Does this sound familiar? You’re working on a shared document with colleagues, exchanging feedback and suggestions as the content takes shape. The end goal is clear: produce a high-quality document within the given time frame. But unless everyone is on the same page about what needs to be done, there’s a real risk of wasted time when edits are incomplete, misdirected, or just not quite what was intended.
But people can be very protective of their work and sensitive to criticism, so you probably also have your own priorities in mind – how to point out errors or suggest improvements in a way that doesn’t undermine their self-image and preserves your relationship.
Remote and hybrid working complicate things
Hybrid and remote working have aggravated what was already a delicate balance. When we see colleagues regularly in person, we have a better sense of their personalities, how well they react to criticism, and how defensive they are of their work and ideas. We can then calibrate better the tone to use with them in making suggestions. When this interpersonal element is diluted through online collaboration, it can take longer to work out how best to interact with each other.
Try it yourself: Clarity or Indirectness?
Below are six real-life examples of feedback drawn from collaborative documents in a large UK-based workplace. All the writers are of similar seniority, working in the same team.
For each one, decide whether it prioritises clarity (direct, specific, action-focused) or indirectness (tentative, relationship-focused). As you read, ask yourself:
-
Would I be annoyed if I received feedback this direct?
-
Would I be frustrated if I got unclear feedback and didn’t know what to do next?
Activity
Key takeaways: how to collaborate constructively
When you're giving feedback on a shared document, you’re doing more than just editing. You’re managing a professional relationship. Here's a quick guide to the two main approaches:
Feedback that prioritises clarity:
-
Uses direct statements or commands (e.g., “Add an example,” “Reword this sentence”)
-
Avoids hedging language
-
Gives specific suggestions or examples
-
Clearly explains why the change is necessary
Feedback that prioritises indirectness (relationship-focused):
-
Often framed as a question (e.g., “Would it be worth…?” or “Have you thought about…?”)
-
Uses hedges (e.g., maybe, possibly, I think)
-
Suggests edits as optional
-
Leaves more room for interpretation
Putting it into practice
Next time you give feedback on a document, think about the context:
-
Is speed and accuracy the priority? Then clarity may be more useful.
-
Are you building trust or managing a sensitive relationship? Then a more indirect approach might be better.
Working on shared documents isn’t easy, and the fallout from something going wrong can be long-lasting. Using the right language can help you find the right balance between clarity and relationships, so it goes right instead.
You may also like to explore our range of Short Courses on Languages at The Open UniversityShort courses on communication and languages
To learn more effective communication strategies for work, take a look
at our new short course, Effective communication strategies and skills for work.
Rate and Review
Rate this article
Review this article
Log into OpenLearn to leave reviews and join in the conversation.
Article reviews