What a Newsroom Workflow Review at glamorixa Involves, Step by Step
Our workflow review follows a story from first tip to broadcast and ends with written recommendations your editors and producers can act on. This note explains how a review runs.
Why we offer reviews to newsrooms
For some years glamorixa has shot and edited news video for broadcasters, and in that time we have watched a great many stories travel through other people's newsrooms. We noticed that the footage was rarely the problem. Delays crept in elsewhere: a tip sat in one inbox while the duty editor looked in another, or a package waited for sign-off because nobody was sure whose name was on it.
That experience is why the Newsroom Workflow Review is part of what we do. It is a practical look at how a story moves from the first tip to the moment it goes to air, carried out by someone who has worked inside regional television and who understands the pressure of a running order that changes by the hour. I lead these reviews myself, and I write the report that follows.
How a review begins
We start with a conversation, usually by telephone, with the editor or head of output who asked for the review. I want to hear what feels slow, what has gone wrong recently, and what the team already suspects. That conversation sets the boundaries: which programmes are in scope, which shifts matter most, and who on your staff I should speak to.
After that I ask for a small amount of material. Nothing elaborate is needed; the useful items are listed below. If some of it does not exist in written form, that is itself worth knowing, and we simply note it and carry on.
- A recent week of running orders or story lists
- Any written editorial or sign-off guidelines
- A description of how tips and agency copy arrive
- The names and roles of those who touch a story
Following one story from tip to broadcast
The core of the review is tracing real stories. We pick a handful that have already aired, including at least one that went smoothly and one that did not, and follow each from the moment it was noticed. For every step we ask who held the story, what they needed, how they passed it on and how long it waited before the next person picked it up.
This is often where the quiet findings appear. A reporter may be rewriting a script because the first version was never visible to the producer. Footage may be copied between drives twice because the shared folder has no agreed naming. None of this is a criticism of anyone; it is simply what builds up when a newsroom grows day by day without anyone stepping back.
Time in the newsroom
Where circumstances allow, I spend time in your newsroom during a normal working period, sitting quietly and listening. People describe a process one way in a meeting and carry it out another way at their desks, and the second version is the one that matters. I take notes on handovers, interruptions, the points where people leave their desks to ask a colleague a question, and the moments when a story waits for a decision.
I also speak with editors, producers, reporters and edit staff separately. People say different things when their manager is not in the room, and the differences tell me where the process is not working for those who use it. I do not name individuals in the report, and I agree with you beforehand how the notes will be handled.
What you receive in writing
The result is a written report, set out in plain language. It describes the path a story takes today, marks the points where time or accuracy is lost, and gives recommendations in order of how much difference we think they will make. Each recommendation says what to change, who would be affected and what a first small step might look like.
We keep the recommendations realistic for the staffing you actually have. A suggestion that needs three extra producers is of little use to a team of six, so we look for changes to handovers, naming, checklists, shared schedules and responsibilities before anything that calls for new equipment or new software. Where we think a change carries a risk, we say so directly.
Walking your team through the findings
A report left in an inbox rarely changes anything, so we offer to talk it through with your editors and producers once they have read it. This is a working discussion rather than a presentation. People question the findings, point out what we missed and tell us which recommendations would never survive a busy evening. Those objections improve the plan.
Prices and the way a review is ordered are set out on our prices page, and you can start an enquiry through the contact page. We reply with a written quotation, and nothing begins until you have confirmed it. If your newsroom is small and the question is narrow, a shorter review is possible, and we will say plainly what it would and would not cover.
A workflow review will not make a newsroom faster overnight, and we do not promise that it will. What it gives you is a clear, written picture of how stories really move through your building, and a short list of changes worth making first. With the darker evenings arriving and bulletins running long, these weeks are a sensible time to look at that picture.
Iwan Davies
Newsroom Workflow ConsultantIwan reviews newsroom processes and writes clear, workable recommendations for editors.
More from the News Desk
How to Prepare Your Newsroom for a Workflow Review
A practical guide to getting ready for a review of how stories travel from first tip to broadcast: what to gather, who to involve and what to expect on paper afterwards.
A Handheld Workshop for a Regional Newsroom: Dylan's Story
Dylan, a reporter who also shot his own pieces, joined a camera technique workshop with his colleagues. This short account follows what changed in his handheld shooting over a few weeks.