Merge pull request #475 from DFE-Digital/doc-update-001

Content Workflow in Code (SWCD-2004..Others)

docs/architecture/decisions/001-contentful-workflow.md

@@ -0,0 +1,35 @@
+# Content Workflow in Code vs. Using Contentful Workflow Plug-in
+
+## Status - Accepted
+
+## Context
+The team discussed the implementation of the 'Contentful workflow plug-in' on their instance of Contentful. This plug-in would allow content to be moved to the next stage of progress once it is put into Contentful. However, the plug-in comes with additional costs and licensing requirements.
+
+The current content workflow is implemented in code, which requires developers for any changes to the sign-off procedure or additional steps to the content workflow. The plug-in would shift this responsibility from developers to users, allowing them to create their own sign-off workflow procedures.
+
+The team also discussed the procurement process for the plug-in, which involves Paul Brown from SACM meeting with the current suppliers, 'Akhter Computers'. However, there were concerns about the time it would take to get the plug-in, especially given the team's deadlines.
+
+## Decision
+Due to the time constraints and the uncertainty of getting the plug-in by the end of the month (June 2024), the team decided to implement the workflows in code. They will continue to try to get the Contentful workflow plug-in for the next round of content.
+
+## Consequences
+Implementing the workflows in code will require developer work for any changes, while the plug-in would allow users to manage content themselves. However, given the time constraints, implementing the workflows in code was deemed the most feasible option.
+
+The team also discussed the potential value of this approach for the Steady State Team and the possibility of developers doing presentations or show and tells across the portfolio or department. This decision may also serve as a proof of concept for other teams considering similar options.
+
+The team will continue to try to get the Contentful workflow plug-in for the next round of content, hopefully having it in the team space tested and then start using it from there. This would shift the responsibility of managing content workflows from developers to users, making the process more efficient and user-friendly in the long run. However, this is contingent on the procurement process and the ability to get the plug-in in a timely manner.
+
+## References
+Meeting Transcript dated 22 May 2024 5:24
+
+The team managing digital services content within the organization currently relies on coded workflows for managing content within the Contentful platform. However, this approach requires developer involvement for any workflow changes, leading to potential delays and inefficiencies. There is a desire to explore alternatives to streamline content workflows and empower users to manage workflows independently.
+
+After evaluating the options, the team has decided to proceed with coding the content workflows for the current phase instead of implementing the 'Contentful workflow plug-in'. This decision is based on the following considerations:
+
+* Timeline Constraints: There are concerns about the feasibility of getting the plugin in place by the end of the month (June 2024) to meet immediate deadlines. Previous experiences with similar procurements suggest that the process might take longer than anticipated.
+
+* Risk Mitigation: Given the uncertainty surrounding the timeline for plugin implementation, opting for coded workflows provides certainty in meeting current deadlines without relying on external factors.
+
+* Proof of Concept: While the team acknowledges the potential benefits of the plugin, they see value in first testing it as a proof of concept for future content cycles. This phased approach allows for risk mitigation and ensures smoother integration into existing workflows.
+
+