TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
I once had the privilege of working with a wonderful and effective editor whose style was 180 degrees away from my own. I'm a take-no-prisoners-all-that-counts-is-the-words-on-the-page Lou-Grant-with-a-ponytail type, whereas she is a highly empathic friend who sits and coaches the writer to improve the work. She was enormously successful with people whose egos were too fragile to withstand my approach. I learned enough from her that now I can sometimes be successful in dealing with such writers (when I can muster the self-control).
My point is that you don't need no stinkin' questionnaire. You should be able to evaluate your own style honestly and understand what situations and what kinds of writers (in terms of personality) it works well in. And you should be able to perceive where a different style might work better.
Some people just don't take kindly to having their work edited. They probably shouldn't be writing for a living, but we don't always get to choose our coworkers. These people will always give an editor a negative evaluation no matter what you do. Just accept that as a fact of life and move on.
"W words" wrote:
>As an editor have you ever thought of following up every editing project
>with a questionnaire asking the author about what they felt about the
>editing process and outcome?
>Are there any traps in doing this?