LWW JGS 23-2 Project:

Feedback Analysis Report

Version00

June 22, 2016

Prepared by:

Jelaine Bless B. Cabrera

Business Process Analyst
SPi Content Solutions Quality

Reviewed by:

Ramill S. Delos Reyes

Senior Manager
SPi Content Solutions Quality

LWW JGS 23-2 - Feedback Analysis

Page 2

I. Background
A feedback was received through email last June 3, 2012 from Elliot Ellis the Senior Production
Editor of JGS, regarding 11 articles in which 5 of those have lots of typesetting and copyediting
errors. Prior to the email, a meeting was held where the penalty of 5% for late delivery of files were
discussed. The affected articles must be delivered to the client morning of the next day.
A total of 121 corrections were tabulated and analyzed. The study focused on the following
aspects:

Validation of data report from QIS

Distribution of Valid and Invalid Errors per articles
Top error on CED and Production
Screenshot of the e-Mail received from LWW

II. Analysis
Upon investigation
of the feedback
received from JGS,
out of the 11
articles with 91
pages in total only
5 articles have
errors. From the 5
articles,
121
corrections
were
tabulated and 25 of those were valid errors and the remaining 96 were not valid errors. The overall
EPP of the project was 0.27 which meet the target EPP threshold. Production EPP was 0.03, from
the 3 valid errors from pre-editing and typesetting. The CE EPP was 0.24 which is over the 0.20
CE threshold.

LWW JGS 23-2 - Feedback Analysis

Page 3

CEI is a
CED
error
resulting from either failure to follow
client-specific instruction or doing
something not required by the client.
CEI has the highest count due to
punctuation and incorrect data error.
Punctuation errors occurred because
the copyeditor missed to insert period after each letter acronym. For the
incorrect data errors, the copyeditor failed to follow some specifications of the
client. Copyeditors have a failure in the execution of the instruction but then
CEC (Copyediting Checking) also missed to see the error occurrence for the
errors were detected prior to printing.

Pre-editing has 1 valid error count where the agent missed to insert some
words in the article. Punctuation and incorrect data errors where the 2 valid
errors that Typesetting had made.
III. Conclusions
Putting these data together:
JGS project meet the overall target threshold and does not have a major problem regarding
typesetting process. In terms of the language or copyediting, there was a deviation from the
set threshold. Major contributor was the punctuation and the incorrect data where
copyeditors failed to follow client specific instruction regarding the use of periods and
special character.

Punctuation and incorrect data errors were the most significant both
with copyediting and typesetting process.
IV. Recommendations
Problem

Corrective Action

Responsible
Person

Date

LWW JGS 23-2 - Feedback Analysis

Page 4

Lots
of
Punctuation
and
Incorrect
data errors

CEC
agent
missed
CEI,
CEL and other
errors
during
checking.

Weekly
and
monthly
regular
coaching to all agents.
List down all common errors that occurred
in the copyediting and production. Then
provide a visual awareness for the agents
to clearly see the error and for them to be
familiarized.
Whenever new error occurred, visual
awareness must be updated.
All CEC agent must have a requalification
to the process of checking.
Provide a visual awareness for the common
errors committed by copyediting and
refresh all CEC agents regarding all the
errors

B. Kalma
(CED Team
Lead)

J. Wallas
(CEC Team
Lead)

June 05

June 08

June 05