The problem
Publishing depends on isolated judgement and repeated manual rescue, so quality, evidence and commercial relevance vary from one release to the next.
What it looks like
- Priorities change without a recorded reason.
- Review standards depend on who is available.
- Dates, taxonomy and evidence drift during release.
Why it happens
Strategy, authoring, review, taxonomy and publication are treated as separate tasks instead of one governed workflow.
What not to do yet
Do not increase publishing volume or add generation tools before the acceptance and ownership model is explicit.
Diagnostic path
- Who can approve publication?
- Which evidence and classifications are mandatory?
- What must be restored when acceptance fails?
Solution pathway
Define the editorial decision record, enforce pre-publication gates, preserve truthful timestamps and verify the public result before finalising release.
