Memorandum
To: Elton Kok, Team Undefined member.
From: Syed Ahmed, Team Undefined.
Date: 9th December 2020
Subject: Peer Review of draft report on “Improving the Documentation Process for the Raw Materials Quality Control Department at Sanofi Pasteur.”
I am pleased to review this draft report on improving the documentation process at the quality control department for raw materials at Sanofi Pasteur. The report has thoroughly analyzed the issue of over-reliance on paper documentation in the QC department. Various key insights were gained through the effective collection and analysis of data through primary research which were used to make recommendations for action. A review of each section and thematic considerations is given below:
First Impressions
The report is generally well organized and follows a logical progression. The Introduction section provided a thorough exploration of the goal and problem statement of the report. In the Data Section, a narrative analysis of the data collected from surveys and interviews is used to develop insights into the problem. Appropriate graphs and tables are used to organize and display some of the information. Valid conclusions and recommendations are presented. The recommendations appear to be somewhat conservative.
Introduction
The Introduction section is comprehensive and does an excellent job of laying out the purpose and scope of the report including describing the methodology. There seems to be an excessive emphasis and space devoted to providing the background of the company and a general description of biopharmaceutical industry. Since the report is addressed to a senior manager at the company, this information might be considered superfluous, and a summarized version may be used instead. It should be noted that the second paragraph of “Description of the Biopharmaceutical Industry” that explains the regulatory requirements for documentation was found to be highly relevant and should not be removed in any revision.
The Abstract provided is limited to describing the scope of the report. It is recommended that including the conclusions and recommendations sections will help meet requirements for a more complete abstract.
Data Section
The data section is very impressive as a large amount of in-depth data has been collected allowing many valuable insights to be deduced from its analysis. The list of unique advantages and disadvantages of paper and digital documentation that was developed from the interviews and surveys of employees seems to be comprehensive and would form the basis in any further treatment of the topic. However, the pros and cons are described in the body of the text which make them hard to keep track of. Collating this data into a table would benefit any reader by collecting this valuable assortment of data in one place.
The discussion and presentation of the results has been organized according to source: whether it was collected in a survey or an interview, which has led to some points being repeated. Creating sections according to topic and having separate paragraphs, within each topic, to describe the results of surveys and interviews might help to overcome the problem of repetition and contribute to clarity and readability.
A greater voice of the author in interpreting or critiquing the opinions of the employees being shared would be desirable as it will help the reader evaluate and develop a more realistic perspective about some of the data as it is being presented.
Lastly, moving the graphs at the end of the Data Section to each point in the Data Section where they are being discussed would help to provide context for each of them.
Conclusion
The conclusion section is the highlight of this report as it contains much valuable analysis that allows the reader to arrive at some key determinations about the problem statement. The restatement of the problem is very effective at reminding the reader and collecting their thoughts about the problem statement and the purpose of the report. The summary of the interpretations indicates that although the monetary cost of paper pales in comparison to the cost of digitization, there are significant hidden costs of continuing to use paper. The recommendations provide ways to make a gradual shift towards digitization using the company’s internal resources which would defray the large capital cost of making a sudden shift relying on external contractors. The recommendations, although conservative, are valid.
Content
The report makes a tangible contribution to the question of shifting away from paper use in the raw-materials QC department at Sanofi Pasteur. An appraisal of the primary research has revealed that the issue is complex and there are multiple arguments in favour of each strategy beyond cost and environmental considerations. The author has proposed a workable and cost-effective solution that is forward-looking.
Organization
The report is generally well organized with all parts well connected. There is some minor inconsistency in labelling as the references to figures (“Figure. [title]”) is placed below the image and those for tables is placed above the table. There are some minor detractions about the biopharmaceutical industry which has been identified above which is an unnecessary sidetrack and may be removed to preserve focus.
Formatting of subheadings can be refined so it is easier to identify sub-sections. For example, the current headings:
Comparing Digital to Paper Documentation
Benefits and Issues with Paper Documentation
can be reformatted as:
2. Comparing Digital to Paper Documentation
2.1 Benefits and Issues with Paper Documentation
Style
The report has a consistent objective tone. There are parts of the Data Section where the responses from the survey are discussed in a narrative format which can make it hard for readers to keep track of the plethora of information. The author has observed the YOU-attitude in their writing and minimized the used of pronouns or imperatives, however, the report has a very neutral tone. Having a more positive tone and catering to the ego of the target audience might be an effective strategy to make this report more compelling.
Design
The report faithfully adheres to the template for a formal report with a well formatted title and contents page, appropriate body sections, and an appendix. The graphics are well designed and appropriately labeled and make the data easier to understand. As has been suggested above, some of the graphics seem to be out of place at the end of the data section and may be placed earlier in the results section where they have been referenced or provide helpful context to the discussion.
Language and Grammar
A number of instances were noted where the use of a hyphen would be recommended for e.g.:
- Changing “each day to document quality related data” to “each day to document quality-related data”. Alternatively, the sentence could be phrased as “each day to document data related to quality”.
- Changing “suffering from a vaccine preventable disease” to “suffering from a vaccine-preventable disease”.
Some minor grammatical issues noted are:
- changing “vaccine doses in a safe, robust, efficient manner” to “vaccine doses in a safe, robust and efficient manner
- Changing “to when the finish product is put on the shelf.” to “to when the finished product is put on the shelf.”
- Changing “receives 20 000 shipments annually” to “receives 20,000 shipments annually”.
Concluding Remarks and Recommendations
The author is well on their way to writing a compelling report that has fully addressed the problem statement and goal they outlined at the start. The following recommendations will further polish an already impressive product.
- Keeping the audience in mind, the introduction to Sanofi Pasteur can be summarized and some content that describes the biopharmaceutical industry can be pared away.
- Collating the information about the pros and cons of digital and paper documentation in a table.
- Organizing the discussion of the results by survey “question” or topic instead of by source of data collection (i.e. interviews or survey).
- Moving the graphs at the end of the data section to the appropriate place in the discussion where they are contextually relevant.
- Using the strategies of writing-with-YOU-attitude to change the tone of the report from neutral to positive.
- Correcting the minor grammatical issues identified.
NOTE: The draft report by Elton Kok has not been enclosed here due to confidentiality reasons which have been explained to the instructor and approved by them.
Leave a Reply