What is the difference between "inspecting" and "reviewing" in process performance?

The choice highlighting that "inspecting" is about verifying adherence while "reviewing" assesses effectiveness is correct because it captures the fundamental distinctions in focus and intent between the two activities.

When inspecting, the primary goal is to ensure that outputs or processes comply with specified standards or requirements. This often involves checking if the processes are being followed correctly and if the results meet predetermined criteria, which is critical for maintaining quality and consistency. Inspections tend to focus on pointing out deviations from established guidelines or benchmarks.

On the other hand, reviewing takes a broader look at the performance or processes over time. It involves evaluating not just whether the standards are met, but also understanding how effective those processes are in delivering desired results. The emphasis here is on gathering insights into process efficiency and effectiveness which can lead to improvements or adjustments in the overall approach.

This differentiation is vital in the context of process performance management, where both adherence to standards and evaluation of outcomes play crucial roles in continuous improvement efforts. Understanding these roles allows organizations to better target their quality assurance and performance enhancement initiatives, ensuring holistic and effective management of their processes.