While in the early stages of my consulting career—well before I decided to focus on writing—I had had a client with an underperforming area that I brought to the attention of my manager. Instead of heaping praise on me for what I found, he offered some constructive feedback that I’d only done half my job.
“Bring me solutions, not problems,” he said, before explaining that identifying that something is broken and needs fixing (or improving) is the easy step. The harder part is actually providing a solution, a way forward. Particularly as a consultant, most clients know they have issues. That’s why the consultants are there in the first place. So, to go to the client and tell them “Process X is broken” is not really helpful. They probably already know that.
But, if you go to the client and say, “If we do these three things, we can fix Process X.” Now, you’ve given the client new information and something to consider. They may tweak it, they may implement it, or they may do something different, but the key is that new information has been provided.
I have taken this approach on in most aspects of my life. Instead of just pointing out an issue, I usually try to think of a couple of ways to address it, or at least have an idea of how to come up with a solution.
Application to Critiquing
I have found this same “solutions not problems” approach to be useful when critiquing and helpful when receiving critiques.
There are many rules and best practices about writing that many authors, particularly newer authors, don’t know. And even experienced writers who know the rules don’t always remember to follow them. It is one thing to point out where their writing fails in one of these areas. But that’s not always helpful. A comment that says “this doesn’t work” or “this needs more” or “this is confusing” doesn’t really help. Adding specificity is a step forward, such as “too many filter words” or “there’s a lot of repetition” is better.
But what I have found to be the most helpful is to include a solution. A comment like “watch use of filter words” can be followed by a sentence or two, taken from the submission, and redone without the filter words included. Or if pacing is the issue, redoing a small section with shorter sentences and more paragraphs. This gives the author not just the problem, but also shows them how to fix it. They can then tweak what’s been provided, apply it to the rest of their work, or ignore it outright. The choice is always theirs, but at least they made the choice with more information.
Be Judicious and Mindful
Be careful because this approach can be taken too far. Not every little item needs to be rewritten and on display to the author. This is not about showing up the author or proving that the critiquer is a better writer. Receiving too many changes can also be soul-crushing to an author. Pick the two or three most critical things to fix.
Also watch for including so many suggestions for improvement that you’ve actually lost sight of the original story. Too many grand changes show more about how the critiquer wants the story to be than actually providing helpful feedback on the story that is written. If the critiquer wants to see new characters added, a different challenge presented, or a different thematic message, then they should consider writing their own story and not projecting their desires on to another author’s work.
In Conclusion
Identifying problem areas is the baseline for a critiquer to help an author. Taking that to the next step, providing helpful, quality feedback with specificity can provide insight to an author on what their story lacks. And including suggestions for specific fixes can help get the author’s mind thinking along those lines.
But remember that the job of a critiquer is to help an author, not crush their spirit, not show them up, and not direct them to tell a story that isn’t theirs. It is to help improve that story and, in turn, help the writer improve their craft just a little bit. Over time, those bits add up and beginning writers bloom into experienced writers.
Comments