It is essential for each management deliverable to be formally reviewed, especially those that have been explicitly defined in the contract, before they are officially issued to the client. Therefore, the review for a management deliverable may take place in two stages:

1. Internal review – conducted by the Service Engagement team to assess whether the content is relevant and correct for the current service engagement and will be acceptable for the Client. The deliverable should be assessed against the review requirements and the contract, if applicable, to determine its suitability.

2. External review – conducted by client stakeholders with relevant subject matter knowledge to determine whether the content satisfies the client’s requirements. The deliverable should be assessed against the acceptance criteria defined by the Client and documented into the SGP or Contract.

Within some short period of time following the review or as defined in the contract, relevant approvers will either accept the deliverable by completing and signing an acceptance certificate, or reject it by providing a written list of defects contained in the deliverable. This should include the amendments that must be made for it to meet the requirements of the acceptance criteria. If a deliverable is not approved, the Service Engagement team (or the supplier) will complete the necessary amendments within a fixed period of time, as defined in the contract, before issuing a new version of the deliverable for a further review.

In some cases, it may be prudent to evaluate work products at selected milestones during their development or to perform incremental evaluations of work products and/or services against process descriptions, standards, and procedures. Where cases of non compliance are found during the evaluations, appropriate action plans must be put in place to address these before the next evaluation. Additionally, it is vital that non-technical commitments associated with the delivered work product are satisfied, such as confirming that appropriate licenses, warranties, ownership, usage, and support or maintenance agreements are in place and that all supporting materials have been received.

Where the review confirms that a Service Engagement deliverable has failed to satisfy the pre-agreed acceptance criteria, the Engagement Manager should ensure that the findings and recommended next steps are documented in the Deliverable Review Report, which should include:

• acceptance test results (using related procedures).
• number and severity of defects.
• recommended corrective actions.
• responsible owner(s) for corrective actions.
• deadlines for resolution of actions.

Engagement Manager must ensure that all defects detected based on the detailed review of deliverables are traced and resolved based on the identified resolution actions. The identified defects should be monitored periodically, and efficiency of the resolution actions meets the stated deliverable review requirements.

Where the review confirms the deliverable as being acceptable, the Engagement Manager should conclude the remaining actions, such as signing off the deliverable, before formally issuing it to the Client.

Wherever resolution action does not produce the expected results, alternative solutions need to be put in place or Engagement Manager must use the established escalation mechanism to communicate with the stakeholders.

The Engagement Manager should evaluate review results as well as the review process and identify actions to optimize the process to make it more effective. This can be taken up through continual improvement process in Performance and Improvement Management stream.