Make the work visible to the people doing it.

A product sheet is ready in one language while another version still describes an older feature. For a hypothetical organisation in Israel maintaining a multilingual product range, a small internal tool could show which material is ready to publish and which needs attention.

Follow one product change

The product owner records the approved change against a stable product identifier and the affected document revision. Required language versions become separate work items, with the relevant source material attached. A reviewer should be able to identify the feature being described without relying on a translated filename alone.

Useful states might include awaiting product information, awaiting language review, ready to publish and withdrawn. The business chooses the real states and people responsible. A colour alone should not explain why a sheet cannot proceed.

Keep a rejection specific

Suppose a language reviewer finds that the draft implies an unapproved capability. Returning that version should preserve the comment and the product facts that need clarification. It should not hold an unrelated approved document or mark the whole product as complete because another language passed.

If the source feature changes again, the tool should identify the affected versions before staff publish them. A correction history helps the next person understand why the current sheet differs from last week's file.

Assess the simpler alternatives

A configured document or project-management tool may already cover the workflow. We compare that option with a focused custom application and define a first group of users, exports and a fallback. Existing systems can stay where they work.

Acceptance asks the intended staff to carry one change through review, return a misleading draft and find the current approved sheet. Bring a product-information handover →