Reviewing Documents Part 2: How to Review and What to Do With the Results

In the first part of the article, we discussed why reviewing is important, how to review your own and someone else’s creations, and how to make the reviewing practice work for you. In this part, we will take a look at how to review your or other colleagues’ work and how to use the results.

How to Review the Document?

There are two options: you are a reviewer, or you provide the document for review.

If you provide a document for a review: ask the right person according to the existing process. Provide the reviewer with the following information:

• The deadline.
• The document they need to check.
• What should they pay more attention to?
• Make sure that they do not review things out of their scope (software developers should not review text style), but be grateful if they did and double-checked the highlighted points.

Wait for the results of the review.

If you are the reviewer, there are two options:

1. You review your document. The main problem in this case is that you get used to the document when writing it. Even if you are very attentive, you can miss an error. It is very easy to miss poorly formulated sentences, grammatical mistakes, or complicated phrases. I highly recommend switching your attention to another task or going for a short walk; let your brain switch to other things. This will refresh your attention to details. A gym session, a cup of tea, or a small talk could work as well. Record the results.

   
   

2. You review someone else’s document. In this case, understand the purpose of the document and read it, paying attention to details. You can read it several times, looking for different types of errors each time. Highlight the errors. Also, take note, of how easy it was to understand the document, for instructions – how easy it was to follow, were you able to achieve the result, did you have any questions, did you have any errors not described in the document. Does the text in general help to achieve the goal and how does it make it simpler and easier to read? Record the results.

How to Use the Results

You can use the results to improve the text, but in general, they are very beneficial for the technical writer:

1. Technical review improves your understanding of the technology you work on. If you understand it well, you will make less mistakes in future tasks. Also, you will know what details you require to write a great document before starting to write.

   
   

2. You will know which tools may help to automate your work.

   
   

3. You will improve your mentoring skills (if you review another technical writer’s work) or your writing skills and attention to errors.

   
   

4. You will improve processes involved in developing documentation.

In general, you will progress as a technical writer and help other people to improve their skills.

Mistakes

Pay attention to the following popular mistakes:

• You follow all commentaries. Don’t rely completely on other people’s opinions, unless they are professionals in this particular field. Sometimes, software developers tend to look for grammar mistakes instead of checking the technical accuracy.

• You don’t use the tools to help you with your tasks. Use modern tools to check the grammar, style, outlook, and so on, but don’t rely on them completely – AI tools can generate hallucinations.

• You proceed to review your own documents straight after writing them. This will blur your attention and you may miss the mistakes.

• You don’t ask for another opinion if you are confused. Involve more people if you don’t feel confident.

• You don’t examine highlighted problems. Sometimes the repetitive or typical problems may give a hint on what to improve.

Remember, mistakes are the points of growth, you will get better and help others.

Summary

• Reviewing is a very important step in a document’s lifecycle.
• Reviewing makes your document a source of truth.
• The technical review by a relevant professional is mandatory.
• Reviewing documents improves the skills of the technical writers.