This working session will consider what constitutes ‘fit for purpose’ reviews in differing contexts, and how to produce them. Reviewing has traditionally been a significant part of the expectations of an academic’s workload; it is an important element of professional development, a recognised indicator of academic standing and contributor to career progression. Peer review is key to upholding quality standards in academic disciplines and is relied upon within various academic structures. For example, prospective papers for journals usually depend on two to three reviews and proposals for conference presentations on one or two reviews; the number of reviewers for research proposals will vary depending on the funding body and the value of the research being proposed. The outcomes of the reviews can have a significant impact on the careers of reviewees and also the confidence of, particularly early career, researchers; at the very least, reviews can affect how they proceed with a particular piece of work. Thoughtful and accurate reviews can be immensely helpful as learning opportunities, whilst vague and/or minimal ones can be confusing and frustrating, for the commissioners of the review as well as the reviewee. However very few people have the opportunity to establish, reflect on or enhance their skills as reviewers. The workshop is aimed at anyone who is interested in developing reviewing skills. It will be especially useful for early career researchers and those who have recently become involved in editorial roles on academic journals, or for people who wish to revisit and build on their reviewing skills. It will also be useful for authors, adding towards understanding the requirements of a review and how to respond to reviews in ways that may strengthen the quality of the output without compromising its intended substance and message.