Editing People Who Hate to Be Edited

On 4 October 2018, STC Technical Editing SIG member Marcia Shannon gave a fascinating talk entitled “Editing People Who Hate to Be Edited” as part of the SIG’s quarterly meeting.

Corrigo Correspondents Laura Allen and Denise Collins attended, and summarized it for those who couldn’t make it.

By  Laura Allen:

Why did you change my document? The content is there –  what else is there to modify?

As technical editors, we have all probably heard similar comments at one point or another. We work (or try to work) with a range of writers and subject matter experts, some more receptive than others to having their documents edited. So how do we work with those less open to our edits? How do we work with these seemingly unreceptive people?

Marcia Shannon, CPTC, presented several considerations and techniques in her talk, “Editing People Who Hate to be Edited.”

She began the presentation by reminding us that, as technical editors, we are the advocate for the audience, they are our “client.” And our end deliverable to them is a well-crafted document that meets their needs. So, as advocates, it becomes our responsibility to understand why some writers and subject matter experts can be more challenging to work with than others – we need to understand the people and come armed with techniques for collaborating with them.

Considerations

As Marcia explained, most writers push back from:

• Anger: They feel that their work has been “rejected” by us editors and stifled by usage rules and style guides. By providing feedback, we have called their hard work “ugly,” so they become defensive and start to question our competency.
• Fear: They feel that their own technical competence is being questioned. They know what they are talking about; they know their subject area. And they do – they might just need to be reminded that collaborating with us will enable their expertise to shine. It won’t take away from it.

Techniques

After telling us why writers push back, Marcia gave us some tools/techniques for avoiding conflicts with writers:

• Collaboration
  • Discuss the project with the author at the beginning.
  • Establish expectations from the start.
  • Agree upon how the project will be completed, including guidelines, requirements, and software.
• Communication
  • Explain your edits to the document so the writer understands why you did what you did.
  • Put the edits in the working file, via a comments feature, so the author can see the comments and content together in context.
  • Remember to add positive feedback and kudos to the author.
  • Welcome discussion and feedback, perhaps via a review meeting.

So, when working with writers who might be reluctant to receive feedback, remember to:

• Respect their perspective.
• Take the time to understand their reaction to edits and why they might react that way – anger or fear.
• Collaborate with them by setting mutual expectations at the beginning of the project.
• Communicate with the writers via face-to-face meetings, video chat, phone, or screen-sharing software.
• Customize and compromise your approach to working with them – each writer is different and should be approached as such.

Marcia’s presentation gave us the knowledge and techniques we need to work with almost any writer and subject matter expert to edit any document. We now have a better understanding of why they might be unreceptive to feedback, and use her tips for overcoming this resistance to work in partnership with them. And we can use this process expand these relationships with these writers to ensure success on future projects.

By Denise Collins:

In her presentation, Marcia Shannon provided some excellent points about how to edit someone’s work while building relationships and avoiding tension.

Because most people do not enjoy what appears to be criticism, negative responses to editing can be viewed as possibly coming from fear or anger: fear that they aren’t good enough or angry that someone dare correct them.

Conflict between a writer and an editor at some point is inevitable, but proper planning can reduce it, and Marcia suggested the following two-step approach:

• Collaboration:
  • Before the writing project begins, discuss and set expectations with the team.
  • Work together with the team and take an active interest in the topic being written about (for example, ask well-thought-out questions to gain additional insights).
• Communication:
  • Effectively communicate the rationale for any changes made by explaining why you made them.
  • Put your explanations in the document itself, where the edit occurs, rather than in a separate cover email.

As the writer/editor relationship progresses, these steps become almost seamless. They might even prevent future conflicts and give the writer some new respect for you.

When conflict does arise, understanding the source of the conflict and proper conflict management can lead to faster resolution. Marcia recommended that this be done via face-to-face communication if possible, or by telephone or video chat, but never via email.

Personally, I disagree about the use of email. I work as a writer for many technical teams. In many cases, the opportunity to speak in person or over the phone simply does not exist. Having a good working relationship from the start is paramount to effective communication, and that extends to email as well. Face-to-face communication is, of course, still preferred, but I feel that it is possible to communicate effectively via email as well.

Marcia concluded by saying that technical editing practitioners must be careful to not turn the editing process into a personal thing by adopting a critical or confrontational approach; rather, they should take the opportunity to coach the writer and in so doing, cultivate a better understanding of the writer. However, writers, too, must understand that the editing process is not an attack on their professionalism, and that it is geared to supporting the audience. To grow in skill as a writer, accepting criticism must become a skill on its own.