AI Content Workflow Guide for London Agencies

What to take away

Mapping the London agency content workflow end to end

Start with the client brief. In London, briefs often arrive from FCA-regulated financial clients, retail brands and public sector bodies, each with different approval chains. Map every handover before you add AI tools. Write the map as a sequence of stages, from intake through to measurement after publication.

Use agile delivery for planning the workflow itself, not just the content. The GOV.UK service manual sets out how to work in short cycles with a clear owner for each stage. That discipline matters when three clients share one content team.

Assign one owner per stage. A stage with two owners has none. Put the owner's name in the workflow document and review it monthly.

Build the map as a simple table. It becomes the contract between account managers and the content team.

Add a feedback loop. Every published asset should generate notes for the next brief. That is how the workflow improves without a rewrite each quarter. For a week by week rhythm, see our operating workflow.

Choosing AI tools for research, drafting and review

Pick tools by job, not by brand. For research and source-grounded summarisation, trial Perplexity or Google NotebookLM; for drafting and rewriting, trial ChatGPT or Microsoft Copilot; for language review, consider Grammarly. ChatGPT or Copilot can also help flag claims, dates and names for a human to verify, but must not replace that check. In a London agency, three categories cover most needs: research and summarisation, drafting and rewriting, and review and checking. A tool that does all three badly is worse than three tools that do one job well.

For research, use tools that cite sources and let you export the citation list. For drafting, use tools that accept a style guide and a source pack. For review, use tools that flag claims, dates and names for a human to check.

Run a small trial before you buy. Give two writers the same brief with and without the tool. Compare time to first draft and the number of revision rounds. If the tool does not cut either, it is not worth the seat cost.

Agile tools and techniques from the GOV.UK service manual help here too: short trials, clear success measures, and a decision point. Do not run a six month pilot with no exit.

Keep a tool register. List the tool, its purpose, who owns it, the data it sees, and the renewal date. This register feeds the ICO checks in section four and the buying decisions in our tool implementation guide.

Example tool register:

Three rules for AI tools in agency work:

Team roles from strategist to sub-editor

London agencies often run lean teams across several clients. Name the roles, then name the people. A role without a person is a gap.

The core roles are strategist, researcher, writer, sub-editor, compliance lead and producer. In smaller agencies, one person may hold two roles, but never the writer and sub-editor roles on the same asset.

The strategist owns the brief and the source pack. The researcher gathers sources and flags gaps. The writer drafts with AI assistance and records which tool was used. The sub-editor checks facts, tone, claims and style. The compliance lead owns ICO and ASA checks. The producer schedules and publishes.

Write role descriptions with decision rights. Who can stop a draft? Who can approve a claim? Who talks to the client when a fact is wrong? Put those answers in the workflow document, not in a meeting.

Our team roles map covers how these roles change as AI tools take on more drafting work. The short version: the sub-editor role grows, the pure drafting role shrinks, and the compliance role becomes a named post rather than a task shared around.

If you are building the team from scratch, a ninety day plan helps sequence hiring and tool trials.

ICO obligations at the data intake stage

Intake is where content workflow meets data protection. If a client sends customer reviews, case notes, CRM extracts or interview transcripts, you are processing personal data. The ICO's UK GDPR guidance sets out what that means for agencies using AI tools.

You need a lawful basis for processing, a clear purpose, and a retention rule. Possible UK GDPR lawful bases include consent, contract, legal obligation, vital interests, public task and legitimate interests. Choose and document the basis that fits the specific purpose and your role rather than defaulting to consent. You also need a data processing agreement with any AI tool vendor that processes personal data on your behalf. That agreement is not optional and it is not the same as a standard software licence.

Check transfers. Some AI tools process data outside the UK. If so, you need appropriate safeguards and you must tell the client. Put this in the brief, not in a side email.

At intake, ask three questions:

If the answer to any is no, stop and fix it before drafting. A breach found after publication is far more expensive than a delayed brief. The ICO's UK GDPR guidance and resources is the reference point for these checks.

Keep an intake log. Record the brief, the data categories, the lawful basis and the tools used. This log is your evidence if a client or regulator asks questions later. It also supports the delivery model that survives audit.

A practical intake log template can record:

CAP Code review points before client content goes live

ASA sign-off is a stage, not a person. The Advertising Standards Authority enforces the CAP Code, which covers advertising and marketing content in the UK, including much of what agencies produce for clients.

Check claims first. Any factual claim about a product, price or result needs evidence on file. Comparisons need a fair basis. Testimonials need to be genuine and current. The CAP Code's Misleading advertising section covers substantiation and comparisons; its rules on testimonials apply to endorsements. Check the Financial products section for applicable financial advertising.

Check the obvious traps. Prices must include VAT where required. Free offers must state conditions. Health, finance and food claims attract extra rules. If a client is FCA-regulated, finance content may need their compliance team too. Route financial promotions to that team to check against the FCA Handbook's Conduct of Business Sourcebook (COBS), particularly its 'Communicating with clients, including financial promotions' chapter. ASA review is not a substitute for approval by the client's compliance function.

The CAP Code is the source for these rules, and the ASA's advertising codes page lists the codes and their scope. Keep a link in your workflow document so writers can check before drafting, not after.

Sign-off record: asset name, date, checker, claims checked, evidence location, approval to publish. One row per asset. No row, no publication.

Measuring the workflow after the first quarter

Measure the workflow, not the vibes. After the first quarter, you should know how long a typical asset takes and where it stalls.

The GOV.UK service manual's guidance on measuring success applies to content operations as much as to public services: define the outcome, pick a few measures, and review them on a set cycle.

Set a baseline in month one and compare in month four. If cycle time has not fallen, the bottleneck is usually sign-off, not drafting. If revision rounds have risen, the brief or the source pack is weak.

Review the tool register at the same time. Drop any tool that has not earned its seat. Add any task that keeps coming back to a human because the tool cannot do it safely.

Finally, review the workflow map itself. Stages change as clients change. The map is a living document, and the first quarter review is when you update it. For the planning method behind the workflow, the GOV.UK service manual's agile delivery guidance is a practical starting point.

Common questions