Step 1: Understand AEM Workflow Use Case.

Objective

To automate the content review process in such a way that whenever a piece of content (a page) is approved by a reviewer, the system automatically updates the page with two pieces of information:

1. Last Approved By: The name of the reviewer who last approved the content.
2. Approval Date: The date on which the content was approved.

Additionally, the process should allow the reviewer to provide feedback or comments and, if necessary, request revisions from the content author.

Actors

1. Author: Creates content and submits it for review. The author is responsible for making any changes requested by the reviewer.
2. Reviewer: Reviews the content submitted by the author. The reviewer has the authority to approve the content, request changes, or reject it. Upon approving the content, their name and the approval date are automatically recorded on the page.

Steps to Implement the Use Case

1. Create User Roles: Set up two user roles in the CMS: Author and Reviewer. Each role should have permissions appropriate to their responsibilities (e.g., Authors can create and edit pages, Reviewers can review, comment on, and approve pages).
2. Add Custom Fields to Page: Modify the page structure to include two new fields—Last Approved By (text field) and Approval Date (date field). These fields will be automatically updated when the reviewer approves the content.
3. Design the Workflow: Create a workflow that encompasses the submission, review, feedback, and approval stages. The workflow should:
   • Allow authors to submit pages for review.
   • Notify reviewers that content is awaiting their review.
   • Enable reviewers to provide feedback or request revisions.
   • Update the “Last Approved By” and “Approval Date” fields upon content approval.
4. Implement the Workflow:
   • Author: Logs in, creates a page, and submits it for review via the workflow.
   • Reviewer: Receives notification of the submission, reviews the content, and decides either to approve it, request revisions, or reject it. If approved, the system automatically updates the page with the reviewer’s name and the current date.
5. Testing and Usage:
   • Test the workflow thoroughly to ensure it functions as expected across various scenarios (e.g., approval, revision requests).
   • Roll out the workflow for actual use, training authors and reviewers on its operation.

Outcome

Upon successful implementation, this use case ensures that every time content is approved, there is a clear, automatic record of who approved it and when. This process not only makes the review process more transparent but also creates an audit trail that can be helpful for content governance and quality control.