Re: peer review ??

Subject: Re: peer review ??
From: Bonni Graham <bonnig -at- IX -dot- NETCOM -dot- COM>
Date: Wed, 5 Jul 1995 17:30:14 -0700

Becca Price asked:

>Is this strictly a *writing* review, or do SMEs contribute? or do you have
>separate technical review meetings? if it's all done at once, how do you
>keep the technical people from being bored out of their minds when you get
>into a discussion of a subtle point of technical writing?

I use peer review as strictly a writing review, and I try to have it fall
towards the *end* of the review cycle (I have a write-up of my preferred review
cycle and a review team worksheet for each iteration, if anyone wants to see
them). There isn't any real way to keep the SMEs from getting bored, so I
include them in a different iteration of the review cycle.

>if you have a separate technical review meeting, who attends? and how do
>you enforce attendance? (for example, we're getting excited here at the
>idea, since we have trouble pulling in comments *before* release - but if
>developers won't even read the doc. to review it now, how do we get them to
>come to a meeting having read it already? and if they come and haven't read
>it, do we send them home and say "sorry, you lost your chance to tell us
>whether it's accurate or not?"

I almost never do technical review as a meeting. I usually send a document
serially to the review team, with a due date for passing it on. Then I go bug
the person who hasn't passed it on in time (I have a badger puppet I use for
this). Mind you, I don't get this resistance as much from my clients as I did
when I was dealing with in-house staff.

Hope this helps!

Bonni Graham
Manual Labour

Previous by Author: Re: what is dtp?
Next by Author: Re: Playing (was Re: peer review ??)
Previous by Thread: Re: more on peer reviews
Next by Thread: Re: peer review ??

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads