Situation: Multiple Reviewers for one Checklist that is required for all departments to complete.
Currently if a Reviewer is in progress on a checklist and doens't complete it there is no tracking to show who the reviewer was. Or if the reviewer forgets to write their name or part of the observation needs more explination there is no way to follow up with the Reviewer.
There needs to be a tracking system with Reviewers. You should also allow the signiture pin to be turned on only for Reviewers to sign off on checklist. Currently the pin signiture you have to turn on for all learners, you can't select who needs the pins.
We use the Observation Checklist in a variety of ways throughout our company. We have over 17K staff, and over 500 Admins. It is important for there to be able to be crossover among the admins to help complete a checklist review.
We have the observations as part of our new hire onboarding. We use the ability to name reviewers to allow a smaller set of reviewers to be able to see those within their division. This breaks up the mass notifications and double dipping that can occur. People in training aren't assigned to a specific supervisor until after the completion of training, but observations are part of that process in the meantime. Thus we need a small assigned group of people to be able to engage with the users assigned to the course session being reviewed. Since we have to tie a checklist to a course and to a session, we should be able to allow reviewers assigned to that session to review at will.
This is just one of several processes where what is being asked would make sense.
We have a growing company who is located in 4 different states. The Forklift Checklist has multiple Reviewers for not only coverage in the other states but in case someone is out sick they can complete the checklist right away to be sent out for a job. This is the first LMS experience this company has used and we are working out the processes and how to get coverage for all the different locations.
Hi Amanda,
We didn't design the checklist feature to use a generic account. It was always intended that the Reviewer was a named account to ensure auditability on who conducted a review. That way you can report easily on who reviewed someone.
We did at one time consider scope to build in the concept of 'hand-off' between reviewers but we never had time to develop this feature against our other competing high priorities.
We think the use case you have is valid, but it is not intended that you can complete it as you describe with the feature in it's current state, even though you are perfectly welcome to create a generic user, you will lose that tracking.
Would you be able to tell us reasons why your reviewers are not completing checklists? That's an interesting thing to us as we haven't heard it before.
Pamela