In theory, new comments during the approval phase should only be related to reworked parts of the document. The formal review phase is passed so all comments should be noted in the review form.
However, during the approval phase you might run into the situation where new comments arise. There are different reasons for that and different actions to take. In all situations common sense of the moderator and willingness of the involved will determine what needs to happen.
Causes for new comments
- Disapproval of rework
- New insights and second thoughts
- Changes in context
- Review was done perfunctory or was done not at all
How to deal with this
Normally, all issues that need to be fixed before the next project phase is entered will help in saving time and money. The need is to be decided by the author and the reviewer, with some help of the moderator.
- Majors need to be fixed.
- Lot’s of minors: need to be fixed.
- Typo’s don’t need to be fixed.
Depending on the amount of fixes, the approval phase needs to be redone or the updated document needs to be spread “for your information” to all reviewers. A good moment for this last action is during the finalization of the process. (Together with the review report)
Next to the question about fixing or not, the moderator has an action to take to discourage this behavior in the future. All comments (except for disapprovals of rework) in the approval phase cause the review process to become inefficient. Since the review process is owned by the moderator, the moderator is responsible for keeping it as efficient as possible.
Inform the reviewers about the extra work they cause by providing comments in the approval phase. Let them know you’ll try to get everything reworked, but also that the new rework will cause extra work for all other reviewer to re-check.
Posted in: From a Moderator perspective