Sometimes announced, sometimes not announced: comments can get delivered áfter the review deadline. The moderator has to deal with this, depending on the situation but always with a doses of common sense.
When a reviewer announces not to be able to make the review deadline, this must be encouraged. Open communication is a good thing and it opens possibilities to search for a solution. Some possibilities are:
- Stretch the deadline for all reviewers
- Stretch the deadline for the single reviewer, and wait for his comments before merging. Inform the author of a delay in delivery of comments.
- Stretch the deadline for the single reviewer, but don’t wait for this comments. Inform the author of a delay in delivery of comments from this specific reviewer.
- Try to get a colleague or second reviewer to take over the review activities.
- See if the reviewer’s priorities can be rescheduled.
- Accept the risk of not having the comments from this reviewer (especially if this was an optional reviewer). This must be done together with the QA-manager.
If not announced
This must be discouraged. The moderator has already requested and reminded the reviewer to be in time or to inform the moderator if the deadlines can not be made. Comments that are too late must be checked for impact and the moderator, together with the QA-manager and author, must decide what to do with it. Some possibilities are:
- Accept the late delivery and send an update of the merged review form to the author.
- Accept part of the comments
- Reject all comments
If Majors still can be fixed before the next project phase commences, it might still be worth it to let it be fixed since it will save time or money.
The moderator needs to protect the review process. So, the reviewer must be made clear this behavior is not accepted and good alternatives are available. (Namely: the reviewer is asked to mention it in time if the deadline can not be met.)
Posted in: From a Moderator perspective