Skip to main content

         This documentation site is for previous versions. Visit our new documentation site for current releases.      

Content review cycle

Updated on July 1, 2022

Peer Review

To ensure that the content we publish is of high quality, you can send your content to peers for a sanity check, which typically occurs before both the SME and editor reviews. The main purpose of this review stage is to address issues that are easily spotted by a person who reads your text for the first time and to ensure your content makes sense. 

You can use this stage of the review process to ensure that we create only high-quality content that is accurate and relevant. 

Note: Peer review is an optional stage of the review process. 

Because peer review is a basic sanity check of your content, no specific review requirements apply. 

Stakeholder/SME Review

Most projects will require stakeholder or SME review. Team members who are not authors, but need to provide feedback on the content, should do so before the content is sent to Pega Academy COE. Stakeholders can be: 

  • Leadership: Many contributors submit content to a manager or leader for review. 
  • Subject Matter Experts (SMEs): Subject matter experts can review content for accuracy, scope, and relevance. 
  • Users: Will clients, consultants, or partners leverage your training? It may be worthwhile for one of these users to review your content ahead of publication. 

Requesting content reviewers

To request access for stakeholders or peers, email [email protected] with: 

  • Reviewer name
  • Reviewer email 
  • Title of the content they will review
Note: We recommend limiting the number of Content Reviewers to roughly five per project. 

Instructional/Curriculum Design (ID/CD) Review

Instructional and curriculum design includes aligning the content to the Pega Academy mission content strategy and design to create engaging training content (such as interactions, knowledge checks, quizzes, activities, and videos). 

ID reviews identify the performance, skills, knowledge, information, and attitude gaps in the content for the targeted audience and create, select, and/or suggest learning experiences to fill this gap. CD review structures the content to fill knowledge gaps by creating cohesive and consistent curricula or learning paths. 

COE Review

The Community COE completes a copy-editing review cycle for externally facing content (including internal content that is also intended for partners). 

Submit your topics for copy editing to ensure the content is clear, concise, and adheres to Pega Academy style guidelines and standards.

As a best practice, submit individual content pieces (such as a topic, challenge, or quiz) once completed to ensure a continuous review and update workflow.

Allow two (2) business days for the return of copy edits for individual content pieces. For more information, see Submitting content to the COE for review or publish.

Important: Content authors perform the pre-publication click-through. For more information, see the Pega Academy Publishing Requirements checklist in the Getting started resources.

Have a question? Get answers now.

Visit the Support Center to ask questions, engage in discussions, share ideas, and help others.

Did you find this content helpful?

Want to help us improve this content?

We'd prefer it if you saw us at our best. is not optimized for Internet Explorer. For the optimal experience, please use:

Close Deprecation Notice
Contact us