Give the reviewer
something to go on.
The report comes with the sources behind its numbers, the results of the checks, and any questions still waiting for an answer.
Eight hours
counted twice.
The sources add up to 72 hours. The draft says 80. An eight-hour entry has been included twice.
That difference holds up the report. Removing the duplicate fixes this check; your reviewer still needs to review the rest of the package.
Example project / weekly report
The supplied inputs
| Workstream | Hours |
|---|---|
| Research | 30 |
| Implementation | 24 |
| Review & handover | 18 |
| Source total | 72 |
These three supplied inputs total 72 hours. The report must reconcile to this source total.
Invented data for this example. It demonstrates a proposed method; it is not a customer report.
Evidence belongs with the thing it supports.
What your
reviewer sees.
Each figure points back to the input and version used to prepare it. The check record shows what passed, what failed, and which corrections changed the report.
Questions that need your team’s judgment stay in the package with the person who needs to answer them. Writing down an exception does not resolve it.
Your reviewer receives the report and these supporting records together. They decide whether to accept it and where it can be sent.