when your boss asks you to review something... 3

[kingnero]

When your boss asks you to review something, eg. a note, ment for in-house public, about something technical or about the implementation of new procedures, do you...
a) read the whole thing, check any calcs/prices/ technical stuff,
b) also check for contents (making sure he doesn't spread information that is incorrect or not realistic to be followed)
c) also check his spelling/grammar/punctuation/capitals?

My boss, also an engineer, has asked me again to review a document before spreading it.
While the technical side is OK, it contains some spelling/grammar errors.

Last time he asked me to review something, I gave him a reviewed word-doc in which some punctuation marks were corrected, some missing words were filled in (probably forgotten by typing too rapid), ...
but the document that was spread was his original doc.

The exactly same thing happens right now again.
I don't want to come over as a know-it-all, yet I'm trying to do my work as good as possible, so I review a+b+c from above.
I'm no greenhorn either, I know what to do and my position in the firm, yet he's still the one paying my check every month (so there's no reason to piss him off, which happens easily).

any suggestions or situations you want to share?

 

[StressGuy]

Alright, I see this has made it's way back up after a while, but I don't remember seeing the original comments. So, since it is back on page one, I've got to chime in:

I gave him a reviewed word-doc in which some punctuation marks were corrected, some missing words were filled in (probably forgotten by typing too rapid), ...
but the document that was spread was his original doc.

Are you sure your boss new there were comments in the file? Are you sure your boss knows how to view those comments when he opens the file? I could very easily see this being a case of getting the file back, finding no changes, and running with it.

Edward L. Klein
Pipe Stress Engineer
Houston, Texas

"All the world is a Spring"

All opinions expressed here are my own and not my company's.

 

[kingnero]

Yes, he knew. First time I handed him a paper copy, with remarks in blue (didn't want to use red) on a black/white print out.
He said he prefers "Track changes" in Word. So next time I did, and mentioned it in the mail with which it was sent to him.

Just e few days ago, he asked me again to review a document, so I did (using the "Track changes" feature), and he sent out the reviewed documen. So apparently he has a reason for using the reviewed (or not) document. I guess I'll just leave it at that, and continue doing what I do. Problem is that it takes time that I don't have.

 

[JsnPrkr]

Your manager is interested in your time being utilized effectively. Why don't you ask him to give you some insight on why the documents are sometimes issued without the edits so you can improve the process?

Corrections should always be in red. We're not in grade school any more (if that's where your objection to red are coming from), so don't complicate things with extraneous considerations. Comments are often blue.

When you're wondering what someone is doing, ask! If he says he'd like you to keep taking time to thoroughly proof and edit, that opens the door to a discussion of workload and demands on your time.

 

[Nereth1]

I was once asked to check a colleagues drawing, I found some errors. They talked their way out of almost all but the dimensional ones then told me off for time wasting and never asked me to check anything again.

I feel for you.

6 or so months ago I was called by a colleague for an opinion on how to analyse something in a project I was not on. I explained the base concepts and walked out. The next day, I informed him of my intention to independently do the calculation to verify the result, and did so. I got a different result.

Based on what it was out by, I had a good idea of what he had done wrong and asked to see his work to check. He wouldn't show it and instead wanted to go through mine. He said I had used a different method but agreed with the method, and couldn't fault the maths. Did not want to show me his math at that time because he was too busy. His method seemed right too, conceptually.

I re-did the calculation using a different method to check my math again. Came to the same result. Walked into his office and insisted on seeing his math, saying I was sure it was a clerical error and just let me go through it and I would return with it fixed. He reluctantly obliged. I looked through it and found he hadn't made the clerical error I assumed, but instead had used an odd equation.

I went back to his office and asked where he had gotten that equation, to which he pointed me to where he got the equation, but the source was aimed at a clearly different situation. He asked how it was different. I explained. He accepted the change.

None of this annoyed me, other than that he clearly didn't want me going through his analysis which is ridiculous considering he had only known how to do that analysis for one day - since I had taught him the concepts the day before.

What *did* annoy me, was that after he accepted the change, as I was walking out of his office, he stopped me and said something like this:

"Now see, you wasted all morning on the nitpicking, and in the end the difference (he was out by ~50%) won't change anything because it's close eno

http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=334914ugh"

After some back and forth, I signed off by getting on an admittedly high horse for someone as young as me, and gave him a speech a bit like this, (in exasperated tones at this point):

"You can be inaccurate in engineering, as long as you know about it. Then you can apply safety factors. But you didn't even know you were wrong, and you didn't know why for next time. If you're wrong, and you don't know about it, you're going to kill someone".

To which he gave a short grin/laugh of dismissal. I stormed out of his office and spent the next 5 minutes just walking around the companies premises, very nearly if not actually shaking with anger at the attitude, and trying to cool my head.

 

[Ron]

KN...agree with others. Keep doing a critical review. Your boss has confidence in you that you will do the right thing....that's invaluable. He has the prerogative to take or ignore your advice.

a note, ment for in-house public,

As you can see, it is easy to make typing mistakes (ment=meant), so he probably places a lower value on the grammar, typos and format than on the technical.

I have been critically reviewing technical reports for over 30 years. I review for technical, grammar, spelling and format. I review for overall presentation and consistency of conclusions and data. I think it is important to be as correct as practicable with any document you produce. I don't always achieve that goal, but I try and I instill in those that I mentor to strive for the same.

Engineering ideas and concepts have little impact if they cannot be presented in a manner that shows the audience that you are attentive to details and can present your ideas in a consistent, logical manner with few or no mistakes. (I will take a point loss for a run-on sentence! )

 

[kingnero]

being dutch with french as a second language, spelling mistakes in english are easily made. That being said, I do place a rather high value on the aesthetic side (spelling, grammar, lay-out) of notes and such.
Our equivalent to "they're, their and there" kind of mistakes, won't pass my office.
It's not that I am perfect, but a spelling chacker has its merits.

I appreciate everyone's thoughts!

 

[tygerdawg]

chacker[/b] has its merits.]

Indeed it does.

TygerDawg
Blue Technik LLC
Virtuoso Robotics Engineering

http://www.bluetechnik.com

 

[zeusfaber]

I'm a fan of reviewing thoroughly, but tagging proposed changes so the author can tell which ones I think are important

When you make a change, there is always some risk that the Boss was right and you've made a mistake during your review. Your boss is probably going to want to spend a bit of time checking your changes (or at least the significant ones) to guard against this.

If you can flag your corrections as Significant, Material or Editorial, then you're giving the boss the ability to focus "last look" effort on the changes with impact on the organisation's engineering reputation. Whether they do a global accept or a global reject on the Editorial ones won't change much - but if Significant proposals start getting rejected, both you and Boss ought to be taking an interest in why.

A.

 

[graybeach]

I just reviewed a lifting beam calculation where the eccentricity of the pick up points was not included in the calculation. Just considering compression alone, the D/C was around 0.6. Considering interaction of the moment due to the eccentricity and the compression, D/C went up to 1.03 by my independent calculation. The originator of the calculation, an engineer employed by the contractor, huffed and puffed about how nit picky I was being. They had used that lifting beam for years and picked up heavier things that our new chillers. I certainly lost a lot of respect for that engineer.