OU Campus has the ability to enforce an edit approval process by restricting users from publishing pages, it's called Workflow. This process is recommended for divisions with access to writing experts.
Under Workflow Process
We recommend you Save a Version of your updates prior to submitting for approval because if the approver rejects your edits, all submitted edits will be automatically deleted and you will have to start over. If you saved a version, you can work from the saved version to make required modifications.
Once a page is sent to an approver, it is automatically checked out to that user. Other users in workflow might be completely dependent upon the approver to review and publish the page. To this end, the approver has the standard reviewing tools available such as compare, backup, and review, as well as the standard functionality found for publishing, unless another layer of review has been put into place.
As an approver, it is prudent to review a page and approve it or decline it in a timely fashion, as there may be a delay in the review cycle or with the publication of pertinent information if the page is left sitting in workflow. Publish options for a page in workflow include Schedule, Reassign, Decline, and Expire.
Any level user in the system can be assigned as an approver and a frequently used scenario is to create Level 0 for the role of approver. The Level 0 is unique among user levels as it includes very few permissions other than publishing. This level is also known as the reviewer or executive level as the user can review, and choose to decline or publish, but cannot perform any of the editing functions. If changes need to take place, the Level 0 user needs to send the page back to the original user to have the edits completed.
Enforcing an Approver
Flexibility is introduced into workflow with the ability to enforce an approver or not. If an approver is enforced for a user, then that user must submit any content to that approver specifically, instead of choosing to whom they submit the content. This may also be used when a peer-to-peer review is desired before the page goes to the final approver for review and publication. Then the person to whom the page is sent for review can publish it, rights permitting, or send it back to the original user or the designated approver.
There can be multiple levels of review. This situation allows for additional flexibility within the system and is defined by an approver having an approver. This implements a workflow process whereby more than one user can review a page.
Most access settings within OU Campus are configured with the use of groups. The assigning of an approver, while it can be accomplished at several levels within the system, only assigns a singular user.
Bypassing the Approver
In addition to choosing not to enforce an approver, there are two types of overrides that can circumvent the approval process. One is at the administrator level, as an administrator has the capability to reassign a page that has been sent for approval.
The second override is the use of the Bypass Approval access setting. A group can be assigned to the Bypass Approval setting and members of that group have the ability to publish without respecting the restrictions of any assigned approvers.