TAP TAP GO
Frame the question precisely
Describe the decision the review will inform and the specific technical questions requiring expertise. Provide the relevant documents with dates and versions. Identify known gaps and avoid assuming the reviewer will discover every possible issue. Agree the expected output and the information the reviewer needs from the team. Keep commercial enthusiasm separate from the technical brief.
Preserve scope in the final summary
When presenting the result, state what was reviewed and what was outside scope. Do not turn a narrow technical observation into a broad endorsement of the business or asset. Seek clarification if the conclusion is conditional or difficult to interpret. Retain the original report and use an approved summary where appropriate. The value of specialist input comes partly from knowing exactly which question it answers and which questions remain unresolved.
Put the guide to work
Provide the reviewer with a list of known concerns from the operating team. This helps focus the work without dictating the conclusion. Keep the reviewer’s independent observations distinguishable from management’s description so later summaries do not blur who established each part of the assessment.
Hypothetical example
A team requests a technical review of a particular integration workflow. The resulting report addresses that workflow under stated conditions. The public summary does not describe it as approval of the entire platform, avoiding a broader claim than the review supports.
Make it practical.
Use this checklist as you read. Checks are not stored.Published by Tap Tap Go. Product availability and eligibility vary by programme and market. About our stories.
