Phase C: Quality Review

Last Updated: 2026-06-13 — Speaker states aligned to the 8-state model (ADR-009 / Epic 11); revision flow corrected to the Cognito speaker portal (magic links removed).

# Overview

Phase C ensures submitted content meets quality standards before public release. Organizers review each presentation for relevance, clarity, and audience fit.

Key Concept: The event state remains SPEAKER_IDENTIFICATION during quality review. Individual speakers transition from CONTENT_SUBMITTED to QUALITY_REVIEWED as their content is approved.

Key Deliverable: Quality-reviewed speakers ready for slot assignment in Phase D

# Publishing Speakers

Before reviewing content, publish the speakers from the Publishing tab.

After publishing speakers:

Return to the Speakers tab to begin content review:

# Step 7: Content Quality Review

Implemented

# Purpose

Systematically review speaker content to ensure presentations meet BATbern quality standards.

# Acceptance Criteria

• ✅ All submitted content reviewed by at least 1 organizer
• ✅ Quality scores assigned (1-5 scale)
• ✅ Revision requests sent for insufficient content
• ✅ All speakers either APPROVED or REVISION_REQUESTED

# Quality Criteria

Relevance (1-5):

• Aligns with selected topic
• Appropriate for BATbern audience (architects)
• Current and applicable content

Clarity (1-5):

• Clear presentation structure
• Well-defined learning objectives
• Concise and understandable abstract

Originality (1-5):

• New perspective or insights
• Not generic/basic content
• Demonstrates expertise

Completeness (1-5):

• All required fields provided
• Adequate detail in abstract
• Realistic learning objectives

# How to Complete

# Review Best Practices

Be Constructive:

• Explain WHY revisions needed
• Provide specific examples
• Suggest improvements

Consistent Standards:

• Use same criteria for all speakers
• Multiple reviewers should calibrate scores
• Document rationale for borderline cases

Time Management:

• Review 2-3 submissions per day
• Don’t batch all at end (spreads workload)
• Allow 1 week for speaker revisions

Parallel Processing:

• Quality review and slot assignment can happen in any order
• You can assign slots in Phase D before all quality reviews complete
• A speaker becomes is_publishable when BOTH QUALITY_REVIEWED AND a slot is assigned (regardless of order)

Idempotent State Transitions:

• Re-submitting a speaker to their current state is a safe no-op — the system accepts it without creating duplicate history entries.

# Phase C Completion

# Success Criteria

• ✅ All content reviewed and scored
• ✅ Minimum speakers at QUALITY_REVIEWED state
• ✅ All topics have quality-reviewed speakers
• ✅ Event state = SPEAKER_IDENTIFICATION (unchanged - progresses in Phase D)

# What Happens Next

Phase D: Assignment begins:

• Quality-reviewed speakers ready for slot assignment
• Capacity is enforced upstream at invitation time (slot-capacity gate on READY → INVITED), so there is no separate overflow pool to manage here
• Drag-and-drop scheduling interface
• Speakers become is_publishable once assigned to slots

See Phase D: Assignment → to continue.

# Troubleshooting Phase C

# “Too many rejections”

Problem: Many speakers rejected for quality issues.

Solution:

• Work with borderline speakers on revisions
• Activate backup candidates immediately
• Consider event scope adjustment
• Extend phase timeline if deadline allows

# “Revision requests ignored”

Problem: Speakers not responding to revision requests.

Solution:

• Follow up via phone (more personal)
• Offer to help edit content
• Set firm deadline (3 days)
• Move to DECLINED if no response, activate backup

# “Reviewer disagreement on quality scores”

Problem: Multiple reviewers score same content very differently.

Solution:

• Calibration meeting to align standards
• Use average of all reviewer scores
• Senior organizer breaks ties
• Document scoring guidelines for consistency

# Related Topics

• Phase B: Outreach → - Previous phase
• Phase D: Assignment → - Next phase
• Speaker Management → - Speaker content

# API Reference

POST /api/events/{id}/workflow/step-7                       Complete Step 7 (Quality Review)
POST /api/events/{id}/workflow/step-8                       Complete Step 8 (Threshold Validation)
PUT  /api/v1/events/{code}/speakers/{speakerId}/status      Approve content → QUALITY_REVIEWED (delegates to SpeakerWorkflowService)
GET  /api/events/{id}/quality-metrics                       Get threshold status

See API Documentation for complete specifications.