Intranet Content Governance

Governance Home Keep intranet content current and trusted A practical handbook for the people who own, edit, review, and use internal information. Fictional sample setting: Northstar Services is a 2,400-employee professional services firm. Its content owners use role-based accountability, clear source links, and review triggers to keep intranet information useful. Go to the guidance you need Choose the task in front of you. Find content ownership See accountable roles, review expectations, and handoffs. Choose a lifecycle action Decide whether to keep, repair, archive, or retire content. Publish for readers Apply the writing, visual, accessibility, and findability checks. Resolve a content concern Follow an issue through verification, change, and recorded evidence. A worked example: one owner, one source Northstar’s People Operations content owner is accountable for the New Starter Guide. A People Operations editor handles routine page changes; a relevant subject-matter reviewer checks information that depends on specialist knowledge. The guide links to the single approved home for the leave procedure instead of copying its steps into a second page. When that procedure changes—or a reader reports a broken route—the owner reviews the guide, records the decision and evidence, and sets its next review point. Employees can use the guide for orientation; the linked authoritative procedure remains the source for its own instructions. Open a worked governance example These internal pages are the handbook’s usable references. Sample ownership register See roles, review triggers, and escalation paths for four fictional content areas. Ownership View ownership examples Content review workflow Follow a worked issue from report through verification and recorded outcome. Review View the workflow Ownership and Roles Know who maintains each content area Assign accountability by role so ownership survives staff changes. Content owner: accountable for the accuracy, audience, and continued usefulness of an assigned content area. The owner makes sure review questions reach a role qualified to verify them. Editor: prepares routine changes, checks presentation and links, and records the update. Subject-matter reviewer: verifies claims or process details that require specialist knowledge. Governance coordinator: routes unassigned items and recurring ownership gaps to the appropriate decision-maker; this role does not automatically approve content. Distinguish shared employee-facing information from a team’s internal working material. Shared policies, forms, and procedures should each have one authoritative home; other pages explain when they apply and link to that home. A team may own its own working notes, but should not create a competing copy of shared instructions. Sample ownership register Northstar Services illustration. Cadences are sample planning choices, not service guarantees. Content area Owner role Editor role Review cadence or trigger Unresolved question route New Starter Guide People Operations content owner People Operations editor Every 6 months, or when a linked people process changes People Operations lead Service Desk how-to articles IT Knowledge owner IT Knowledge editor Every 3 months, or when a service route changes IT service management lead Office Access and Facilities Guide Workplace Services content owner Workplace Services editor Every 6 months, or when a site instruction changes Workplace Services lead Client Handoff Playbook Client Operations content owner Client Operations editor Every 3 months, or when the handoff changes Client Operations lead Hand over ownership when a role changes Keep pages assigned, accessible to the responsible roles, and reviewable. The outgoing and incoming role coordinate the handoff; the governance coordinator tracks unresolved ownership gaps. Inventory assigned content List pages, files, linked resources, current review dates, and open questions in the approved content record. Confirm working access Check that the incoming editor role can reach the content and its approved tracking location. Record the accountable role Update the owner role, reviewer route, and escalation path in the register. Set the next review point Apply the agreed cadence and record any earlier trigger that should bring the content back for review. Ownership questions Resolve gaps without implying that a page has been verified. Can a page have more than one owner? Several roles may contribute, but name one accountable owner role in the register. List other contributors as editors or subject-matter reviewers so follow-up has a clear lead. What should happen to a page with no owner? Record it as unassigned, identify the audience and content area it serves, and route the gap to the governance coordinator. Do not imply that the page is current until an accountable owner has reviewed it. How should temporary coverage be recorded? Record the covering role, coverage period, and route back to the accountable owner. Reconfirm the next review point when normal ownership resumes. Content Lifecycle Choose a deliberate lifecycle action A review checks reader need and accuracy; a date alone does not prove content is wrong. Draft The owner is preparing and verifying material before publication. Published Readers can use the current version. In review The owner is checking accuracy, links, audience, and continued need. Record the decision and evidence in the approved content record. Start an earlier review Start an earlier review when: A linked process changes A reader reports a problem An audience or access assumption changes The page no longer answers its intended task The content lifecycle Draft and verify Confirm the audience, accountable owner, source information, and any specialist review needed. Before publication Publish and assign Publish a useful version and record its owner role, review cadence, and event-based triggers. At publication Review and decide Check accuracy, links, audience, and continued need; select keep, repair, archive, or retire. At the scheduled review or a trigger Apply and record Complete the chosen action and record observable evidence and the next review point when the item remains active. After the decision Choose the review outcome Record the decision and evidence in the organization’s approved content record. Keep Still accurate and needed Record the checks completed, owner role, and next review point. Repair Useful, with a fixable gap Correct the specific issue; record what changed and how the result was checked. Archive No longer current, but useful as history Use an approved archive location, label its status, and record where readers should go for current information. Retire No continuing reader or reference need Unpublish or remove through the local process; check and update incoming links. Worked example: repair an outdated request route Finding: Northstar’s fictional “Request a work device” article links to a retired request route. Its audience guidance and explanation of what information to prepare are still useful. Decision: the IT Knowledge owner asks the relevant service role to verify the current route, updates the single link, and checks that the destination opens for the intended audience. The obsolete route is removed rather than repeated in a second article. Why repair rather than retire: employees still need the article’s preparation guidance. The owner records the corrected destination, the check performed, and the next review point in the approved record. Publishing Standards Publish for the reader’s task Put the answer or action first, then support it with clear structure and a trusted source. Use a title that names