Peer Review of Formal Report Proposal – Elton Kok

To: Elton Kok
From: Syed Waqar Ahmed
Date: October 21, 2020
Subject: Peer Review of Proposal – Improving the QC inspection process for consumables at Sanofi Pasteur

 

It was a pleasure to review the report proposal on improving the QC process at Sanofi Pasteur. The writer is well qualified to take on this important undertaking. Please find my feedback as follows:

 

First Impressions

The proposal has identified an important topic area. Improving the workflow efficiency at Sanofi Pasteur. The potential payoff of improving the QC process will be of interest to all stakeholders as it will improve workflow and productivity in these challenging times of pandemic as well as improving safety for consumers. At the very least, it can promote a rethink of the way things are done at the company.

The proposal has focused on exploring the benefit of digitization and reduced paper use in the QC process, however, it is not clear if potential negative consequences of such action will be fully explored as well.

 

Overall Layout and Design

The proposal meets the design and formatting guidelines for a formal report proposal. The given subheadings are appropriate and address all the key sections of the report .

 

Introduction

The introduction provides information on Sanofi Pasteur and the different vaccines they produce. The production figures of a billion doses of vaccine per year gives the reader an idea of the immense scale of operations at the company. One fact that should be highlighted is that at such large scale of production, finding even small efficiencies in the production process can be highly consequential. The importance of the QC process to the manufacturing process was properly emphasized. The acronym “LEAN” is a jargon term and its expansion needs to be provided.

 

Statement of Problem

The statement of problem points out that the QC inspection process of incoming raw material uses paper to record quality data. The proposal claims that paper documentation process is also slower compared to electronic as “redundant data must be copied onto different pages”. It is unclear what is referred to as redundant data. Since this point drives at the heart of the problem, it needs to be further explained. Furthermore, it is claimed that using paper creates environmental waste, however, the electronic waste of using digital devices also needs to be weighed. Although Sanofi Pasteur can create an internal process for minimizing the use of paper through digitization, the high amount of paper use in the QC process is contributed to by paper that arrives from external vendors that is providing documentary information. The proposal should differentiate between the two and clarify if it seeks to reduce the use of paper coming from external suppliers of raw material.

 

Proposed Solution

The proposed solution is for switching to a digital documentation system for as that will eliminate paper waste and increase efficiency as copying of information will become easier. Again, the use of ‘redundant data’ needs to be further elaborated upon. The sentence “Currently, there is no urgency to change the process as the company culture is complacent on old systems.” should be rephrased to have a more positive tone as the audience of the report is the existing management and should not be alienated. Since the transition to digital record-keeping is a big change, the suggestion of a transitional period or experimenting with a pilot project could also be made.

 

Scope

The scope lays out all the key questions that the report must answer in order to develop the optimal solution for digitization in the QC process at Sanofi Pasteur. Important questions such as gauging actual paper usage, estimating time saved by using digital documents versus paper, and employee preferences are included among others. Three further questions might be added to the scope:

1. Exploring the usefulness of a hybrid solution where key information could be recorded on paper while extraneous and detailed information could be made available digital?
2. What effects switching to digital documentations will have on safety and effectiveness of QC? This might complement the goals of saving paper and making the process faster.
3. What is the environmental and financial cost of using digital devices versus paper?

It might also be beneficial to rephrase the concluding sentence to be more proactive and project confidence. The existing sentence “These inquiries will help guide me as to why my proposed solution has not yet been implemented, and its benefits” may be rephrased to, “These inquiries will guide me on the best solution to implement digitization in the QC process of Sanofi Pasteur”

 

Methods

The existing methods will rely in interviews. It might also be beneficial to consider the usefulness of anonymous surveys or providing the opportunity for “off the record” interviews as current employees might be hesitant to speak up against existing company culture.

 

Qualifications

The author is academically qualified and has the necessary work experience and company connections to conduct this report.

 

Intended Audience

The intended audience is appropriate, although it should be acknowledged that since the Quality Director is a high-level position, the report might first be read and be filtered through people who work in the office of the Quality Director at Sanofi Pasteur.

 

Conclusion

The conclusion is succinct and powerful. Its focus can be improved if it incorporates key points from the ‘statement of problem and ‘scope’ as well, thereby effectively recapping the entire document. It might also be highlighted that limitations in vaccine production capacity is of pressing concern in current times.

 

Grammar and Clarification

The written proposal is clear and concise with minimal grammatical or language issues. Two sentences where the author can rephrase the sentence to have a more positive tone and be more forceful and enthusiastic have been highlighted in the earlier sections. The words “life saving” should include a hyphen between them.

 

Concluding Comments

I was pleased to review this well-written report proposal from an author who is well-qualified to create this report. The topic being explored is highly consequential as limitations in vaccine production capacity is one of the most important issues the world is facing due to the current pandemic. The main suggestions are summarized below:

 

• Use insights from your personal experience to provide examples of how using digital devices in the QC process confers advantages over using paper, which goes beyond the cost or environmental impact of paper.

 

• Ensure the language remains positive and enthusiastic throughout the proposal as the goal is to convince the old-guard to change their ways.

 

• Include in your scope an awareness and willingness to explore the counter-questions. Could switching to storing and accessing quality information digitally have a negative impact on robust safety and efficacy protocols, since those areas might be prioritized over simple cost-effectiveness in the QC process. What will be the environmental and monetary cost of using digital devices in the workplace versus the costs for paper.

 

I hope you find some of these suggestions useful as you embark on writing this report. Please let me know if you have any questions.

 

Elton Kok’s Formal Proposal:  https://blogs.ubc.ca/engl301-99a-2020wa/2020/10/12/research-proposal-for-formal-report/