The art of the written critique: on giving and receiving

On sharing your writing

For writers, the road to perfection passes through the review purgatory.

The fact that the review process is collaborative makes writing both easier and harder. Easier because the burden of improving the writing is shared. Harder, because you as the writer are exposed to the scrutiny and criticism of others.

In this blog post I will propose some ways of smoothing the rocky passage, from the perspective of both the giver of feedback and the receiver. 

In the fields of international development and evaluation, sharing written drafts for comment is standard practice. While essential to good quality outputs, it is also a laborious process. When a report is developed, it can go through multiple rounds of revisions over a period lasting weeks, and even months.

A silent dialogue

Imagine, in this fast-paced world, a slow-motion conversation in which the speaker takes as much time as he or she needs to reflect and ruminate on a given subject. It is an extended back-and-forth dialogue with the audience that starts…and…stops…and…starts…and…goes…on…for…weeks. The dialogue continues until…no one has more to say, and it is finally over.

On top of that, imagine that the issues under discussion are technical in nature, and would mean little to most people listening in.

Such a conversation might sound agonizingly dull. But it mirrors the way good reports get written. Most of this dialogue is not spoken, of course. It takes place on the page. The back-and-forth is the writing, reviewing, commenting, editing, revising, and rewriting that happens in the “document space.” It is usually very effective. I have seen plenty of reports transformed from sub-par to excellent as a result.

A far from dull process

Being the responsible writer in this ‘dialogue’ is far from boring. It can, in fact, be nerve-wracking, waiting to see/hear what the other person thinks, knowing they will find and point out weaknesses (which is their job), and wondering how tough they will be.

If you are the primary team member responsible for the writing, after you have labored over your draft, there’s always a moment of trepidation after hitting the “send” button. Is the report on the right track? Is it broadly acceptable? How difficult will the comments be to address? How many comments will there be? Should I have spent another day revising before sending it in? If you are a consultant, you may even be wondering, Will I ever get hired by this client again?

In the fields of evaluation and development, you will be in the role of reviewer as well as reviewee. You need to be able to dish it out as well as take it. That is, to give and accept critiques of the reports that you and others write. These are skills most development professionals learn over the course of their career.

(I should note that the word “critique” is not normally used in these circumstances. It’s a little too loaded, perhaps. The preference is for “comments,” “feedback” or “review.” But critiquing is essentially what’s happening.)

When I first began working in this field, I was delighted to find weaknesses in a given document. Being asked to review the work of others gave me the sense that I had arrived, that I could hold my own among colleagues, most of whom were older and far more experienced. It gave me a confidence.

Unfortunately, it also occasionally caused me at times to become a bit cocky in my reviews. I may have expressed my reservations in language that was a little too harsh.  I’ve learned that, on the written page at least, while being straightforward is fine, being severe is unnecessary and unhelpful.  

Who comments?

Comments can be generated by the client, the manager overseeing the task, other members of the team, and by specialists from outside the team. For official publications, an editor will be hired. For certain documents, the feedback process may be formalized as a peer review process, as is done for academic journal articles.

If you are new to the field, you’ll need to get comfortable with feedback, because it will always be there. If you don’t receive feedback from someone, it is not because you are brilliant, I’m afraid. It’s because they either didn’t review your draft, or didn’t read very carefully.

On the flipside, you can always find constructive ways that work written by others can be improved. It may take a couple of read-throughs, but issues will come into focus, like those magic eye pictures or  autostereograms that reveal a 3D image if you stare at them long enough.

Receiving a lot of comments means additional work, of course. But you want substantive feedback: it will make the report that much better. What you want to avoid is receiving feedback along the lines of “I don’t understand what you’re trying to do here” or “this is not what we were expecting” or “the quality is unacceptable.” That generally means you need to start over.

Then there is the pedantic reviewer, who finds fault with every minor issue or who gratuitously asks for everything to be explained ad nauseum, which can also be stressful.

Below are a few things to keep in mind:

On receiving feedback

• All comments from the client or your manager will need to be addressed, either by incorporating them in the text or by making a good case for why not.

• Other than the above two cases, you don’t need to address every single comment. Indeed, some comments may contradict one another.

• When deciding the order in which to address comments, consider plucking the low-hanging fruit first. Addressing the easier comments first will give you an encouraging sense of progress, and additional time to reflect on how to tackle the trickier feedback.

• Keep in mind that it is good if you get no feedback suggesting that the work’s approach was wrong, or if they don’t ask for a complete redo.

• Before sharing your work with others, it is paramount to edit one’s own work.  That is one way of reducing the amount of comments you will receive.

• To avoid going down a cul-de-sac, it is a good idea to communicate with people who will be reviewing the piece before you send them the final draft to review. Share ideas and outlines with them early on, and incorporate feedback. This generates interest and buy-in for the work.

• Don’t take criticism personally. It’s not you, it’s the writing.

On giving feedback

• As you review, ask yourself:
  • Is the piece addressing the stated objectives, the questions it poses?
  • Is anything important missing? 
  • Does the structure work?
  • Does the work flow in a natural progression?
  • Are certain elements underemphasized or overemphasized?
  • Are there any errors?

• Avoid framing comments in a negative way, e.g. “this is incorrect” or “you didn’t understand.” Positive turns of phrase include “I suggest” or “think about phrasing it this way.” You don’t want to demotivate the writer with harsh criticism.

• Although you probably have not been asked to copyedit, if you do come across grammatical errors or typos, it’s not inappropriate to simply make the correction. When I do that, I’ll add a note to the effect “that I took the liberty of doing some light editing” or that I “made a few edits along the way.” 

• There will be reports which are poor quality, or completely miss the mark. Remedial measures may be needed, including a complete rewrite, or even another person to write it. Even this situation should be handled diplomatically.

• You can write comments directly into the report, and also include general comments in the body or in your email response.

• Use the sandwich approach — start with what you like about the report, and end on a positive note. Highlight the strengths. That’s encouraging for the writer.

As a general rule, feedback makes everyone’s work better. It is the essence of quality control. Having more eyes poring over a report, more brains scanning it, is effective for uncovering issues before a written work is signed, sealed and delivered.

Sometimes it may feel as though you are getting hammered by critics. If your critics are insightful and forthright, what they’re really doing is helping you hammer your work into shape. And that’s a good thing.