Book 4 - Appraisal Institute of Canada

Peer ReviewThe future of peer reviewPrevious peer review articles coveredsuch topics as What is peer review?,Common errors found by reviewers, andFeedback from members. This article will focuson the future of peer review, or, more specifically,some of the choices the Appraisal Instituteof Canada (AIC) may face once the pilot projectconcludes in December 2011.The Peer Review Pilot Project was launchedin 2008 and concludes in December 2011, atwhich time the Board is to receive a report withfindings and recommendations. The primaryobjective of the pilot project is to measure costsand benefits of a peer review program. Thesecondary objective is to build a peer reviewprogram infrastructure.At the end of the pilot project’s mandate,the committee will analyze the cost andbenefit data and report our findings to theAIC Board, along with recommendations.Although it is premature to conclude whatthe findings may be, presumably, they willfall into one of three categories: costs exceedbenefits, costs and benefits are similar, orbenefits exceed costs.Should it be found that the costs of apeer review program exceed benefits, thenour options would be few. We may chooseto extend the Peer Review Pilot Project in aneffort to determine if costs can be cut whilemaintaining or increasing benefits. Or, wemay simply choose to cease all efforts todevelop a larger peer review program.If we find that costs are similar to benefits,we would have a few more options. As notedabove, we may consider an extension of thePeer Review Pilot Project in order to collectmore data and attempt to streamline costs.Or, possibly, we may consider launching asmall-scale voluntary or mandatory program.If we find that benefits exceed costs, thenwe have more options, and some importantdecisions to make.One of the more pertinent questions willbe, are the pilot project’s cost and benefitfindings scalable to a larger program? Moreresearch and feasibility studies may berequired in this regard.Assuming that we find that a large-scalepeer review program is feasible, what couldit look like? Well, that raises many morequestions.• Should it be a mandatory program, or avoluntary program, or both?• Should it be user pay, or subsidized by AICdues?• Should it be administered within the AIC,outsourced, or completely privatized?The enormity of these decisions cannot beunderstated. For example, let us assume wechoose to launch a mandatory program for onlyprivate practice designated members, whereeach member must have a peer review onceevery five years. This could generate upwards of400 peer reviews per year, which could requiretwo full-time peer reviewers plus administrativesupport.By Michael Garcelon, AACIMember, Ad Hoc Committee on Peer ReviewAlthough the costs may be significant, sotoo could the benefits such as a heightenedquality and consistency of our members’ workproduct, fewer professional practice complaints,and reduced insurance claims.A great deal has been accomplished since2008. We have created a peer review programinfrastructure. We have gained actual practicalexperience administering a peer review program.And we have gathered actual programcost and benefits data. However, much workstill remains before we are in a position tomake any decisions regarding the future of peerreview within the AIC.Ad Hoc Committee on Peer ReviewLinda Hastings, AACI – ChairMike Garcelon, AACICherie Gaudet, CRAGerald McCoombs, AACIAndre St-Arnaud, CRA – Board LiaisonTo contact this committee, email:peerreview@aicanada.caclick here to return to table 0f contentsCanadian Property Valuation Volume 54 | book 4 | 2010 Évaluation Immobilière au Canada 37