There was a team of content strategists writing component documentation. The “official” peer review process was someone writing in the Teams Content channel, “Hey can someone review this?” There was no time spent for reviews, no one was assigned and accountable, and there was no formal structure or criteria for reviews, which meant that some people (me) were reviewing more thoroughly (I review documentation for accuracy, completeness, clarity, consistency and a copy edit for errors), and some were just doing a copy edit.
We needed a more structured review process, and needed to define review criteria to get a common baseline for documentation quality.
I wrote up and presented this presentation to the CS and leadership to outline the issues and my recommendations (and things that i already started changing).
Getting this discussion started illuminated some upstream issues that had been affecting documentation, namely that some review layers (accuracy and completeness) were being done by content strategists, and should be done earlier in the process by developers and designers (together with CS).
I also highlighted the need to account for content review time in sprint planning.