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.
> How do you handle the situation in which one reviewer (out
> of a total of six) who insists that his/her changes/edits
> _must_ be incorporated in to the current revision?
<snipped out the details of how the reviewer demands the revisions be
Yikes! This is a tough situation, and I wish you lots of luck. I've
had similar experiences, and how I dealt with the issue tended to
revolve around with whom I was dealing. For example, if the person is
rational (and this is a tough one, since if the person was rational,
there wouldn't be this problem!), you can usually (clearly!) explain
why the edits are not going to be incorporated, adding that they are
good comments. If the person is not rational, try the above. Then
throw your weight around (I'm kidding!!) and insist that you are the
one with training and background in writing and thus you really
should know what the reader wants or needs to hear. And if that
doesn't work, sometimes it's not worth it to really fight a whole
war. Let the person win that battle (for example, include whatever
comments/edits were suggested, but modified to your liking).
Good luck, and let us know what you did and what the end result was!
Research Information Systems
Email: Sue -at- ris -dot- risinc -dot- com