This is a transcript of one of the videos in the plain language training course Writing well at work. There are references to slides and visual material that are only available by viewing the video.
Access the full web based course.
Book a course for your team.
In most organisations, just about everything you write is reviewed by somebody else before it moves on, before it moves around the organisation or outside the organisation. So let me say a few words about internal review.
Document reviews are great, but they must be done well
Firstly, I think internal review, when done well is fantastic. It is an opportunity for people to think together. You’ve done some writing and some thinking about this topic ,about this document that you’ve put together, and somebody else is going to join you in that so often we’ll end up with a richer outcome. It is a way of establishing a corporate voice where we speak as one in the organisation. It’s a way of harnessing the intellectual horsepower inside the organisation. So document reviews are very, very valuable. It is a way of refining and improving a document so that it meets the reader’s needs, and it meets the objectives of the organisation.
But I’d have to say there are some downsides to document review. Some of the downsides are firstly, it will cost you time because there’s this other process to go through and so that will slow down your documents. You might not be able to take advantage of all the opportunities that you see because your documents have to go through this process. And the other thing, if document reviews are done poorly, they can actually crush people’s spirits. And I say that because I’ve been in places where I’ve heard people say things like, ohh, I never worry too much about what I write because I know my boss is going to change it. Well, what’s going on there? That is absolutely terrible for the individual and it’s terrible for the organisation too. They’re not getting the best out of the people they employ.
So document reviews are great, but they do need to be done well. I’ve been in places where I’ve heard horror stories where people have told me, yes, they wrote the document, it went up to their boss. For a review, the boss made some changes. It came back down to them to do a bit more work on the document. It went back up for a second review and then the boss changed it back to what it was originally. Well, what’s going on there? There’s absolutely no value being added in that review process. So we do need to make sure that the review process adds value and makes things better for our reader.
Document reviews – leave your ego at the door
My single piece of advice when coming to the review process and thinking about it is this one here. Leave your ego at the door. Now this applies no matter what side of the review process you’re on.
So let’s take the example where you’re having your work reviewed. You might have spent a few weeks crafting this document doing the research, putting it all together, and you’ve got it into a pretty good shape. Well, you’re pretty happy with it, and now it’s time for somebody else to have a look at it. Leave your ego at the door. They may suggest different ways of wording things. They may suggest some alternative content, maybe some new stuff needs to come in, or maybe some stuff needs to go out. They may suggest some different ideas and some different ways of wording things.
Leave your ego at the door. This is not about you. This is about our reader. And if the reviewer can find a better way of crafting this document, putting it together for the reader so that it better meets their needs and better meets the needs of the organisation, well, that’s fantastic. Because we, as writers, we live to serve our readers. And if somebody can make that sort of change, that is absolutely fantastic. So I’m not gonna hold on tightly to those sentences that I wrote or the structure that I put together. If there’s a way of improving it, that’s great.
But this idea of leaving your ego at the door also applies if you’re on the other side of the review process and you’re reviewing somebody’s work. This is not an opportunity to play school teacher and put red pen through everything. This is not the time for you to force people to say things in the way that you would say them. Sure, if you can find a better way of expressing things or make it better for the reader, well, that’s fantastic. That’s precisely what the review process is all about. But it’s not about enforcing your style on somebody else.
Earlier in this course, I asked you to rewrite a few sentences. Now my guess is that your rewrite was probably different to my rewrite. That doesn’t mean that I’m right and you’re wrong. It just means that we might express ourselves in different ways. Well, how about that? We’re all individuals. We can still use those plain language techniques and come up with a different way of wording things. So don’t use this as an opportunity to impose your style. But certainly if you can find a better way of expressing things and improving the document, that’s great, that’s fantastic. That’s what should be happening.
So as you review, ignore matters of personal style, focus on usefulness to the reader. Ask yourself, is it fit for purpose? Some of the questions you might want to ask during the review process are things like:
Do I understand what this is about straight away?
Did I need to reread anything to understand?
Is the logic flowing OK?
And is the language actually appropriate to the user and is it consistent with the organisation style?
I’d have to say that I think the best way of doing a document review is via discussion. Have a conversation with your reviewer, talk it over. That is far better than just marking up documents and sending them backwards and forwards over the email. Because when you talk together you can discuss the ideas. You can together find good ways of expressing those ideas to make sure that they are highly readable and also accurate.
If you can’t do that, and I know sometimes there’s some logistical problems in doing that, maybe you might want to just, instead of tracking changes and changing people’s words, maybe just highlight some paragraphs and make some comments about it. So you might say, hey, could you include this idea? Or maybe you could reword this paragraph.
And the final thing I want to say about the review process is be gentle, be kind, but be robust. It’s important to be gentle and kind because the review process can be very damaging to people if it’s not done well. And I think that’s because of that tight relationship between writing and thinking. When somebody suggests that my writing can be improved, they’re sort of suggesting that my thinking can be improved. None of us like to hear that. But that is no reason to allow sloppy work to move around the organisation or outside the organisation. We do need to be tough and robust with each other to make sure that the documents that we publish, that we pass on, are as good as they possibly can be.
We do want to make sure they meet the needs of our readers and they also meet the intent of our organisation.