I've recently started in a fairly senior role in an organisation. It's a role I've done previously at the same level for years and part of it involves drafting correspondence to clients. In previous roles at this level I've drafted my own correspondence and sent it off myself, only checking with my boss if there was something particularly contentious I needed advice on. In this organisation they have a few levels of approval for correspondence before it can go out and I'm really struggling with it.
The person who first reviews the correspondence has been in the team for a very long time and has very particular ideas on how things should be structured. I've tried to follow their advice as closely as possible but at times I've been told I included too much context, then when I shortened my responses I was told there wasn't enough context, then I was told to stick to the standard wording and then told I should have deviated from it. Nothing I've written has been incorrect, just not structured to this person's liking. It is quite subjective and I can't really push back at all because I'm still new and this person is senior to me (though not my boss).
I'd really thought that at this stage of my career I'd be past this back and forth on what I consider fairly routine and uncontentious correspondence. It's making me feel nervous and quite anxious every time I have to submit something to them. I know I'm still fairly new but I'm worried this may continue as this person seems quite pedantic and particular about how they like things done. I've asked them for examples of best practice but they said they can't really give any because each correspondence is so different.
Any tips on how to deal with this? I already get quite anxious about people reviewing my work so when they reject things I've worked on it has made me feel more insecure than ever 