‘Be clear with what you’re asking other people to do’: How to review engineering documents

Do you find yourself rewriting sections of other people’s work? Are you given poor-quality documents to review? Does the first draft submitted to you bear little resemblance to what you expected? If you can answer yes to any of these questions, an upcoming IMechE course could be for you.

Running in London on 19 November, Reviewing Engineering Documents will teach you the skills needed to improve the quality and consistency of work produced in your department, while significantly reducing the time spent on reviewing.

Last year, we spoke to tutor Jean Billingsley about what the course has to offer. Here, she gives four useful tips for efficiently reviewing engineering documents.

Get everyone on the same page

You’re putting the reviewer in a difficult position when the first they see of a document is when someone says: “Can you sign this off, please?” I’ve seen this, and it’s not the ideal place to start.

The reviewer should be involved at the beginning of the process so everyone is on the same page about what document has been created and what it needs to contain, to minimise any rework.

Communicate clearly

Another issue I’ve seen is when people say things like: “Can you just have a look at this for me?” What do you mean by “have a look at it”? Are you asking me to review it? Are you asking me to edit it, or proofread it?

You need to be clear with what you are asking people to do, so you don’t end up with people thinking that somebody else has done what should have been part of their job or vice versa.

We have very clever engineers working on a lot of engineering documents. For people who are competent with technical work, learning these skills to review documents should be a quite straightforward top-up to their skillset.

Focus on what matters

There are some things that we really should be focusing on, like information control. Do you understand the importance of your role and the significance of your findings? Does it actually come across?

You can’t lose sight of the big point – if someone gets to the end of a report and asks “So what?” it has failed to communicate what it needs to say.

I've seen audit-style reports that just say, in a very bland tone, that there were findings – you think: “Yes, but are these three minor nonconformances or do we need to shut the plant down right now?”

Keep feedback positive and constructive

When we do the course, we get the delegates to review a document and then give feedback as though they were giving the feedback to the author. They practice how to give feedback in a positive way, recognising what’s good and then what could be improved, so that the author is learning from the experience and still feels ownership.

I’m interested in the psychology of it – if you say to somebody “I think that’s a great report, and it needs a bit more work”, people will be more receptive than when you say “I think that’s a great report, but it needs more work.”

Usually, most of the document is good, so you shouldn’t start with the 2% of things that need changing. Keep things in perspective and recognise the positives.

IMechE’s Reviewing Engineering Documents course runs in London on 19 November and in Coventry on 7 May 2026. Find out more and book.

Want the best engineering stories delivered straight to your inbox? The Professional Engineering newsletter gives you vital updates on the most cutting-edge engineering and exciting new job opportunities. To sign up, click here.

Content published by Professional Engineering does not necessarily represent the views of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers.