2.5 Periodic Review and Maintenance

Also in this Chapter:

• 2.1 Purpose of the Manual
• 2.2 Navigating the Manual
• 2.3 Determining Changes to the Manual

• 2.4 Governance for Editing the Manual

The Manual is reviewed in line with the requirements of our Quality Management System to ensure content remains accurate and consistent. Content of Manual pages from Volumes 2-6 are reviewed periodically (in accordance with the maintenance cycle) by subject matter experts (Manual editors) from Patent Examination and Oppositions to ensure they are compliant with current practices and legislative requirements). Sole responsibility for Periodic review of Volume 7 rests with Oppositions. When reviewing content reviewers should identify opportunities to improve the usability of the Manual by:

• Determining whether content duplicated in other parts of the Manual can be consolidated.

   

• Consider if content or sections within the Manual require restructuring to ensure that key information is easy to locate and apply.
   
• Consider whether current examples provided within the Manual reflect current practices and procedures. Determine whether additional examples are necessary to demonstrate key principles and add them as deemed necessary.
   
• Ensure that content has been written plainly and concisely and that terminology and all acronyms (including those of various sections within IP Australia) are up to date.

As part of the ongoing review process, any pages that are amended due to issues raised in Improve@IP against one or more of the identified circumstances should be fully reviewed during such an update. Any related pages linked with or associated with the amended page should also be reviewed to ensure that they are consistent with the amended page and that the content of these pages is also accurate given the proposed change. 

QEP will progressively allocate groups of Manual pages to PEG for review for actioning by the end of every month, with the intent that at the end of the maintenance cycle, that the manual has been reviewed full. Any improvements that are identified by PEG can be logged as an Improve@IP item, whereby QEP will facilitate the actioning of the PEG-endorsed improvements. If any improvements are deemed an urgent priority due to the risk to examination quality or legislative compliance, this should be noted in the respective Improve@IP item, and QEP notified accordingly so that these items can be actioned first. 

Those with Manual editing privileges can make changes to pages through the “Edit” button at the top right of each page. Any changes will need to be accompanied by a description of the changes made to the page and will need to be approved by another manual editor before the changes are officially published. 

When Manual pages are reviewed, but no changes are deemed necessary, the page should still be “Edited” and submitted for approval with the description of changes published as “Reviewed according to maintenance cycle.”. Reviews should be documented using Annex A (see below) in a separate document and emailed to the QEP inbox.

Annex A - Manual Review Documentation

Month and Year: 

Name of Manual Reviewer:

Pages Reviewed: