I totally agree with Dr. Simon mentioned in lecture and I have personally done this. Typically, deadlines would happen on Friday's, so I would like to send out documents to the appropriate people prior to approval. More often than not, they would send back comments and suggestions that usually were small changes. However, there were a couple instances that some situations needed retesting. In these cases, it would be a last minute scramble to find the right materials that were mentioned in the original SOP and execute the testing protocol. Luckily, we would be able to finish the testing before the deadline and make sure that the documents were sent back to the people required for approval with the new information added. 

Another way to keep the project approval process moving is the use of a Gantt chart or another task-monitoring method. This way, engineers/researchers/scientists/etc. will be able to see how far along a project is and if they need to contribute things anything at a given time. By including the deadlines of tasks in the chart, they will be able to plan ahead and make sure that the required documents are approved in time.

The only solution that I can think of making sure a design review goes as swiftly as possible is to make an agenda that everyone is distributed to and to actually stick to the schedule. However anyways to fast-track the review process can introduce corners being cut which can be catastrophic for the company in the end if there are any errors that may have been introduced to the design because the team wanted to expedite the process. This design review is the one time that everyone is able to put their input and a series of collaborations can ensue and mistakes and new innovative ideas are fostered during these meetings. Methods to keep the meeting on track is using Gantt charts and agendas and various other project management tools that can keep a project on task and growing in a healthy manner

I agree with all previous comments that to ensure fast approval of documents at design review meetings, meetings should be structured appropriately, documents should be sent out well in advance, and meetings should be scheduled frequently. I would like to add that prior to even sending these documents or scheduling meetings, each department needs to ensure that documents are created with all required sections/information (similar throughout the industry) and clarity so that team members from other departments understand. It would be ideal if team members from the same department quickly meet to ensure that required documents are up to standard. If a section is missing or not clear during a design review meeting, it is more likely that the document will not be approved, therefore increasing the time needed to move forward with the project. Also, it’s important to ensure healthy communication between team members at design review meetings so that all opinions are expressed at the same time, and not after the meeting. To explain, if employees feel uncomfortable expressing their opinions at the meeting and choose to discuss with the project manager at a later time alone, then the approval process is also delayed. These are both important strategies and skills of a project team that need to be implemented throughout the project cycle. If the approval process takes longer than expected, what are some ways to deal with the delay? 

I think to obtain a faster approval of documents, as others have mentioned, the document should be sent out ahead of time for approvers to review. As mentioned by peers, the downside to this would be that there is a possibility of losing the document in a pile of projects that may have a higher priority. To address this, I think that a PM should send out the first email with the document that needs approval and then follow up in a reasonable amount of time (depending on how hot the project is and how soon the meeting is) with table of the document number/name, the project it is part of, when it needs to be reviewed by or when the meeting about it is, and the people that need to review it. This would allow for a quick follow up email that can be quickly re-referenced by team members. 

As important as it is to finish a project within the set time frame, I think it’s more important that the output is a safe, efficient and working device (if the project is building a device to introduce into the market). As others have mentioned, safety is more important because a minor miscalculation, wrong specifications, or a minor verification failure can lead to detrimental consequences later in the project development cycle. However, I do think there’s ways you can mitigate risk and attempt to obtain faster approval. One of the best ways I can see this happening is to document *everything* into the design history file (DHF) and have periodic meetings where everyone goes through this file. This might help identify mistakes, find ways to make the product better, or simply finish the project faster. I think doing this refines the product and the project to the point where towards the end of the development cycle, it’s easier for people to go through the necessary steps and documentation to approve the product. Another way that others have mentioned is to finish tasks and send documents in a timely manner so other people have time to look through  necessary documentation before giving their input.

I used to be one of the research assistants in an academic lab a few years ago. It was the most severe period of the pandemic then. Our university asked us to limit members to less than four a day in a lab. We had to report to the company that funded us twice a month. It was hard for us to have a pre-review meeting and cover everything we wanted to discuss under this limit. Therefore my supervisor and professor asked us to record the critical period of the experiment and attach it to the daily report email. This video would become a series of screenshots or a gif file, and the voice file also is attached to the pre-reviewing document. It did help me get the point more quickly while reading the review document. However, it took me more time for me to make my daily report.