REVIEW TEAM LEADER TIP SHEET
STEP 1: RECEIVE THE AUTOMATED “REVIEW NOTIFICATION” E-MAIL
Default review team leaders are notified that they have an innovation submission ready for
review through an automated e-mail sent from pcinnovation@pciglobal.org. This e-mail is
important! It includes:
- a link that only you as the review team leader has access to!
- the date that your review must be submitted by!
Remember that the role of a review team leader is not to make the decision of whether an
innovation is accepted or declined, but to facilitate the process with a wider team.
STEP 2: CONDUCT PRELIMINARY EVALUATION
The e-mail from Step 1 contains a lot of valuable information. Please take time to briefly skim the
e-mail to make these preliminary determinations:
1. Do I have the capacity to serve as review team leader and submit this review by the
stated due date? The date is located at the top of the e-mail.
- If yes, please continue through this tip sheet. (Tips: Make sure to flag this e-mail or
save it somewhere that you can easily reference it. We also suggest that you
make some calendar reminders for yourself of when the review is due by.)
- If no, please forward the automated review notification e-mail to someone else
who you feel is best fit to serve as review team leader on this innovation
submission. Before doing so, read the list of submission team members that is
included in this e-mail—the review team leader cannot be anyone who is a
member of the submission team.
2. What stage is this innovation currently at?
- There are 4 potential stages of an innovation at PCI: IDEA, CONCEPT, PROTOTYPE
and EXECUTION. Innovations can be submitted at any of these stages.
Additionally, there are two types of EXECUTIONS: those that have progressed
through the system through previous stages, or those that first enter the system as
a RETROACTIVE innovation. Please review your PCInnovAtion placard for more
information about these stages.
3. Is there enough information presented at this stage to warrant pulling together an entire
review team?
- The answer to Question #2 matters for Question #3 because a submission at an
earlier stage (idea) does not require nearly as much research or justification as a
submission at a later stage (execution).
- As a rule of thumb:
- Idea submissions are only 1-2 paragraphs and briefly describe the problem,
their proposed solution and how it meets PCI’s criteria of an innovation. A
large amount of research or input on the design idea is not requested. At
this stage, they only have to demonstrate the potential of an innovation
being able to meet the innovation criteria.
- Concept submissions build on an idea and provide desk research with
proof of other examples or contexts that justifies why their innovation holds
merit and feasibility. They also need to include a brief plan for how they
can prototype it.
- Prototype submissions contain the information of an idea and concept, but
also present compelling results of their prototype/pilot test and justify why it
is worth scaling up. A plan for full scale up should be included.
- Execution submissions should present very clear arguments of what the
exact innovation is (sometimes this is a single part or subset of a larger
tool/program), how it met the criteria for an innovation, and present
beneficiary numbers.
- If yes, please continue through this tip sheet.
If no, there is no need to pull together a review team. Please click on the “Click Here Submit
Your Review” link in your automated e-mail and complete the form in the Innovation Tracker
(you can leave all review team members as blank). Under the “Review and
Recommendations” section, mark “Status” as “Continue at Current Stage.” Then write brief
details in the “Observations” and “Recommendations” sections why you feel there is not
enough information to warrant a full review team review and suggest what information they still
need or how they could get it. After you submit this review, no further action is needed until you
receive a new automated e-mail that the submission team has submitted more information.
Please start back at Step 1 with that e-mail!
STEP 3: ASSEMBLE A REVIEW TEAM
The next step requires that you form a review team. Please refer to the Review Team Protocol
for the country/office/department/unit that the submission was submitted at. (Visit
http://www.pciglobal.org/innovation/resources/ if you do not have this.)
Criteria for selecting your review team:
- Teams should range between 3-6 members, in addition to the review team leader.
- Review teams cannot contain members of the submission team.
- Keep in mind that groups should be diverse to avoid over-burdening of a specific
department/unit and to provide a well-rounded review.
- If this innovation submission has been reviewed at an earlier stage, you do not have to
keep the exact same review team.
- At least 50% of the review team must be comprised of members from the tier
(office/department/unit) that the innovation was submitted at. The “tier” is included in
the automated e-mail the review team leader receives.
Review team participation is voluntary; if you are having trouble compiling a review team, you
could remind people that this counts towards their annual performance review! 
When you ask someone to join a review team, you must send them the content from the
automated e-mail you received if you wish for the team members to have already read the
submission before the review team meeting. If they have already participated as a reviewer for
that innovation at an earlier stage, they will have automatically received an e-mail.
STEP 4: HOLD A REVIEW TEAM MEETING
It is completely up to the review team leader how much preparation they want to do before
the review team meets. Feel free to ask anyone on the Innovation Team for suggestions or
examples, or reach out to other review team leaders through the Embedded Innovation
Learning Group Chatter group. One option is that the reviewer may choose to invite members
from the submission team to join in for part of the review team meeting for Q&A.
Some questions for the review team to consider:
- Is what the submission team presented reasonable? (Please see Step 2 #3 for guidance.)
- Has the submission team provided enough information to justify how their submission
might meet the threshold criteria? If not, what information is needed? Criteria:
A. It must directly or indirect help us transform the lives of 10M people and;
B. It must meet 2 of the 3 following criteria:
o Makes current practice(s) obsolete
o Improves value by min. of 50% (ie: impact, cost reduction, time savings, etc.)
2
o
Provides a unique product, set of skills or experiences highly valued by our
beneficiaries, donors or employees.
STEP 5: SUBMIT REVIEW
The review team must come to a decision to:
1. Advance  sufficient information is provided on the issue, opportunity, and solution
being presented and the sufficiently explains how it can meet the innovation criteria)
2. Decline  the innovation idea is unlikely to meet the innovation criteria and the idea is
not likely to be relevant/useful
3. Approve as positive change  the idea does not meet the innovation threshold so it does
not qualify as an innovation, but it is still recognized as a good idea
4. Continue at current stage  additional information is still needed from the innovation
team and is sent back for additional information or clarifications
5. Place in reserve  there are not enough resources available to move to the next stage
so the team will revisit in 6 months
6. Certified  Evaluated as meeting all criteria and should be recognized (Execution only)
The review team should also contribute to drafting any suggestions or recommendations for the
submission team.
Once a decision is made by majority vote, you will click on the link in the automated e-mail. DO
NOT CHANGE THE INNOVATION TITLE—this is the unique identifier code. If there was a suggestion
to change the submission name, please only make note of this in the “Suggestions” or
“Observations” fields. Make sure to enter the review team leader name/e-mail as yours and
enter the names and e-mail addresses of all review team members. Please provide
comprehensive and constructive “Observations” and “Suggestions” to the submission team.
Then click submit and you’re done until further notice! Feel free to communicate further outside
of the system with the review or submission teams as you see fit.
3