The Art of a Peer Review: Are you a Credible Peer Reviewer?

Unit 3 caused me to reflect on 2 peer reviews, presented to me by 2 different peer reviewers.  The feedback and personal growth came not from the written peer reviews, but from a moment of personal reflection.  Why is it that one peer review frustrated me and the other, made me realize there were a number of changes that would improve my work?  The answer, I believe, lies in the following thought – that an effective peer review is an art.

I believe that people generally come from a positive place, wanting to do a good job.  Whether it’s walking into work and finding out you’ve made a mistake or cooking a seemingly perfect dinner only to find out your guests were less than impressed; no one starts from a place wanting to fail.

So if everyone’s intentions are good, why do things turn out so different?  This is the question I pondered as I read not only my peer reviews, but the peer reviews completed for others.  It has become clear to me that we should not just be improving our own written work so that it kisses the perfection we seek, but if we are ever to be heard and deemed credible, we must find ways to be effective in providing feedback.  I share the following challenges so that you may ponder, just as I have, how the peer reviews you have written rise above or fall victim to the ideas below.

It’s Easy to Point Out the Small Errors, but Did You Get the Message?

If you are trying to acknowledge positive aspects of a particular piece of work, be specific about what and why something is good.  Stating “there are good points” followed with a list of insignificant constructive feedback such as comma use suggests to the writer that the reviewer lacks the skills to understand the ideas and complexity of the document and as a result, resorts to simple feedback.  By identifying specific strengths of the writer’s work, it builds the credibility of the reviewer and increases the likelihood that (s)he will adopt the feedback.

Clean Hands Principle

When providing feedback on grammar or spelling as a reviewer, you lose credibility when your feedback is grammatically weak.  It’s important when pointing out an error to another person, that you avoid making the same error when pointing it out.

The K.I.S.S. (Keep It Simple Stupid) Principle

Using terminology that assumes someone has a degree in English can come across as insulting and is ineffective in conveying feedback.  Give the writer real world terms so they can appreciate your point and make the necessary adjustments; it’s unlikely someone is going to Google search a term just so they can understand what the reviewer is saying.

You’re Not The Boss

It’s important to ensure reviewers avoid directive language such as “you need to . . .” or “this should be . . .”  People read this approach as adversarial and are more likely to resist making the change.  Reviewers should be aware they are providing suggestions, considerations and are trying to influence the writer’s thinking.

This list is not exhaustive and I invite you to share your own rules.  We may be providing feedback as students, but at some point we will be both givers and receivers as professionals, leaders and potentially, business owners.  I will continue to practice and encourage you to do the same.