The reflex
You review a piece of work and either approve it or ask for a change. The person knows what was accepted, but not always what you examined to decide.
The builder’s reflex
Explain one useful criterion, what you observed, and the limits of your review. An approval can also make visible what works.
Why
A review can help someone learn from a real example. It is not the only occasion for learning, and its cost depends on the complexity and on how much context is shared. A brief approval can be enough when the criteria are already understood; there is no need to turn every check into a lesson.
When a piece of reasoning is worth passing on, name it precisely. A colleague drafts a reply to a member of the public. You first check that the next step is understandable and that the date given is confirmed. Saying why those points matter helps more than presenting the wording as simply good or bad.
A review can also confirm a strength, reveal an assumption, or show what you were not able to examine. Tell a requirement, a risk, and a matter of style apart. A view from one angle is not a guarantee about the whole work. If the subject goes beyond your competence, say so and suggest someone who can help, with the recipient’s agreement.
Between peers, ask what kind of feedback they want and how much time there is. Someone starting out can check whether an instruction is understandable, or ask a useful question. An experienced person can explain their criteria without rewriting the whole document. Rewriting together can still be instructive if that is wanted and the choices get discussed.
Try this
On your next review, agree the scope. Add one precise piece of feedback:
“I checked … because … Here, this works thanks to … This point still needs examining by …”
Do not fill in every line if they are not useful. Ask whether the person understands the criterion and how they could use it. They can also contest your reading or bring context.
On a later case, look at whether the feedback helped them decide or check. If the same ambiguities persist, clarify the criterion or choose a demonstration rather than systematically writing longer comments.
From where you sit
- Engineering: say which cases you checked and what the review does not cover.
- Design: tie your feedback to what the person has to understand or do.
- Finance: separate an assumption in a calculation from a confirmed figure.
- Management: plan proportionate feedback and name the solid points too.
To discuss
Which review criterion would gain from being explained, and in which situation is a brief approval enough?