I just answered in the original thread but I will post the same response in here.

“I am a part of a start up with less than 15 users. I am admin and make most of the templates so we dont really have permissions. We have a collection with temporary templates that everybody can create and edit but anything that moves to an “official SOP” folder can only be done by admins. That way each department can make any changes as our processes changes (and they do weekly) and when we do get more employees it would be easy for an admin to make final edits, streamline the formatting, and push it to another folder.“

I have 2 buckets:

1. Admin only templates: these are template collections where only an admin is expected to make edits
   1. These are restricted, and generally a small set of templates with a defined use case
2. Templates where teams can make edits
   1. These are templates where teams are still figuring out their Benchling use case
   2. I will often make the initial template, then work with the user/group for 1-2 months where we make frequent, small changes together. This is also a great time to teach the user/groups what types of changes are small, what types of changes are big, how to migrate through an environment, etc
      1. Have them make the small changes
      2. Anything requiring new/updated entities, results, etc involve a quick check-in with me before going forward

We are currently a bit more strict with template creation to prevent the collections from being inundated with random templates and keep notebook structures aligned within the company.

1. All collections are Admin only by default.
2. We have a ‘super-user’ group that can develop templates in a specified collection, only viewable to super-users and admins. I will work with the super-users during development, and do a review to ensure the template is not promoting bad practices before pushing the ‘final’ version out of the ‘User Development’ collection into the appropriate publicly accessible collection.
   • The approach that @rooshabh outlined above sounds like a great approach that gives teams some opportunity to explore and prevents bottlenecking during admin review - thank you for sharing!