Describe a time you received substantial editorial feedback that required major revisions. How did you handle it and what was the outcome?
Behavioral
Receptiveness To Feedback
Revision Process
Collaboration With Editors
Authors often work closely with editors (from houses like Gallimard or Hachette in France). This question assesses receptiveness to critique, revision process, and collaboration skills—crucial for producing publishable work.
How to answer
- Use the STAR structure: Situation (what the manuscript and relationship context were), Task (what the editor asked you to change), Action (concrete steps you took to revise), Result (the outcome and lessons).
- Be specific about the editorial points (plot, pacing, character development, voice) and which you agreed with versus which you defended.
- Explain your revision workflow: how you prioritized changes, sought additional feedback, and preserved your voice.
- Quantify outcomes where possible (e.g., improved reader engagement in advance readers, acceptance by publisher, positive reviews, sales milestones).
- Reflect on what you learned about collaboration, humility, and improving craft.
What not to say
- Reacting defensively or saying you ignored the feedback without justified reason.
- Claiming the editor was entirely wrong without explaining why you preserved parts of the original text.
- Giving a vague or purely emotional answer without concrete actions or outcomes.
- Taking all the credit and not acknowledging the editor's contribution.
Sample answer
“When I submitted my second novel to a mid-size French publisher, the editor liked the core idea but asked for major restructuring: the timeline was confusing and a key character felt underdeveloped. I mapped the narrative beats, created multiple scene-level outlines, and rewrote sections to clarify causality and deepen the character's arc. I also shared the new draft with two trusted beta readers for focused feedback. The publisher accepted the revised manuscript; upon release it received positive notices in regional press and readers commented specifically on clearer pacing and stronger emotional throughline. I learned the importance of separating personal attachment from story needs and the value of iterative revision.”
Ready to rehearse this answer out loud?
Practice this question