Find the weak link in your color workflow.
A quick diagnostic for print teams who need clearer decisions, better consistency, and fewer workflow surprises.
Built for teams dealing with calibration drift, proofing issues, profile confusion, workflow gaps, and inconsistent output.
Outputs you’ll receive
A concise diagnosis of workflow weaknesses, top risk areas, and a practical 30‑day action plan.
How it works
1. Answer a few questions
Get a fast picture of how your workflow is performing across calibration, profiling, proofing, process, and visibility.
2. See what needs attention
We highlight likely risk areas and where your process is strongest or weakest.
3. Get next steps
Receive a practical action plan and the option to get expert help.
Ready to see where your workflow is slipping?
ColorWorkflow Audit
This short assessment looks at the five areas that most often drive inconsistency in print production:
What best describes you?
What are you trying to solve?
Help us tailor the report.
These details are optional context so your results reflect the type of workflow you’re running.
What type of work best describes your production?
How many production output devices are in scope?
Which tools are part of the workflow?
Select any that apply. You can skip this if you are not sure.
Calibration discipline
How consistently your devices are checked, recalibrated, and kept within control.
How often are production devices calibrated?
Who is responsible for calibration?
Are calibration events documented?
Do operators get prompted when calibration is due?
When a device falls out of tolerance, what happens?
Profile and color-management control
How profiles are created, deployed, and governed across devices and shifts.
How are profiles managed today?
How often are profiles reviewed or refreshed?
Are the same profiles used consistently across similar devices/workflows?
Do you know who created the current active profiles and when?
Are profile choices tied to defined media/press conditions?
Proofing and consistency process
How consistently proofs align with production output and hold up over time.
What best describes your proofing process?
How often does proof not match final output closely enough?
Are tolerances or pass/fail expectations defined?
How are approvals handled?
When a consistency issue appears, can you isolate whether it came from proofing, calibration, profile use, or workflow setup?
Workflow and job-submission maturity
How structured intake, handoffs, and production controls are.
How standardized is job intake?
How often do file/setup issues cause delays or rework?
Are repetitive prepress or routing steps automated?
How well documented is the workflow from submission to output?
When jobs fail, is root cause usually obvious?
Visibility and accountability
How visibility and ownership support reliable, repeatable output.
Can you see the status of devices, proofing, and key workflow steps in one place?
Can you compare consistency/performance across devices or sites?
Is there a history of issues, failures, or corrective actions?
If output quality drifts, how quickly do you know?
Do you know which issues are costing the most time or rework?
Your workflow score: 0 / 100
Controlled in spots, but still too dependent on workarounds.
Your results suggest some useful structure is in place, but gaps in ownership, standardization, or visibility are still making consistency harder than it should be.
Advisor summary
A concise advisor-style interpretation will appear here after the audit is scored.
Report summary
Critical answers will appear here when they need to be called out separately from the score.
Recommended next step
The recommended engagement type will appear here after the audit is scored.
Get expert help
Share your contact info if you want help interpreting the results or deciding what to fix first. You can view the full report without submitting this form.
Your audit is complete.
We’ll send your summary and next steps shortly.
Color and workflow, made clearer.