What This Is
Audit of the current 413 workflows across 82 folders in Top Rep's GHL, plus a proposed clean folder structure that maps onto Top Rep's real product line + customer lifecycle. Includes side-by-side comparison, 4-phase migration plan, and a standardized naming convention going forward.
Live proposal: https://topreptraining-docs.pages.dev/ghl-workflow-organization/
Current State (Audit)
Total workflows 413 Total folders 82 Root orphans 28 (no folder) Masterclasses in one flat list 105 Untitled / Test workflows 6+ Empty aspirational folders 11 Top-level folders 19 (with overlapping concerns) Problems Identified
Two competing top-level taxonomies running in parallel. 01 - Market / 02 - Sell / 03 - Customer / 04 - Product / ... AND [1] CAPTURE / [2] ATTRACT / [3] RETAIN / [4] ENGAGE / [5] OPERATIONS. Same products in both. New workflow owners have to guess which axis to file under. 105 Masterclass workflows in one flat list at /[4] ENGAGE/Masterclasses. No subfoldering by guest or year. Going back to October 2024. 28 root orphans. Workflows like "Test email" (Published), "Webhook Test", and 4 "BTC Aug 2026" drafts sit at GHL root with no folder. Untitled workflows in production. Several "New Workflow : 1768339671257" entries (Unix epoch defaults). One literal "Test email" with status Published. Empty aspirational folders. /05 - Team is 100% empty. /04 - Product has 7 subfolders, 6 empty. Three competing naming conventions coexist: bracketed dotted-number ([3.3.7]), pipe-separated (CSM | Function | Stage), and plain-language (Bootcamp Room Block Reminder).
Recommended Structure (12 top-level folders, single product-first axis)
00 - Operations 10 - Lead Capture 20 - Flight School 30 - Coaching 40 - Live Events 50 - Wednesday Masterclass (Archive by Year/Guest) 60 - Physical Products 70 - Engagement & Retention 80 - Upsell & Advocacy 90 - Special Campaigns _DRAFTS _ARCHIVE
Why product-first (not lifecycle-first): Top Rep ships 10+ products. A workflow's purpose is almost always tied to one specific product. Product-first keeps workflows colocated with the product they support; lifecycle becomes a clean subfolder inside each product.
Migration Plan (4 Phases)
Phase 1 - Build skeleton. Create the 12 new top-level folders + immediate subfolders. 30 minutes. Zero risk. Phase 2 - Classify every workflow. Build a mapping spreadsheet (workflow ID + current folder + proposed target). 2-3 hours. Read-only. Auto-classifier handles ~320 of 413; ~93 need human review. Phase 3 - Bulk-move via API. Move workflows in batches. 1 hour with a script. Workflow IDs, deep-link URLs, webhook endpoints, and active enrollments do NOT change. Phase 4 - Decommission old folders + rename batches. Delete empty old folders. Audit names against the new convention. 1 hour deletion + ongoing rename pass over ~1 week.
Naming Convention Going Forward
Pattern: [INIT] | [Function] | [Stage]
Already being adopted in Closing Roadmap (CRT | ...), Chris Scoville Masterclass (CSM | ...), Brian Simpson webinar (STW 06-18-26 | ...). Make it the default for all new workflows.
Risks & Mitigation (high-level)
Workflow IDs and deep-link URLs are NOT folder-bound. Moves don't break bookmarks, webhooks, or active enrollments. Only the GHL UI folder breadcrumb changes. During migration, lock new builds to _DRAFTS/ only and rename old folders with _LEGACY_ prefix so they sort to the bottom but stay visible until Phase 4.
What I'm Asking For
Sign-off on:
The 12-folder structure (does the axis split match how the team thinks about Top Rep's products?) The 4-phase migration plan The naming convention
On approval, Tech VA executes Phase 1 (build empty skeleton, 30 min, zero risk) and produces the Phase 2 mapping spreadsheet for Jet's review before any workflows move.
Source
Workflow scrape: 2026-05-06T20:51 UTC, captured directly via GHL workflow API. 413 workflows across 82 folders. Naming convention reference: already in use across CRT, CSM, AIS, STW workflow series. New Brian Simpson webinar campaign documentation (https://topreptraining-docs.pages.dev/brian-simpson-service-tech-webinar/) follows this same standard.