How are the edits indicated? By hand or using Word's tracking/markup
feature?
If by hand, then my guess is that you're pretty well stuck. Either convince
them that their expectations are out of whack or look for a different
position. If they're using paper, they're wasting a lot of trees needlessly.
If they're tracked using Word, and then it's up to you to integrate or
otherwise deal with the changes, the quickest way is "Accept all", smile.
But seriously, if they're tracked and there are too many to do, I simply
start at the beginning and triage them either by inserting comments as
reminders to myself, ranking them in order of importance. Then I go through
an do the #1s first, then the #2s, etc.
The same system can work for paper edits, but paper cuts are a real hazard.
But, it sounds like the bottom line is that their expectations might be too
high. Maybe ask a supervisor to demonstrate a technique for dealing with the
volume.
--
Herb Tyson MS MVP
Author of the Word 2007 Bible
Blog:
http://word2007bible.herbtyson.com
Web:
http://www.herbtyson.com
"Island Girl" wrote in message
...
I'm in a new legal department in which stacks of documents (some small,
some
quite large) with heavy edits are expected to be finished in short order;
e.g., 20 documents in 4 hours. Most of the wonderful things you've taught
me
over the years will not be called upon--just move 'em in, move 'em out!
In my previous position, there was a lot of original input and formatting.
Since I type 120, more or less, that was easy, and the present department
probably thought I'd be just as fast at making corrections and edits. But
that turns out not to be true, because when I proof these documents I find
that I've missed edits---and that's my problem.
My question is: do some of you out there have a "system" for the most
time
effective way of proofing a heavily edited/corrected document? Proof as
you
go? Print out and proof? Relax my standards? Get more sleep?
Thanks again for all you do!