the task or answer. Open by telling readers who the page serves and what they can do. Organize longer material with descriptive headings, short paragraphs, and ordered steps where sequence matters. Give each shared policy, form, and procedure one authoritative home. Explain when it is relevant and link to that source instead of copying its instructions into a second page. Name the intended audience and any known role, location, or access scope; do not assume that a company-wide page applies to every location or reader. Use meaningful link text, logical heading levels, informative alternative text, and sufficient contrast. Do not rely on color alone. For audience-restricted pages, check the content with an intended reader role. WCAG 2.1 AA is a useful accessibility reference for applicable digital content; this sample is not a claim of conformance. Make the page easier to scan and trust Fictional Northstar examples: replace vague labels with reader-centered wording and a visible handoff. Title Requests Request a replacement work device Opening There are a number of things to consider when a device is needed. Use this guide if your work device is damaged or no longer works for your role. Link label Click here Open the work device request procedure Source rule Copied procedure steps appear in multiple pages. Keep procedure steps at their authoritative home; link to them from related guidance. Ownership No owner or review trigger is visible in the content record. IT Knowledge owner role; review every 3 months and when the service route changes. Visual publishing kit Choose a treatment that helps readers understand the content; imagery is optional. Task story: show the useful action For a short service explanation, lead with the task, one verified destination, and what the reader should have ready. Use a clear image of the relevant work only when it genuinely orients the reader. Keep the action and eligibility or scope in the opening. Crop to the relevant subject without cutting off meaningful context. Use a concise caption for context; write alternative text for informative images, not a duplicate of the caption. Task page Process story: make sequence visible For a process overview, use an ordered sequence with a named role at each real handoff. A process diagram or image supports the explanation; it does not perform a workflow. Show the reader’s next action before supporting detail. Crop diagrams so labels and the whole relevant sequence remain legible. Keep authoritative procedure details at their single source; link from this overview when a destination exists. Process overview People or change story: identify context For an editorial story about a team or a change, explain what happened, who the information serves, and where follow-up belongs. Attribute statements to an approved role or source. Use a photograph only when it illustrates the story, not as a substitute for context. Crop to retain the subject and context; do not imply a stock image depicts a named employee or event. Route factual corrections and reader feedback to the content owner. Editorial story Run a small findability test Observe how representative readers find a real answer; route friction to its owner. Set the task Ask three to five representative readers to find the work device request procedure using the current navigation. Test facilitator Listen for their words Before showing the page, ask what terms they would search for and which navigation label they expect to choose. Observe the route Do not coach. Note the first label or search term used, whether the reader reaches the authoritative source, and where they hesitate. Record and route friction Record the task, audience role, words used, observed friction, and suggested correction; send findings to the accountable content owner. Content owner Check the change The owner decides whether to revise the title, navigation label, or supporting link, then checks the revised route with a reader. Before publication: the complete editorial check Audience and scope State who the page serves and any known role, location, or access limits. Answer and structure Make the primary action or answer visible early; use descriptive headings and ordered steps only where sequence matters. Canonical source Identify the single authoritative home for each shared policy, form, or procedure; link to it rather than duplicating it. Accuracy Check claims against an appropriate source and route specialist questions to a qualified subject-matter role. Access and accessibility Test links from the intended audience context, use meaningful link text and alternative text, and do not use color alone for meaning. Ownership and review Record the accountable owner role, review cadence, event-based review triggers, outcome, and next review point in the approved content record. Feedback Make the correction route clear; send reader-reported problems to the content owner or, if unassigned, the governance coordinator. Governance Workflow Turn a content concern into a verified update Gather the observation, route it to the accountable owner, and record the evidence. Capture the page title or location, the specific passage or link, the audience affected, and why the issue matters. Include a source that could verify the information if one is available. Route the concern to the owner role in the register. If no owner is listed, ask the governance coordinator to assign the issue before treating the content as verified. For disputed or specialist claims, keep the proposed change pending until the appropriate subject-matter role checks the source. The owner coordinates the decision; the assigned editor applies approved changes through the local publishing process. Review workflow The owner role coordinates the review; the editor applies the change. Record the observed issue Note the page, specific problem, affected audience, and why the information matters. Route to an accountable role Use the ownership register; ask the governance coordinator to resolve an unassigned item. Verify the source Check an appropriate source and ask a subject-matter reviewer to resolve disputed or specialist details. Make a reader-focused change Correct the issue without creating a competing copy of an authoritative policy, form, or procedure. Check the result Test destinations and access for the intended audience; review headings, link text, and informative-image alternative text. Publish and record Use the local publishing process; record the decision, evidence, owner role, and next review point when the content remains active. Worked review handoff Fictional example; the evidence is something a reviewer can observe. Issue Owner and reviewer roles Decision Completion evidence A Service Desk how-to links to a retired request route. IT Knowledge owner; IT service management subject-matter reviewer Repair the route and retain the article. The current destination opens for the intended audience; the retired link is removed and the review outcome is recorded. Workflow questions What if reviewers disagree about accuracy? Keep the disputed change pending, record the specific open question, and route it to the role that can verify the source. Do not describe an unverified change as confirmed. What if a review date has passed? Route the content to its owner role for review and record the outcome. If the owner is unavailable or unassigned, ask the governance coordinator to arrange coverage. A passed date alone does not prove the content is inaccurate. When should content be retired rather than repaired? Retire it when it no longer serves a reader or reference need. Check incoming links and update or remove them through the local publishing process.