Most Powerful Open Source ERP

Peer review check list

This document is used for peer review training purpose.
  • Last Update:2015-12-01
  • Version:001
  • Language:en

Peer Review Checklist

*Please read this document before you peer review other students' answer sets.
*This document is used for peer review training purpose.
*Note: this list only provides you the most common mistakes that we found in the past during the answer sets evaluation process. There might be many more problems with the answer sets that are assigned to you.You need to correct the answer sets using your own judgement.


1. Is the questionnaire filled up in English? (see Correction „fill up the answers in English“)

2. Are the answers provided using well-structured full sentences and easy to understand? (see Correction „correct writing style“)

3. Are there many spelling mistakes? (see Correction „check spelling“)

Overall evaluation:

1. Are all the questions from the questionnaire answered? (see Correction „finish Questionnaire“)

2. Is the category configuration spreadsheet completed? (see Correction „fill up the spreadsheet“)

3. Is the title of the answer set changed to the interviewed company name? (see Correction „Change title of answer set“)

Answers evaluation

1. Did the interviewer have a clear understanding towards the interview questions and get the desired answers which corresponding to the specific questions? (see Correction „unrealistic“, „not related“, „are you sure“ etc., then add your own comment)

2. Did the answers provide enough details? (see Correction „please explain in detail“ or „provide more detail“)

3. Are all three priorities which the interviewed company expect an ERP system to improve clearly stated? And the specific business processes which need to be improved well explained? (see Correction „more detail of business process required“, „describe concrete improvement“, „explain improvement in more detail“ etc.)

4. Is there any inconsistency in the answers? (see Correction „inconsistent“)

Category configuration spreadsheet evaluation:

1. Is the path hierachy defined for all categories? (see Correction“correct path in function“, „correct path in grade“, „correct path in skill“ etc.)

2. Are ids given for all categories? (see Correction „correct Id in product line“, „make ID comply to standards“ etc.)

3. Is there any inconstency between Id and Title? (see Correction „inconsistency between ID and Title“ )

4. Are there many information missing? (see Correction „fill the spreadsheet completely“, „improve category according to information given“ etc.)