## 1 Introduction  
For many industrial companies, the maintenance business is growing in importance, and more focus is paid to providing support and technical instructions to the maintenance technicians on the field. Industrial maintenance tasks are often complicated, and technicians need instructions to perform the tasks in a safe and efficient manner. KONE Corporation is a global leader in the elevator and escalator industry [1]. KONE operates in more than 60 countries with approximately 30,000 field employees. KONE publishes hundreds of new or revised maintenance instructions each year to support its service business. As the safety and accuracy of technical instructions are essential to the company, there is no room for ambiguity or misunderstandings in the instructions delivered to the field. To achieve this, KONE has been developing both the practices and processes for maintenance instruction creation and the digital channels for technical information delivery to field employees. Technical documentation creation is a collaborative process involving several departments, including technical documentation, subject matter, and risk assessment experts. While the technical documentation experts prepare the drafts, the subject matter and risk assessment experts validate the content in reviews. Both the preparation of the draft and its review are equally important in the development of a technical instruction. The review of maintenance instructions calls for the collaboration of technical documentation, maintenance method development and risk assessment. Preferably, this review is performed so that all the parties are in the same location and have access to both the equipment and instructions. However, due to the lack of access to the physical equipment and difficulties in remote communication between globally distributed teams and departments, these reviews are in many cases carried out by technical documentation experts sending out PDF files or links to review portals and subject matter experts commenting on them remotely. This trend was further accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic and related restrictions when people from the same location were also forced to work remotely from home. Therefore, instead of an interactive collaborative process, the review becomes a process where the parties work in isolation. Because the work is carried out individually, the reviewers might send conflicting review comments, or some questions might be left unanswered altogether. In most of the existing technical communication literature and guidelines used in companies, documentation reviews are discussed at a fairly abstract level and the focus is on different types of checklists, tips, and best practices. For example, [PERSON] and [PERSON] discuss the importance of reviews, both technical reviews and peer reviews, their effect on the quality of documentation, and the parties that should be involved in the review process [2; 3]. However, the technical communication literature does not go into detail on how reviews should be physically arranged, especially in globally operating companies. Similarly, risk assessment is generally guided by regulations that do not discuss the actual best practices of risk assessments or the physical setup. Some research has been conducted for evaluating the use of novel technologies, such as virtual reality (VR) for the technical documentation creation process [4], but their use has not been implemented in practice in industrial companies. Furthermore, even though the use of VR has proven efficient for engineering design review [5], VR has not, until now, been studied or utilized for technical documentation reviews and risk assessments, processes that have much in common with engineering design reviews. As VR has been proven to be an effective tool to aid collaboration and cooperation [6], it would also be a good fit for technical documentation reviews and risk assessments as both processes are inherently very collaborative.