents
The main job of an approval workflow is to catch mistakes the writer cannot see before they go out. A wrong price or date, wording that hurts someone, something visible in a photo's background, a promotion that does not suit the mood of the day. A second person reading once often notices all of these.
The other job is to protect the person in charge. When something goes wrong with a post that passed review, the company shares it instead of leaving it on one person. Make sure everyone involved understands that approval is not about doubting the person in charge. It is a way to keep one person from carrying every decision alone.
Too much review stops posting
On the other side, approval has a cost. If the approver is busy and slow to look, or several stages are needed, posts cannot go out on the planned day. Posts that miss their moment get less engagement. When the person in charge feels "I'll just be kept waiting anyway," they start posting less often.
So when you build an approval workflow, decide three things, which posts, who reviews, and by when, and keep the number of review stages as low as you can.
Four things to decide
| What to decide | How to choose | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Which posts to review | All, or only certain kinds | Only new themes, campaigns and replies to complaints |
| Who approves | One person, or anyone from a small group | Either the store manager or the deputy manager |
| Deadline | How many days before posting the review is due | By 15:00 two days before the post goes out |
| How to send a post back | Where to write what needs fixing | Write the reason in a note on each post |
Which posts to review
If you can review every post, that is the safest. If it is hard, limit review to posts where a mistake would have a big impact. For example: review campaign and price announcements, posts that touch on current events, new themes and replies to complaints, and let the person in charge publish regular pillar posts on their own judgment. A split like this cuts the review work while still preventing big failures.
Who approves
If only one person can approve, the flow stops whenever that person is away. Having two or more people who can approve, so that either one can review, keeps things moving. But too many approvers means nobody takes responsibility for looking, so two or three is a good guide.
Deadline
Set the deadline to fit the approver's schedule. Reviewing on the day of posting leaves no time to fix anything. A deadline one or two days before posting leaves time to fix a post and still publish it if it is sent back.
How to send a post back
When you send a post back, write what to fix and why. "Something feels off" gives the writer nothing to fix. Telling people verbally or in chat scatters the record, so write it somewhere you can leave a note on each post, where you can look back later.
Don't add too many stages
Large companies may review in many stages: staff, section manager, department head, public relations. For small businesses and shops, one stage of review is usually enough. Adding stages can lead each person to think "the next person will look at it," and oversights can actually increase.
Instead of adding stages, decide what reviewers look for, and even one stage will miss less. Are prices, dates and proper names correct? Is there wording that looks down on anyone? Is anything in the photo that should not be? Does it suit the mood of the day? Just deciding on these four checks makes the quality of review consistent. Write them into your operating rules. How to write them is explained in how to write social media guidelines.
Examples by team size
The shape of an approval workflow depends on how many people are involved. Here is how to set it up for three common sizes.
A shop with one person in charge
The person who writes is the person who publishes, so there is no approver. In this case, decide that only campaigns and replies to complaints get read once by someone close to you, such as the store manager or a family member. For other posts, just scheduling them, leaving them overnight and rereading them yourself the next morning can reveal the risk in text written in a rush.
A company with two or three people in charge
You can separate the person who writes from the person who approves. One person creates the draft and the other approves it. You can also take turns as writer and approver. With two people able to approve, the flow does not stop when one is away. Setting aside a time each week to review next week's scheduled posts all at once makes the approval wait time predictable.
When an agency or production company is involved
The basic form is for the agency to create drafts and your own staff to approve them. Set the approval deadline in the contract, and agree that anything not approved by the deadline is not published. That prevents unreviewed posts from going out under your name. Leave the reasons for sending posts back as notes on each post rather than verbally, so the agency can use them in the next draft.
What happens after approval
Even after approval, circumstances can change before publishing: a disaster or incident, a product going out of stock. Get into the habit of looking through approved scheduled posts once more on the morning they go out, so you avoid posting at the wrong moment. What to do when things change suddenly is explained in preventing and handling a social media crisis.
What you can do in SNS TOWN
Approval in SNS TOWN is built around a single review stage. If you set a post cycle to draft mode, drafts written by AI become "Awaiting approval", and only the ones a person reads and approves are scheduled. In auto mode, drafts are scheduled as they are. You can choose per cycle, for example draft mode for campaign posts and auto mode for regular posts. How to switch is explained in choose how a post cycle runs.
Drafts are prepared by 15:00 (Japan time) two days before the day they go out, so the approver has time to review. Per company, you choose whether admins and editors, or admins only, can approve, post now and send replies. How roles are divided is explained in members and roles.
When a post is awaiting approval, notifications tell you by email, Slack and browser. You can write the reason for sending a post back in the internal note on each post. A post that hits the pre-post check after approval goes back to awaiting approval. For a post whose publish time has passed, you cannot change the text or time. For the steps, see Approve a post.
Essayez gratuitement pendant 7 jours. Aucune carte bancaire requise.
Commencer gratuitementFrequently asked questions
Should every post go through approval?
If you can, it is safest, but if reviews cannot keep up and posts stall, limiting the scope gets better results. Start with the posts where a mistake has the most impact: campaigns, price announcements, posts touching on current events and replies to complaints.
The approver is busy and doesn't look in time
Have two or more people who can approve, so that either one can review. Set a deadline and make sure reminders arrive before it, and posts are less likely to be missed. If it still cannot keep up, narrow the range of posts that get reviewed.
Wouldn't more approval stages be safer?
The more stages you add, the more each person may think "the next person will check," and oversights can increase. For small businesses and shops, one stage with set things to check is more reliable.
Sending posts back keeps happening and the writer has grown to dislike posting
Check whether the reasons for sending posts back have become matters of taste. Limit reasons to factual errors and points that break the operating rules, and leave phrasing preferences to the writer. Adding the points you often send back to the operating rules lets writers fix them while writing.
Should we approve posts written by an agency too?
Yes. Since they go out under your name, we recommend approving them yourself, at least for the first few months. Once the process is stable, narrow what you review.
May we skip approval for urgent posts?
The more urgent a post, the more likely a rushed mistake is. Rather than skipping approval, call or message someone who can approve and have them read it on the spot. Write in advance in your operating rules what to do when no approver can be reached.
Should we keep the name of who approved?
Yes. If a problem with a post is found later, you can look back at who checked it and from what angle. Use it not to blame anyone but as a record for improving what is checked and how the flow works.
