|
CEO, Lasotell Pty Ltd.
http://www.lasotell.com.au
Why does management in general and even technical
people at the coal face seem to question the value
of technical writers? Typically, they question
technical writers' value because past experiences,
observations, and rumours have given the feeling
that technical writers were not up to
expectations. On the other hand, many of us
realise that if a technical writer is properly
matched to the document development environment,
one writer can support a number of engineers and
free approximately 20%-30% of each engineer's
time, which can then be focused on the technical
component of the task. That value should be enough
to please any project manager. However, the key is
in the words "properly matched."
In our organisation we classify people (aspiring
employees and contractors) who call themselves
"technical writers" into three broad categories.
- Production "Writers"—these people take material
that is completely finished in all respects
except for final formatting for delivery and may
run a spelling check, add headers and footers,
print, copy, package, etc.
- Technical Editors—these people incorporate a
wide range of skills. At the bottom end, the
editor can take material that is essentially
finished, as far as the author is concerned,
and edit for grammar and general style. At the
other end of the scale, the editor can take the
first or second draft from the author and work
with the material in every respect,
occasionally add to the content by providing
comments and ideas, etc. The difference between
the top and the bottom of this category is
largely the amount of domain knowledge the
person possesses in the relevant field.
- Technical Authors—these people create material
from scratch. They act as ghostwriters—they do
their own research, write their own material,
edit it (or pass it to someone in Category 2),
and deliver it to the "owner" for content review.
This categorisation is very important given that
we also classify the documentation development
environments into four categories.
The vertical label means the writer needs
increasing amounts of domain knowledge to cope,
and the horizontal label means the writer needs
increasing amounts of writing and tools skills to
cope.
Standard Output: everyone wants standard output,
but the conditions necessary to produce it are
seldom appreciated and hence rarely achieved.
Magic: characterised by chaos and garbage in, but
a Standard Output product is required. Magic is
probably the worst development environment because
it is characterised by the perception that the
documentation is just a nuisance that has to be
written with the least amount of effort from
everyone involved in "real work." These
environments are also typified by people always
knowing, after the fact, how to develop
documentation better next time, but never do.
Highly Structured: dominated by the complexity of
the deliverable document. Highly Structured is an
environment where mature processes are required if
you want to deliver the product without losing
your sanity or your company or department profit
margin.
Nightmare: any job that has been left to a time
when it is virtually impossible to provide the
amount of information required at a credible
standard. The typical response is to throw more
people at the job. (Wrong—you actually have more
chance of pulling the job off with fewer, thus
clearer thinking, heads.) You need a SWAT Team
(but Heroes do not come cheap).
Properly matching the capability of the writer to
the development environment can go a long way to
ensuring the management's and technical staff's
expectations will be satisfied by the skills of
the writer tackling the job. Naturally, properly
matching the writer and the environment always
produces a better document than would otherwise be
achieved.
|
