by Maria Edymans
The editor is an enigmatic figure: omnipresent, but inconspicuous. For some, this might seem like the perfect job for a lone wolf. The editor, in their humble way, is imagined hunching over in their cubicle, surrounded by Princess and the Pea-like slush piles – a mix between an artist and a mathematician.
Yet, while the very definition of an editor can be uncertain – are they an acquiring editor? a stylistic one? maybe a structural one? oh my! – everyone knows that the perception of an editor as a lone wolf couldn’t be further from the truth. Editing is a highly collaborative job. Depending on which kind of editing you do, this collaboration might look a little different, but teamwork is at the heart of editing anyway.
Collaboration through communication
The key to a successful collaboration is communication. For editors, this means being able to give constructive feedback, and, as the editors at the November program found out, it first and foremost means being able to create a space of psychological safety.
During this session, Editors Toronto had the privilege of listening to a talk by Nagma Sayed, a psychology-driven people strategist and HR lead. It was about unlocking the power of constructive feedback and creating psychological safety for effective client interactions.
Defining psychological safety
Sayed began by defining psychological safety: It means feeling secure in taking risks, expressing ideas, and making mistakes without fear of negative consequences – essentially, existing without fear. Establishing a foundation of psychological safety allows for strengthening relationships and enhancing effective collaboration. Sayed advised that, to understand practical steps for creating psychological safety with our clients, editors must first analyze their role in this collaboration and identify the challenges that might arise in maintaining a guilt-free environment.
Some challenges brought up in the discussion included
- balancing honesty and sensitivity,
- respecting a writer’s voice,
- understanding genre and audience,
- being encouraging without overwhelming,
- providing solutions (not problems),
- dealing with resistance,
- handling the subjectivity of creative work,
- managing time constraints, and
- balancing multiple clients’ needs.
Methods for providing constructive feedback
Often, the biggest challenge is handling constructive feedback (no matter the nature of the relationship, even outside of work, this is always challenging), but psychological safety makes it much easier to approach.
There are four methods of providing effective constructive feedback by incorporating psychological safety.
- Following the sandwich method
This method is the most formulaic, which makes it easy to follow and implement into your practice. You provide feedback by starting on a positive note, then addressing areas for improvement, and ending with encouragement. Doing so helps soften the impact of critique and reinforces the writer’s strengths.
- Using guided questions
The editor poses questions to guide the writer in exploring alternatives or rethinking specific parts of the text. For example, asking the author what they think the reader’s reading level would be may lead the author to consider simplifying the language or cutting it down.
- Building a collaborative relationship
This approach has the editor building a collaborative relationship to overcome resistance. The editor provides ideas or frames of reference rather than direct critiques. An example would be to reference the author’s favourite writer or book that they can emulate and to point out things that can be incorporated (or not) into the author’s work. By positioning feedback as a collaboration, the editor reduces defensiveness and builds trust.
- Encouraging writer autonomy
According to this method, the editor encourages writer autonomy with a feedback framework that allows the writer to choose which elements they want to address. This can include summarizing different aspects like plot, character, or theme, and allowing the writer to prioritize a certain element. Sometimes, people aren’t sure what they’re looking for when they hire an editor, and they just want to make sure the chapters make sense and that the story is consistent. Using this approach, the writer can select just this element of feedback and put the rest of the commentary aside.
Psychological safety and a psychological contract
When giving tips to foster psychological safety while using these methods, Sayed took four key ideas from Amy C. Edmondson, a scholar on the subject, and a professor of leadership and management at Harvard Business School.
The conditions that make up the foundation of psychological safety are inclusivity, willingness to speak up, support for mistakes, and clear expectations. To actively and consciously incorporate these elements into their collaboration, editors should use what is called a psychological contract, which is very similar to the contracts, program scopes, or project scopes that we’re familiar with.
A psychological contract encompasses the informal beliefs, ambitions, obligations, and expectations that the employee and employer perceive. Essentially, it’s how both parties understand their relationship outside of the written and signed employment contract, and what they expect the other party to provide. The key to this contract is that it is absolutely essential that it’s overt, openly discussed, and actually followed.
Implementing psychological safety in our daily lives
To help ease us into implementing psychological safety into our day-to-day, Sayed suggested we try a few techniques, like starting by openly sharing feedback on the project, not the person; asking for feedback regularly; setting ground rules for feedback conversations and establishing expectations to promote open dialogue; and acknowledging and validating authors’ concerns.
Sayed reminded us that communication is an open dialogue, not a monologue, and that, outside of monologuing, there are a few other common feedback pitfalls that editors should avoid, like being too vague, focusing on personality rather than behaviour, and neglecting to follow up.
Of course, even when practising psychological safety and trying the outlined techniques, there are moments when it won’t be perfect – maybe someone had a bad day, or your feedback touched a sore spot.
When you come face to face with moments like these, remember that the person whose work you’re editing is, at the end of the day, driving the relationship, and that it’s on you to react appropriately. If your client seems to be having an off day, try to be a little more sensitive – maybe try changing your language or your tone. Above all, remember to show that you care. Even if you don’t like talking to clients and prefer to do everything by email, a short conversation up front can make your client feel at ease. Editing, after all, is a people job, and it’s the human relationship that drives it.
Maria Eydmans is a writer, editor, and illustrator based in Toronto. She has an undergraduate degree in English and French Studies and is on track to acquire a Master of Publishing from Simon Fraser University. She currently works for EXILE/Exile Editions and volunteers for the Editors Canada student relations committee. You can check out her work at www.mariaeydmans.com or reach out to her directly at [email protected].
Alex Benarzi is an editor, writer, and educator, currently working in Calgary. He has a certificate in editing from Simon Fraser University. Alex is currently vice president of Editors Canada national executive committee and volunteers for the Editors Calgary twig. Alex provides freelance editing services to clients, working primarily as an academic, fiction, and creative non-fiction editor. You can connect with him on Linkedin.
BoldFace 