Be a Reviewer

/Be a Reviewer
Be a Reviewer 2018-03-19T16:23:13+00:00

Thank you for your interest in being a Service Management Conference reviewer! The Conference reviewing team contribute greatly to the success of the Conference program by reviewing, shortlisting and supporting speaker submissions.

The submission system


We receive over a hundred proposals into the anonymous submission system each year. Reviewers read and supply feedback on proposals in their respective streams and then work together in teams to produce shortlists. Less than half of the proposals are shortlisted from which approximately 30 talks are chosen for the final program.

Every speaker at the Service Management Conference (bar the keynotes and invited speakers) are required to tender their proposal anonymously.

  • If when reviewing a proposal you notice an author identifies themselves in either the body of the proposal or comments – please let us know!

Once you have signed up as a reviewer – we will link you to the submission system.

Supplying feedback


One of the most important responsibilities as a reviewer is supplying honest and constructive feedback to submitters with a view to shape their proposal to be as good as possible!

Commenting on a submission is your primary means of supplying feedback to an author. You may like to ask the author to clarify things that don’t make sense to you; suggest that they include more examples; query the eye-catching quality of their title etc; but keep in mind that it is up to them whether or not they take on your advice.

  • Service Management reviewers are encouraged to comment on at least half of the proposals in their stream

Reviewers should be commenting between February 2017 – 10th May 2017.

Reviews and ratings are not visible to authors. This is a space for reviewers to discuss their views or submit their ratings on a proposal privately.

  • Service Management reviewers are expected to submit a rating, and/or review on every submission in your stream
  • Please refrain from submitting a final rating of ‘Reject’, ‘Maybe’ and ‘Must have’ until authors have had a chance to respond to feedback

Reviewers should be submitting their final reviews and ratings 10th May 2017 – 31st May 2017.



  • Each reviewing team is required to produce a shortlist that represents the best of the best proposals in their stream – the smaller the selection, the better!

There is no one way to do this, and each team typically uses a slightly different process – your stream captain is responsible for rallying your team to make this happen. In most cases reviewing teams will meet in person or link up via teleconference to discuss their choices in a final shortlisting meeting!

Once shortlists have been produced – a final program meeting is held amongst the [Service Management Conference Committee] in which they balance the program and ensure topics and speakers are not duplicated.

Key dates:

  • Reviewers meet to develop reviewing criteria and inform streams. Reviewers are allocated to streams: Late January 2017
  • Submissions open and commenting begins: Mid-February 2017
  • Reviewing criteria finalised: Mid-May 2017
  • Submissions close. Reviews remain open: 12 May 2017
  • Shortlisting meetings commence for each stream: Week beginning 22 May 2017
  • Shortlists due: COB 2 June 2017
  • Final program meeting – Conference Committee meets to review shortlists, remove double ups and lift a balanced program of 30-40 talks: Early June 2017
  • Early bird prices end and speakers and topics go live!: End June 2017
  • Workshop day: 22 August 2017
  • Service Management 2017 Conference!: 22-23 August 2017
  • The busiest period for reviewers is April to the end of May 2017
  • Submissions usually start quite slowly and then build up to a deluge in the last few weeks – so it’s advisable to stay on top of things from the beginning!
  • The reviewer slack team is a means of communication and collaboration for reviewers. Reviewers will be sent an invite to the team in January 2017


Please do! The general agreement is that those who submit to their own stream are to abstain from reviewing their own proposals.You may also choose to abstain from reviewing a proposal that is a conflict of interest to you (e.g your partner, colleague or nemesis!) if you feel it will affect your ability to remain impartial
Reviewers are able to keep in touch via the Service Management reviewer slack team, email and phone. Stream chairs are encouraged to schedule ongoing teleconferences with their respective teams, particularly towards the end of the reviewing period.
There is no character or word count set for the proposal areas, however, we ask authors to limit their answers to under 1000 words. If you find a proposal too brief, you can ask the submitter in a comment to expand on their submission.
Proposals from vendors will come through the system but will be anonymous and of course reviewed against the same criteria as all the other proposals. Vendors are able to pay to sponsor a talk/product demo at the Conference – these will be marked as such.
Reviewers are asked to flag any breaks in anonymity that they come across in proposals or comments from submitters via email or slack.
This may not be readily apparent as the system hides speaker information. This information will be available at the shortlist stage.
Suggest to the submitter by writing him/her a comment to move their proposal and please also notify us in an email or via slack. If you don’t feel comfortable telling the submitter directly, please let us know and we can facilitate the swap.
You may add as many text reviews as you like, to communicate with your fellow reviewers. Please hold off from inputting your final rating however, until submitters have had a chance to respond to feedback (22nd of May 2017).
Speaker supporters will be appointed to review and guide presenters leading up the conference and to help ensure speakers stick to their initial proposals.
In 2016 we received over 100 proposals with some streams receiving more than others. This year we expect to see even more!
On average, reviewers should contribute 20+ hours of their time across the reviewing period. If the workload becomes too heavy during the busy reviewing time for any particular stream however, we can reallocate reviewers to alleviate this.
Each stream should create a shortlist based on the quality of the proposals, whether it be 2 or 20.
Please reach out to either or contact your stream chair if you have questions or concerns – we are here to help you! You also may want to ask questions via slack.
Submitters can provide information if their proposal is best suitable for a beginner, intermediate or expert audience, but it is not compulsory. You will be able to use this information when creating the shortlist, if the stream decides to, to check we have enough breadth and depth.
This is up to each stream to decide.
In 2017 we have decided to accept nominations for workshops rather than accept submissions given the time frame. If you have any suggestions for topics you think would be valuable as workshops please let us know.
Participating reviewers will be thanked for their contribution with a complimentary ticket to attend the two day Service Management 2017 Conference, discount codes for your network, plus invitations to exclusive events. Your contribution to the conference as a reviewer is invaluable, and will also be recognised on the Service Management 2017 website and in the printed conference booklet given to all attendees of the conference.