How do I set up review and approval platform workflows for submittals and redlines in a consulting engineering team?

Here’s a practical way to set up review and approval platform workflows for submittals and redlines in a consulting engineering team.

1) Define the workflow types first

Separate the two document classes, because they usually need different routing and controls:

Submittals

Examples:

• vendor/shop drawings
• calculations
• product data
• RFIs with supporting files
• permit packages

Typical characteristics:

• formal review chain
• due dates and SLA tracking
• approval statuses like Approved / Approved as Noted / Revise and Resubmit / Rejected
• audit trail required

Redlines

Examples:

• markups from design review
• as-built corrections
• field changes
• reviewer comments on plans/specs

Typical characteristics:

• iterative collaboration
• easier version comparisons
• markups/comment resolution
• may feed back into the official drawing set

---

2) Standardize statuses and decision logic

Use a small, consistent set of workflow states.

Suggested submittal statuses

• Draft
• Submitted
• Discipline Review
• Lead Review
• QA/QC Review
• Client/Owner Review if applicable
• Approved
• Approved as Noted
• Revise and Resubmit
• Rejected
• Closed

Suggested redline statuses

• Open
• In Review
• Comments Consolidated
• Revised
• Accepted
• Rejected/Deferred
• Issued

Keep the status names consistent across projects so users don’t have to relearn the process each time.

---

3) Define roles clearly

A workflow fails when everyone can comment but nobody owns the decision.

Common roles

• Submitter: uploads and initiates workflow
• Discipline Reviewer: technical review
• Lead Engineer / PM: resolves conflicts and signs off
• QA/QC Reviewer: checks standards, completeness, and coordination
• Document Controller / Admin: formatting, numbering, transmittal, archiving
• Client/External Reviewer: optional, limited-access reviewer

Best practice

Assign:

• one owner per workflow
• reviewers by discipline
• one final approver
• one person responsible for consolidation

---

4) Create routing rules

Workflow routing should be automated where possible.

Routing by document type

Examples:

• Structural submittals route to structural reviewer + lead + QA/QC
• Electrical redlines route to electrical lead + CAD/BIM coordinator
• Cross-discipline drawings route to multiple reviewers in parallel

Routing by thresholds

You can add rules such as:

• If document is for permit, require QA/QC and PM approval
• If change affects scope, trigger PM + cost review
• If redline impacts construction, require discipline lead signoff

Routing by project phase

• Design phase: internal review only
• Bid phase: formal issue review
• Construction phase: field redlines and submittals may need external circulation
• Closeout: as-built validation workflow

---

5) Build separate workflow templates

Do not use one generic workflow for everything.

Template A: Submittal Review

1. Submitter uploads package
2. Document control checks completeness
3. Discipline reviewer comments
4. Lead engineer resolves conflicts
5. QA/QC checks compliance
6. Final approval decision
7. Returned to submitter / issued externally
8. Archived with transmittal

Template B: Redline Review

1. Reviewer uploads marked-up file
2. System notifies owner of redline set
3. Reviewers comment in platform
4. Comments are resolved or dispositioned
5. Revised file uploaded
6. Approval to issue updated drawing/document
7. Archived with version history

---

6) Use version control and naming conventions

This is critical for consulting engineering teams.

Recommended conventions

• Project number
• Discipline code
• Document type
• Sequence number
• Revision number

Example:

• 12345-STR-DRG-004-RevA
• 12345-MECH-SUB-012-Rev2

Version rules

• Only one active version in review
• Previous versions remain read-only
• Require comparison between revision and prior version for redlines
• Lock approved files to prevent accidental edits

---

7) Set review SLAs and escalation rules

To avoid bottlenecks, define turnaround expectations.

Example SLAs

• Internal discipline review: 3 business days
• Lead review: 2 business days
• QA/QC review: 2 business days
• External client review: per contract, e.g. 5–10 business days

Escalation

• Reminder at 50% of due date
• Escalate to lead at due date
• Escalate to PM after 2 overdue days
• Auto-close or reassign after 5 overdue days if needed

---

8) Make comments actionable

The platform should support structured comments.

Comment fields

• commenter
• discipline
• location in document
• severity
• required action
• disposition: accept / reject / revise / defer
• due date for response

Helpful comment categories

• technical error
• coordination issue
• standards compliance
• missing information
• editorial/formatting
• constructability concern

This makes comment resolution much easier.

---

9) Add approval gates

Not all comments should block approval, but some should.

Non-blocking

• editorial edits
• minor formatting issues
• informational comments

Blocking

• code compliance issue
• clash with another discipline
• missing calculations
• scope inconsistency
• unresolved client requirement

Define what constitutes:

• hard stop
• soft stop
• informational

---

10) Integrate with your document systems

If possible, connect the workflow platform to:

• SharePoint / Teams
• Autodesk Construction Cloud
• Bluebeam Studio
• ProjectWise
• Aconex
• Procore
• eBuilder or other CDE/DMS platforms

Integration goals

• single source of truth
• automatic version sync
• metadata population
• transmittal logging
• searchable audit trail

---

11) Track metrics

Measure workflow performance so you can improve it.

Useful KPIs

• average review cycle time
• number of rework loops
• overdue reviews by reviewer
• percentage approved first pass
• number of unresolved comments
• time from redline to issued revision

These metrics help identify bottlenecks and training needs.

---

12) Set permissions carefully

A consulting engineering workflow often has sensitive data.

Recommended permissions

• submitters can upload and view their packages
• reviewers can comment only in assigned workflows
• approvers can finalize decisions
• client/external users see only assigned docs
• admin can manage templates and records

Add controls for:

• read-only finalized documents
• audit log retention
• watermarking draft versions if needed

---

13) Train the team on one standard process

Even a good platform fails without adoption.

Train on:

• how to submit documents correctly
• how to comment constructively
• how to resolve comments
• what approval statuses mean
• how to use version control
• when to escalate issues

Provide short job aids:

• one-page submittal workflow guide
• redline naming/version guide
• comment resolution standard

---

14) Start simple, then add complexity

A good rollout path:

1. pilot one project
2. test one submittal template and one redline template
3. refine statuses and permissions
4. add discipline routing
5. add automation and metrics
6. expand to all projects

This avoids overengineering the first version.

---

Example workflow setup

If you want a simple practical model:

Submittals

• Submitter uploads package
• Document control validates
• Discipline reviewer comments
• Lead engineer approves/disposition
• QA/QC reviews
• Final decision issued
• Record archived

Redlines

• Reviewer uploads markup
• Comments logged in platform
• Discipline lead consolidates
• Revised document uploaded
• QA/QC confirms changes incorporated
• Issued as revised record
• Archive superseded versions

---

Recommended governance

Create a small workflow governance group:

• PM
• QA/QC lead
• document controller
• discipline lead
• platform admin

Responsibilities:

• approve workflow templates
• update routing rules
• maintain status definitions
• review metrics
• resolve exceptions

---

If you want, I can also give you:

1. a sample submittal workflow diagram,
2. a RACI matrix, or
3. a configurable workflow template you can use in SharePoint, Aconex, Autodesk, or ProjectWise.