TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Re: Sarbane Oxley process and procedure documentation: how granular?
Subject:Re: Sarbane Oxley process and procedure documentation: how granular? From:"John Posada" <writer -at- tdandw -dot- com> To:"TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com> Date:Thu, 11 Dec 2003 10:04:22 -0500
I did some research on this when I was asked to look into
this at B&N.com. There is some documentation on the web.
Take a look at the following 60 page PDF:
The part that you aren't going to like is on page 60 where
it says that the SEC does not specify guidelines on what the
content should look like because it would "result in
boilerplate of little value". OTOH, the PDF itself is very
informative.
Depending on how important this is to you, I'd suggest that
you check out subscribing to the Protivity Knowlewdgeleader.
It's about $500, but in all my searching, this consulting
company seemed to have the most useful stuff. BTW...I have
no affiliation with them.
John Posada
Senior Technical Writer
writer[at]tdandw.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Suzanne Pyle" <suzpyle -at- hotmail -dot- com>
Subject: Sarbane Oxley process and procedure documentation:
how granular?
>
> Although it may be too early to tell, has anyone figured
out how much detail
> to include when producing process/procedure documentation
for the Section
> 404 Sarbane Oxley requirements? My only frame of reference
is the ISO
> documentation requirements which pretty much follow a
standard format.
>
> Haven't seen much out on the Web that talks about what the
Sarbane Oxley
> documentation should or could look like; instead, there
seems to be more
> discussion around the realization that documentation in
general is
> necessary, and not all the bells and whistles for
automating every process
> within an organization.
>
> If you're in the middle of a Sarbane Oxley project, I'd be
curious to know
> what experience you've got on determining how detailed to
get when
> documenting the organization's processes and procedures?
RoboHelp for FrameMaker is a NEW online publishing tool for FrameMaker that
lets you easily single-source content to online Help, intranet, and Web.
The interface is designed for FrameMaker users, so there is little or no
learning curve and no macro language required! Call 800-718-4407 for
competitive pricing or download a trial at: http://www.ehelp.com/techwr-l4
---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.
