Peer review is the process of going through ones` academic work in order to verify whether it is suitable for publication. Peer review is conducted by people of similar competency and aims at understanding what ones` work is all about, ensuring quality is realized, and advising on corrections where necessary. Breakout meeting presentation was aimed at briefing stakeholders on the best practises for the organization, changes that must be made in order to enhance productivity, recommended feedback system that must be introduced or continued, and the best action plan for managing resistance.
Susanna Peer Review
Susanna presented her work clearly on Kudler Fine Foods. She was able to present to Kudler Fine Foods stakeholders on best practises, recommended feedback system, and the changes that must be made in order to enhance employee productivity. However, she was did not discuss the possible challenges and resistance that may be posed by employees. Susanna also failed to discuss ways of dealing with possible challenges and resistance from employees. Nevertheless, I must appreciate the fact that Susanna presented her work in an attractive and clear manner that her audience could capture her presentation without any difficulty.
Davids` Peer Review
On the other hand, David did all that was required by highlighting Riordan best practises, recommended feedback system, changes that should be made in order to ensure increased productivity, and the action plan that would be employed while dealing with resistance to changes. David made good use of the speaker notes. However, Davids` audience would not grasp all the information captured in form of speaker notes. Davids` work was also clearly presented and attractive as he used a lot of relevant diagrams. Nevertheless, David did not include in text citations, and the diagrams were too big that made him use a small font size. This could have a negative impact as some viewers would experience difficulties in seeing.
All in all, peer review process is an essential process as it enables one to realize his or her mistakes. In addition, it enhances learning from each other. On is able to learn new ideas presented by other authors. Peer review process also enhances quality work through correcting mistakes pin pointed in future.
References
Hames, I. (2007). Peer Review and Manuscript Management in Scientific Journals: Guidelines for Good Practice (Illustrated ed.). Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
Shatz, D. (2007). Peer Review: A Critical Inquiry (Illustrated ed.). Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield.
