Build a seven-stage publishing process with named owners, timing, exit criteria, editorial checks, WordPress QA, and refresh tasks. Customize it for a solo publisher, an in-house team, or an agency and client workflow.
Generated for in-house content team, standard editorial risk, AI-assisted drafting.
7 stages
Stage 1
Brief
Owner: Content lead
14 days before publication
Exit criterion: The audience, outcome, evidence, owner, and approval path are explicit.
Stage 2
Research and Evidence
Owner: Writer
10 days before publication
Exit criterion: Every material claim has dependable evidence or is removed from scope.
Stage 3
Draft
Owner: Writer
7 days before publication
Exit criterion: One complete working version answers the brief and is ready for review.
Stage 4
Editorial and SEO Review
Owner: Editor or SEO lead
4 days before publication
Exit criterion: The candidate is accurate, useful, distinct, accessible, and search-ready.
Stage 5
Approval
Owner: Content lead
2 days before publication
Exit criterion: The exact candidate and its publication conditions have recorded approval.
Stage 6
WordPress QA and Publish
Owner: WordPress publisher
Publication day
Exit criterion: The approved version is live on the correct URL and passes a live-site check.
Stage 7
Measure and Refresh
Owner: Content lead
14 days after publication, then quarterly
Exit criterion: Discovery, engagement, conversion, and refresh evidence have an owner and next action.
Operating rules
Every stage has one accountable owner, even when several people contribute.
A status changes only when its exit criterion is true.
The final WordPress action remains separate from drafting and review.
High-risk content requires qualified specialist review outside the normal editorial pass.
Published work returns to the workflow when evidence shows that it needs correction, expansion, or consolidation.
Before drafting
Make the brief and evidence visible
The template names the reader, outcome, source requirements, owners, approval path, and WordPress destination before writing begins.
Before publishing
Use an exit criterion at every gate
Work changes status only when the expected evidence is present. Draft completion, editorial approval, and WordPress publication remain separate decisions.
After publishing
Return outcomes to the workflow
Indexing, engagement, conversion, distribution, and refresh evidence produce a named next action instead of disappearing into a report.
How to use it
Put the template around WordPress, not in place of it
Copy the Markdown into your operating guide or import the CSV into your existing task system. Assign real people, adjust the timing, remove reviews that do not apply, and add any brand, legal, accessibility, or specialist checks your content requires.
Use WordPress roles and post statuses for the final permission and publication boundary. For a complete explanation of the seven stages, read the WordPress editorial workflow guide.
1.Choose the team, risk, and drafting options that match one real content stream.
2.Download the Markdown or CSV and replace role labels with accountable people.
3.Agree on each exit criterion before the next article enters the workflow.
4.Pilot the process on one article and record where work waits or returns for revision.
5.Revise the template, then apply the proven workflow to the rest of the series.
Questions
WordPress workflow template FAQ
Does the template require a PostMynd account?
No. You can customize, copy, download, and print the template without creating an account or providing an email address.
Can I import the CSV into a spreadsheet or task tool?
Yes. The CSV contains one task per row with stage, owner, timing, task, and exit criterion columns. Review the import mapping in your destination tool before sharing it with a team.
Does this replace WordPress roles and post statuses?
No. The template coordinates the work around WordPress. WordPress roles, capabilities, drafts, pending review, scheduling, and publishing remain the final content and permission controls.
Is the high-risk version a compliance framework?
No. It adds explicit specialist and approval steps, but it is general operational guidance. Your organization must identify qualified reviewers and obtain appropriate professional advice for regulated content.