Looking to see if Wrike has a best practice, or if anyone else has a recommendation, for accounting for various rounds of review for tasks when planning project timelines. We can only think of two ways to do it - either workflow steps or sub-tasks - but hoping there might be a third way. Here are the pros and cons we're debating.
Workflows: We currently have reviews listed as steps in our workflow, e.g. Content Review, SME Review, Requester Review, Customer Review, etc.
- Pros: Reduces the amount of sub-tasks that need to be created and managed. On the final deliverable task, we just change the workflow step. When Content Review is complete, we move it to SME Review, and so on.
- Cons: Confusion around the definition of "Finish Date." For instance, if a task has a finish date of Friday, is that when the primary assignee is supposed to upload it for review, or are they supposed to do that on Wednesday so there's time for review? Do we create an arbitrary standard - e.g. "always move to review five days before the due date to allow for review time" - to avoid tasks going overdue?
Sub-Tasks: We've seen other companies create separate tasks for each review. So, for us, we'd potentially have 2-4 additional sub-tasks for every single deliverable requiring review.
- Pros: Avoids confusion and missed steps by getting even more granular with actions required. Helps take some thinking out of work for assignees because they don't need to mentally account for how much time reviews will require. Helps plan waterfall-type projects more realistically by accounting for all necessary review time when planning tasks start and end dates.
- Cons: That's a ton more tasks we have to create with every single project!
Has anyone tried both, or a third way, and found a method they prefer? Or are we thinking about anything the wrong way?