Workflows in Archie

The introduction of a workflow component in Archie is the third and final phase of the current development of the IMS

The main purposes of the workflow system in Archie are

  1. to help CRGs keep track of where each review is in the editorial process; and
  2. to inform people involved in the preparation and editorial processing of reviews when they need to take action.

Once most of a CRG’s reviews have been incorporated into the workflow system, staff at the editorial base should also be able to use the system to

  1. plan and prioritize work more effectively across multiple reviews; and
  2. identify and analyze trends in the Group’s processes (e.g., by identifying recurring slow or problem points in the review process).

Finally, once most CRGs are using the workflow system to track most reviews, it will be possible for the system to

  1. generate various reports for Collaboration-wide monitoring purposes.
During 2008 the workflows will be piloted by a number of pilot CRGs and the system will be rolled out to all CRGs during 2009.

Update September 2009:

Delay in start of Stage 3

Stage 3 of the Workflow pilot, which will be open to all interested groups, was scheduled to begin during September. We can now see that we are unable to meet this target - there is too much that needs to be fixed first.

Any delay is regrettable, but this one especially so because it would have been very useful for Stage 3 to begin before the Colloquium in Singapore. This would have allowed many more people to have tried the system, and participate in advanced discussion with us at the Colloquium.

Survey of pilot groups

All Stage 2 pilot groups were invited to participate in a survey towards the end of August to assess how close we are to meeting the objectives of the workflow system. An initial glance at the results (the deadline for completing the survey was 7 September) shows that the majority of the pilot groups appreciate the potential of the workflow system, but that there is room for improvement. It also looks as though most groups are hoping for more flexibility in adapting the workflow templates to better suit the editorial processes of their CRG.

Further changes to workflow templates will be made in consultation with the Editor in Chief.

No more tracking!

When planning the Workflow system, we listened to what Review Groups already had in their own systems, which they referred to as 'tracking systems'. This terminology was incorporated in our proposal for a 'Workflow and tracking system'. But since recording what has happened is an implicit function of any workflow system, the old name was a bit like saying your kitchen had an 'oven and baking system'. So the word 'tracking' is officially gone from the system title, but the functionality is of course still there.

See also the full list of status updates.

Workflows Working Group of the Editorial Management Advisory Group (EMAG)

A working group of EMAG convened the first time in September 2006 to start working on workflow definitions that reflect best practice in the editorial process. Minutes capturing relevant discussions about workflow issues and progress on workflows are available from both the full EMAG as well as Workflow Working Group meetings.

Time schedule

  • October-December 2008: Stage 1 of the pilot

    8 Pilot CRGs

  • January 2009 - …: Stage 2 of the pilot

    More groups can join (11 additional pilot groups currently on our list). Not all groups will need to join in January. If you are interested in joining, contact Monica Kjeldstrøm.

  • October 2009 - ?: Stage 3 of the pilot

    Will be open to all interested groups (involving editorial staff, editors, peer referees and authors)

Videos

Basic instruction videos on using the Workflow system.

Workflow definitions

See the Template page.

Background papers

Document Actions