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 6 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 threshold of the project was 0.33 for
Error per Page (EPP) and 0.20 for Copyediting Errors per Page (CE EPP).
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
6 articles have
errors. From the 65
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 and does not meet
thewhich is over the 0.20 CE threshold of 0.20.

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
QA CEC 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
Below are the findings from the above analysis:Putting these data together:
Punctuation and incorrect data errors were the most significant both with copyediting and
typesetting process.

JGS project meet the overall target threshold and does not have a major problem regarding
typesetting and language errorsprocess. 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

Team Lead must regularly coach each copyeditors and production agents. This must be
done on a weekly and monthly basis.
Team Lead must provide a visual awareness regarding the common errors committed by
the copyeditors and agents. Like for example the periods in the author name and the
special character usage. Visual awareness must be available a day after the occurrence of
the error.
QA CEC must also have a requalification and the visual awareness of the errors must also
be refresher to them.

LWW JGS 23-2 - Feedback Analysis

Page 4