How to Build an Effective Review Process

Recently, a colleague shared quite a few comments on a piece I wrote. He was almost apologetic about it, concerned that I might take offence.

Do you ever find yourself responding with a rather clever line to a comment? It’s not common for me, but this time was different. This reply, I believe, will stay with me for a long time.

He explained, somewhat regretfully, that he had several comments on the 40 pages I had asked him to review. He seemed to think that I might be disheartened, interpreting the volume of comments as a reflection of poor quality in my work. However, the reality was quite the opposite.

In response, I said, ‘Only good work garners a lot of comments. Bad work? People simply stop reading it.’ After saying this, I realized I had stumbled upon an interesting perspective. It also seemed to reassure my colleague that his feedback wasn’t overly critical.

This incident led me to ponder the art of giving and receiving feedback. It sparked thoughts about the significance of attitude in successful collaboration and why this proves challenging in many settings. Drawing from my own experiences, I aim to offer some practical tips for effectively giving and receiving feedback.

I’ve noticed, and I’m sure many of you have too, that getting comments from colleagues like developers, support staff, or product managers can be tough. We all know, in theory, that comments improve our work. A good comment doesn’t just fix mistakes; it adds valuable info that’s really useful for the reader. So why’s it still a hard pill to swallow?

Here’s what I think: editing isn’t seen as a rewarding task. It’s often not viewed as creative or exciting. Since it’s not their own work, reviewers don’t expect any grand accolades or even a simple pat on the back for their effort. It’s just seen as a necessary, thankless task by many.

Going a bit deeper, those same reviewers who might not put much effort into reviewing often feel frustrated when others don’t review their work. You’d think the mutual need for feedback would be enough motivation, right? But unfortunately, it’s not.

Clearly, what’s needed is a shift in attitude, both personally and company-wide, to help colleagues. We all aim for the same goal: creating effective documents that benefit the business. I don’t believe this shift is hard to achieve once its importance is recognized. And I suspect many of you will agree that this change is overdue.

The good news is that attitude shifts don’t require massive organizational overhauls. Start by fostering a constructive feedback culture where comments are seen as learning opportunities rather than criticisms. This means training on effective communication, acknowledging the value of feedback publicly, and—most importantly—leading by example.

Recognition matters more than you might think. A personalized thank-you note or a shout-out in a team meeting goes a long way toward making reviewers feel valued. When people feel their effort is noticed, they’re far more likely to engage thoughtfully the next time around.

You also need to create a safe space for honest communication. That means building an environment where all opinions are respected and where people feel comfortable being direct without fear of damaging relationships. Trust takes time, but once it’s established, the quality of feedback improves dramatically.

Finally, make feedback routine rather than exceptional. When review cycles are built into standard workflows, they stop feeling like extra burden and start feeling like a natural part of the process. Celebrate the wins that come from good feedback—nothing reinforces behavior like visible success.

Let’s delve into how we, as authors, can effectively prepare our work for review. We’ve all experienced the anticipation and, sometimes, the apprehension of sending our work out for feedback. It’s not just a matter of passing along our documents; it’s about setting the stage for constructive and useful critiques.

Before you press ‘send’, consider this: the way you present your work for review can greatly influence the quality of feedback you receive.

Don’t be lazy with your preparation. When preparing review materials, put in the effort to be thorough. Think about how you would communicate if you were speaking face-to-face—we tend to be more detailed and less shorthand in person. Writing might feel like more work, but it’s crucial for clarity.

Be clear but concise. Ensure your instructions give reviewers everything they need without overwhelming them. Avoid shorthand that only makes sense to you. Help them understand exactly what you’re looking for so they can focus their efforts where it matters.

Be selective about what you ask reviewers to focus on. For a 100-page help portal, don’t make them review everything at once. Either highlight the changes or provide just the updated sections. This respects their time and increases the likelihood of a thorough review on the parts that matter.

Talk to your reviewers when possible. It’s easier to get engaged and thorough feedback from someone you have a positive relationship with, rather than just a name in an email. A quick conversation before sending work can make all the difference.

Thank them with specificity. A personalized compliment like ‘Thanks for the review, especially your insights on page 5 about the business perspective, which really enhanced the topic’ is far more impactful than a generic thank-you. People notice when you’ve noticed their work.

Now let’s switch perspectives and focus on the role of the reviewer. As someone providing feedback, your approach and insights can significantly impact the refinement and effectiveness of the work presented to you.

Reviewing isn’t just about pointing out what needs to change; it’s about contributing to the evolution of a piece, adding value through your perspective. But how do you ensure your feedback is both constructive and well-received? It’s not only about what you say, but also how you say it.

Don’t be lazy in your feedback. Provide comprehensive and thoughtful comments. If something is unclear, ask for clarification rather than guessing or glossing over it. Your detailed feedback reflects the effort you’ve invested in the review process.

Use short, clear sentences. Express your feedback in understandable terms. Clarity ensures your comments are easily read and more likely to be acted upon. Complex or wordy suggestions often get overlooked during revision.

Be diplomatic and respectful. Unless directness is part of your established rapport with the author, opt for a tactful approach. Focus on the work, not the person. This keeps the conversation constructive rather than defensive.

Build relationships. Try to have a conversation with the author if possible. A strong, positive relationship makes the feedback process more effective and collaborative for everyone involved.

Include compliments alongside your critiques. Be specific about what you liked or what stood out. This helps balance the critical comments and keeps the author motivated to continue improving.

Reframe extensive feedback as positive. If you have many comments or suggestions, explain that this is a testament to the quality of the work. Let the author know that the number of comments indicates the work’s potential and your commitment to helping refine it further. This helps authors view extensive feedback as constructive encouragement rather than criticism.

Whether you’re reviewing a colleague’s report, a team member’s proposal, or a peer’s article, the quality of your feedback significantly impacts the final outcome. But have you ever stopped to consider how effective you are as a reviewer?

Here’s a quick self-assessment. Rate yourself from 1 (Never) to 5 (Always) on each question—and be honest. This is about personal growth, after all.

The questions: Do you make your feedback clear and understandable? Are your comments concise and to the point? Do you balance honesty with tactfulness? Do you engage in meaningful dialogue beyond just written comments? Do you include positive remarks alongside critiques? Do you provide specific suggestions rather than vague observations? Do you respond promptly to review requests? Do you maintain a respectful tone even when being critical? Is your feedback aimed at improving the work rather than just pointing out flaws?

Scoring: 35-45 means you’re a feedback superstar. 25-34 means you’re helpful but have room to grow. 15-24 means you’re on the right track with some areas to work on. Below 15 suggests it’s time to focus on developing your feedback skills.

Remember, the goal isn’t perfection—it’s reflection. There’s always room for improvement, and the fact that you’re thinking about this at all puts you ahead of most.

If you want to delve deeper into collaborative work and feedback, read more about how collaboration works in Paligo in our Focus series with Roger Gelwicks, or our article about working as a reviewer in technical writing.