Enduring the Editing Process - A Perspective

A few years ago, I was asked by an IT Director how it was I endured - and actually embraced - the editing process with our CIO. She was repeatedly frustrated by the process, having spent a lot of time and energy in writing a document, only to have him "re-write" it or edit it heavily. I understood her viewpoint, and in fact, early in my corporate writing career had felt similar frustration, but here's what I've learned (as I shared with her).

- I don't know what I don't know. And I know I don't know.

That is, I know there are conversations, strategies, perspectives, and perceptions that exist outside of my bubble. I can't write to address those if I'm not aware of them. But the CIO is not only aware, but is held accountable to any negative consequences. He adds value to my writing, because he can fine-tune it to meet the need of the organization on a level I just don't have visibility.

- It's not about what I write, but about meeting a need.

My job is not simply to write. It's to meet a specific need, to communicate a specific message, to influence a specific behavior, to manage a specific perception (or set of perceptions). And sometimes it's all of the above. Just as I don't want to use a clunky program written by a programmer who didn't understand the end-user's needs or how the business works, I don't want to create communications that don't meet the needs of my customers. The point for me isn't to write and be validated as a good writer - by the fact that I have a job and remain in that job means I have value - but instead the point is to meet the need of the organization or the customer - including the CIO.

- The world can change at any time.

Dynamics inside the corporate world continually adapt and change. What was true one day may not be true the next. It is the way of things. I may not know that some event that morning changed how a document should or needs to read. I need to be prepared to adapt; and know that it isn't personal, but a reflection of a change in the world around me.


- I turn it into a game.

To avoid getting personally bent-out-of-shape, I play games with the editing process. I take the approach of listening and learning as much as I can to the banter and conversation and edits, absorbing that, and then try to hit the next draft or the next deliverable closer the next time. I score myself based on how closely I hit the mark the next time around or by whether a new direction is decided upon based on concerns or questions I've posed.

It's about meeting the need. I love technology because of what it can do; But I won't use it unless it practically meets my needs. The same goes for a communication deliverable, particularly those I create - does it meet the need?

If not, I'm happy to have the editing. My writing is better for it and the need is better met.

Update: For more on how to have better communications with your IT management, end users, and co-workers, I invite you to join me for my IT Communication Skills Training course at http://ITCommunicationSkills.com

Edits are not personal

Writing is a personal, subjective task. Writing words, the right words, for a specific audience is often a challenge, particularly if you aren't yet well-tuned with the audience or the perceptions the audience has of you.

Managing perception is a key component for a healthy IT organization. Perception of IT can swing wildly - set off by print routing, the wording in a message, too much spam, how a user interface works or doesn't work. Unfortunately (or in some cases, fortunately), perceptions aren't always reality. And because important decisions are made (or not made) based on others perceptions, managing communications becomes an important task for IT leaders.

So, this said, it is important realize when your words are being edited by another, it is not because they are wrong, but rather because there are perceptions that are being managed. As writers/communicators, we don't always know how others perceive us; nor do we always know what decisions will be made from our words. Editing is not about criticising the writer, but instead about reaching the audience in the clearest, manner available - that meets the needs of the organization.

As writers who must undergo a committee-style review and edit cycle, it is important to divorce yourself personally from your words, and recognize that it is not you they are editing, it is the message. Each member of the committee brings forth a unique understanding of how others may percieve and react to the wording. And for reasons we may not see or understand the committee may need to alter the wording to manage perceptions in a different manner.

Decisions will be impacted by the message and the perceptions the message creates. You may not know what those decisions are or how the perceptions will shape the IT organization's future. But someone else does.

My advice is to be open and please - oh please - don't take edits personally. It's really not intended as such. They are just a matter of shaping a message to suit a specific purpose and need.

Update: For more on how to have better communications with your IT management, end users, and co-workers, I invite you to join me for my IT Communication Skills Training course at http://ITCommunicationSkills.com

Improve Your Communication by Answering these Five Questions

Tip: Become aware of communication preferences for those you regularly communicate with; if appropriate create a checklist for future use. Having this information on hand allows you to proactively tailor your communication to your audience and improve the chance of clear communication.

Do they prefer email, phone, or hall-way conversations?
I once worked for a Manager who wouldn't return email; his motto was "If it is really important, they'll call." Whereas another person I worked with hardly ever returned calls, but always answered email. Simply asking is the best way to get this information.

How do they like to be addressed - Mr. Smith, Fred Smith, Fred, Hey You...?
One person I worked with always preferred to be addressed formally (Mr. Smith) and was offended if people, especially subordinates and vendors got too chummy with him. Others prefer to go on a first name basis. Culture and upbringing plays a role in people's preferences.

Do they prefer having a conversation, a formal presentation, an email and then phone conversation, or something in between?
I've worked with several C-level executives who are wary of formal presentations, but instead prefer to have interactive conversations, with supporting documentation to review in more depth if questions come up. Others prefer the formal presentation approach. These preferences are often learned by trial and error, by being aware of the reactions you recieve in your communications.

What type of questions do they ask?
By logging the types of questions being asked, you can then proactively anticipate questions that will be asked in the next communication and incorporate the answers, or have them available 'in your hip pocket' for reference should the questions come up again.

Are there words or colors they do not like?
The last Director I worked for got distracted whenever the word "going" was used. The C-level executives preferred presentations on a white or light background. Another director hated Orange, while others didn't like shades of green. One shut down if purple was used. Colors impact us emotionally and psychologically. Paying attention to color choices will impact the effectiveness of your communication.

What distracts you?

Understanding and profiling your audience's preferences allows you to communicate with them better, more effectively over time. It shows respect and cuts down on re-iterative discussions.

Update: For more on how to remove the distractions and effectively communicate with your co-workers, end users, and management, I invite you to join me for my IT Communication Skills Training course at http://ITCommunicationSkills.com