A multilingual social marketing operating workflow by role

This multilingual social marketing operating workflow routes an asset through the decisions required at each stage. It assigns checks to roles and keeps hand-offs conditional on evidence, while separating exception handling, approval, release and closure. Follow the branch that matches the asset's state; do not pass work forward while its version, decision owner or withdrawal authority is unclear.

If the asset is already live and something is wrong

If you find a mismatch, failed link, hidden qualification, changed audience setting or account alert after publication, pause distribution immediately. Platform acceptance does not settle legal, language or accessibility questions. Open an exception entry beside the asset record instead of treating acceptance as clearance.

Record the failed decision, reporter, affected version and distribution state, together with containment taken and the person choosing the next action. Send language disagreements back to source and language reviewers; route suspected privacy or account events to privacy or security. Do not set an automatic restart time: the specialist owner identifies the evidence needed before distribution resumes.

Rule of thumb: Pause on a mismatch or alert, then wait for the named specialist to set the evidence needed for restart.

If a decision fails or the work is ending

If a review fails, return the defect to the specialist who owns that decision. If the work is ending instead, treat closure as a separate route: keep the asset version and withdrawal authority visible, and do not close until records and access are ready for transfer.

Keep the original asset, correction, affected placements, decision and withdrawal evidence together. A changed version needs fresh approval before restart, so a correction cannot bypass the decision that identified the defect. Preserve the path from finding to corrected version for whoever takes over the work.

At closure, export source and target files, terminology, approvals, publishing logs, corrections and measurement definitions. Remove obsolete access and test restoration. Close only when another authorised person can find the record and withdraw or reproduce the approved asset without relying on a supplier account.

Rule of thumb: Return defects to their specialist; close only with portable records, removed obsolete access and tested restoration.

If the request is missing evidence

If any required intake field or supporting record is absent, keep the request with the commissioning owner and do not release it to production. Require a source claim, its supporting record, the England audience task, a self-described language and format need, channel, rights, account owner and named withdrawal authority.

Never infer language, literacy, culture or preference from a name, postcode, ethnicity or profile. Treat those details as no basis for a person's choice. The commissioning owner records the self-described language and format need in the request and carries it forward, rather than replacing it with a proxy label.

The claims owner checks dates, qualifications and planned placement. CAP Code Section 3 requires documentary support for objective claims and clear presentation of material qualifications. If support is missing, keep the request at intake and compare available evidence with its intended placement before allowing it to advance.

Rule of thumb: Keep intake closed until the commissioning owner supplies every item and the claims owner checks evidence against placement.

If the language service is not specified

If the assignment does not name the language service, keep production closed. Select translation, localisation, transcreation or original target-language production, and define the deliverable before work begins. Make that choice before assigning a producer, so the service label and requested output cannot diverge.

Attach the source version, terminology, prohibited changes, character limits, format and permitted tools as one frozen instruction. The Language Services record from the Government Commercial Agency distinguishes translation, support, managed and technical services for UK public-sector buyers. It can help define the instruction, but it does not approve a supplier or output.

The producer returns the target asset with its version, unresolved questions and tool provenance. Undisclosed machine-assisted work, a missing source segment or a changed number stops the hand-off. The next owner receives no production hand-off until those details are visible in the record.

Rule of thumb: Name the service and freeze its source and constraints; stop if the returned version, questions or tools are unclear.

If data, rights or account controls are involved

If tracking, uploads, direct messages, research data or preferences are involved, route the activity through a privacy and PECR review before it advances. Check the Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulations as part of that review, and keep the intellectual-property check separate from privacy.

ICO direct marketing guidance separates identification, planning, collection and respect for people's choices. Check the live route against UK requirements before authorising the activity. Confirm rights in source and target material too: language approval does not itself establish those rights.

Security staff approve individual accounts, least privilege, recovery and logging. NCSC social-media safety guidance recommends two-step verification, but release requires evidence that it is configured on the actual account. A general control statement does not prove that; keep an accountability record alongside the separate privacy and rights decisions. These security controls need distinct owner decisions.

Rule of thumb: Decide privacy, rights and account access separately; prove two-step verification on the actual account before release.

If the target version is ready for approval

If the target asset is ready for approval, request three separate reviews before it proceeds. A native-level reviewer checks language variety and naturalness; a subject specialist checks claim meaning, evidence and warnings; an accessibility practitioner checks the final creative and destination in required formats.

Record each finding against the precise version reviewed. Return corrected work to the reviewer associated with the finding; deadlines do not justify skipping that return. If a correction changes reviewed material, route the changed version through the decision responsible before any later hand-off, and record the outcome.

Rule of thumb: Keep language, subject accuracy and accessibility as distinct approvals; return each changed version to the owner of the affected decision.

If the approved version is ready to publish

If the approval record matches the intended publication, load that asset into the client-owned account without edits. Compare the preview, disclosure, destination, audience and schedule with the record. Use a non-public test or capped release only where platform conditions and assessed risk allow.

The release owner records the asset ID, publication time, timezone, settings and live rendering. Keep these with the approval record for the exact asset version. This evidence identifies what was actually visible, rather than merely confirming that a release action took place.

Rule of thumb: Release only the approved version, and retain its asset ID, time, timezone, settings and live rendering with its approval record.