My opinion is that this will come across as domineering/micromanaging, even if you really do need to verify that someone understands things the same way you do.
There are ways to achieve the same effect without an equally bad appearance:
+ You can break the work into smaller chunks, to create more checkpoints
+ You can have a plan that is very specific about what is to be done that everyone agrees to in a written form (if you have a meeting, someone should take notes and have them circulated after the fact)
+ Most lightweight, you can not present the plan in one chunk, but talk it through, taking ample opportunity to reiterate and solicit agreement (if you do this right, the other person will repeat what you said, without you ever telling them to--everyone is happy)
There are ways to achieve the same effect without an equally bad appearance:
+ You can break the work into smaller chunks, to create more checkpoints
+ You can have a plan that is very specific about what is to be done that everyone agrees to in a written form (if you have a meeting, someone should take notes and have them circulated after the fact)
+ Most lightweight, you can not present the plan in one chunk, but talk it through, taking ample opportunity to reiterate and solicit agreement (if you do this right, the other person will repeat what you said, without you ever telling them to--everyone is happy)