You're tasked with critiquing your superior's writing. How do you offer feedback without crossing any lines?

A well-meaning superior will always welcome an objective critique. They will value honest feedback on their own work. Just because you are critically analysing your senior’s work, it does not imply that you can overlook drawbacks. Remember, this analysis is not just a critique of the work in question, but also of your own abilities. Therefore, honesty comes first. However, it does not have to be straightforward or unpleasant. You have to strike a balance between a respectful tone and meaningful feedback.

Can you be objective? Your perspective may call for "walking" over the author's "strolling." But does it make a difference? Legal writers must be accurate - walking, hiking, marching, stumbling - but objectivity requires suggestions where it matters. The edits your colleague will respect and appreciate aren't those based on personal preference. They will be the ones where it counts.

Approach the task with an objective mindset. Focus on the content, structure, and clarity of the writing rather than personal preferences. Evaluate how well the writing meets its purpose, whether it engages the intended audience, and if it conveys the necessary information effectively. By keeping your assessment objective, you avoid personal biases and maintain a professional tone. Highlight specific areas for improvement with concrete examples, which makes your feedback constructive and actionable.

What? I get to critique my boss? How fun is that! But seriously, it can be nerve-wracking when you are asked to review a superior's writing. The key here is to be objective. Provide constructive feedback that helps improve the writing. Whether you are talking to a superior or anyone else, being tactful is classy.

Cultural aspects must be considered when providing input in editing superiors' writing. In Indonesia, as a part of Asian culture, that really values seniority is still very strong. Therefore, care is needed not only in terms of editing substance but also how to convey it. My advice is that you need to seek information, for example from your superior's secretary or someone close to him, about the purpose of asking for your editing help. Learn their habits in receiving suggestions. Often superiors just want to get input regarding substance. In this case, try to give suggestions constructively. You don't need to highlight spelling errors (typos) because it can distract from the main purpose. You can convey this typo via other channels.

Start your feedback by acknowledging the strengths in your superior's writing. Point out what you found effective, such as strong arguments, engaging style, or clear organization. This not only sets a positive tone for the conversation but also shows that you appreciate their efforts and recognize their skills. Beginning with positive comments helps to build rapport and makes your superior more receptive to the constructive feedback that follows. It’s important to be genuine in your praise to build trust and ensure your feedback is seen as balanced.

We all have a specialty. Critiquing another's writing means identifying strengths and areas where improvement is needed. Perhaps the writer has presented an appellate brief - correct binding, page color, word count, font, index, etc. The errors appealed, however, seem to lead with a weak argument on the first error, strong argument on the second, then another weak argument on the third. Seeing how to apply strengths from one area to another makes growing easier.

Whenever I am giving a feedback, I first appreciate. Everyone makes mistakes but it doesn't mean that they haven't put effort in work. So first of all appreciate them. Write some positive lines first and then rule out the points of improvement. Otherwise, you will just demotivate them.

Every attorney's worst fear is likely discovering that a fundamental case in their brief was overturned. One scenario depicts a brief that's underwent several edits. You're now the fresh set of eyes looking for factual errors, errors in legal conclusions, logical fallacies, and worst of all - freshly overturned cases. Don't assume your writer was careless. Perhaps the latest revision focused on grammar and structure. It's an opportunity to show your colleague that you respect them.

1. I always suggest: "Shall we....?". Remember, you are a team, and it is not only about them. It is about the whole organization and its growth (including you). Example: It might be helpful if we expand on this section with a few more examples and a diagram. 2. Suggest with respect for their expertise. Example: Overall, the report is very comprehensive and insightful. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to review it. 3. Provide specific changes directly to save time and confusion. Example: In paragraph three, we should add a few transitioning sentences before point B. 4. Superiors/leaders always want solutions to the problem. Have it ready. Example: Conclusion is strong, but we should have a summary of the key points as well.

When providing constructive criticism, frame your suggestions in a tactful and respectful manner. Use phrases that soften the impact of your feedback, such as "I noticed that..." or "Have you considered...". Offer specific suggestions for improvement rather than vague comments. For example, instead of saying "This section is confusing," you could say "Clarifying this point with a concrete example might make it more accessible." By being tactful and providing actionable advice, you help your superior see the value in your feedback without feeling undermined or criticized.

Remember that critique and criticism are two very different things. It's possible to offer corrections in a kind and gentle way - you don't have to make it into a personal attack. This should be something you aim for not just when correcting a superior, but in all cases when you are called upon to give critique. We're all just humans, with human emotions!

They are senior/superior for a reason; respect that! They have expertise and knowledge and might just be short on words. As a writer, your job is to understand what the other person wants to convey and put it into free-flowing words. Listen, ask questions, and get clarification until you get it right. You can suggest two or three options and ask them which option sounds better to them. Do they need supporting numbers, images, and infographics to be included in the write-up? Sometimes, what they are trying to convey is a strategic decision that you might not understand from your point of view. Hence, it is very crucial to get it right and then write about it. Have empathy and try to think from their point of view, this will surely help.

There are two aspects to giving honest feedback without crossing lines: First is the choice of words. You must use words that are respectful of the person’s work and knowledge, and not just of their rank. Certain words can be sharp and hurtful. Examples are words like ‘ineffective’, ‘irrelevant’ etc. The other one is the tone of your language. An idea can be communicated in a respectful way and the same idea can be communicated in a downright insulting way. Be careful about how you structure your sentences. A quick test is to imagine if that feedback was given to you by someone your junior. Check out how it feels and adjust accordingly.