01 / Why: The sign-off date was in the plan. Your Subject Matter Expert (SME) agreed to it at kick-off. Then a live incident lands on their desk. The review link sits unopened for a fortnight, and the build team waits. When the comments finally come, they come all at once, two days before launch.

02 / What: Your experts aren't the problem. Reviewing a course is the fourth job on their list. Nobody told them exactly what they're checking, or why it matters this week.

Here's the part that's easy to miss. The expert who agreed the date is often not the person who can make the call. They know the subject. The person who can say "yes, this goes live" sits one or two levels above them. So the expert checks the work, then waits for their own boss to look. That second wait never made it into your plan. It shows up as a slipped sign-off, but it's really a hidden step.

Before the next review goes out, ask:

• Who can actually say yes, and have they agreed to do it?
• Does the reviewer know which screens to check, and which to skip?
• Is the review booked in their diary, or just sent to their inbox?
• What happens if they say nothing by the date?
• Who else will they show it to before they reply?

If you can't answer two of these, your sign-off date is a guess.

03 / How: Training Journal's 21 October newsflash covers a 360Learning report on where learning teams struggle. Working with Subject Matter Experts was one of the weak spots it named. We're not surprised. Experts get the blame for being slow, when the review was set up in a way that could only slip.

Getting sign-off back on track means changing how the review is set up, not chasing harder. The hard part is doing that halfway through a build, without upsetting the people you still need.

If your launch date is already at risk, book a 48-Hour Tactical Triage and we'll show you where your sign-off is stuck and how to free it.

01 / Why: Picture round four of reviews. Compliance want it word for word as Legal wrote it. Your expert sends back forty comments. Half fix a fact, half rewrite a line they would have slightly phrased differently. And Alan, who wanted to set the Business Continuity Management module on Mars, has suggested rewriting every piece of instructional text in Klingon. The build stalls, and nobody is wrong (except Alan).

02 / What: Each new round adds noise. Facts and wording land in one pile, so every fix opens a fresh debate. Someone has to thank Alan for their input and move forward. Your experts own the facts. Your design team owns how the story lands for the person doing the job.

03 / How: From experience, two rounds are enough when they're well organised. But if you're already in round five, that doesn't help you. We can. Book a 48-Hour Tactical Triage and we'll get your reviews closed and your build moving again.

01 / Why (Start with the Why, Not a Blame Game): Projects do not slip by magic. Start by asking why the business invested in this and why things have not gone smoothly, without a blame game.

02 / What (B2P Over Box-Ticking): Early in my career I was told my work was too B2C and should be more B2B, until the iPhone launched and proved B2P (Business-to-Person) is key. Our audience are people. Contextualise content for them, not just to de-risk the business.

03 / How (Real Capacity Over Waterfall Gantt Charts): Stakeholders are rarely as available as anticipated and work does not flow in a neat waterfall Gantt chart. Establish roles, responsibilities, and real capacity, collaborate closely, and work out a realistic plan that hits project deadlines.

Need a senior pair of hands or a turnaround? Book a 48-Hour Tactical Triage at TacticalLearning.co.uk.