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.
Consider this scenario. A company manufactures cell phones.
At one level they have scientists in a lab puzzling over problems of
metallurgy and circuit miniaturization and algorithm design--highly
variable, unpredictable, creative efforts that may yield a breakthrough
in one technology or another every couple of years.
At another level they feed those breakthroughs into a reasonably well
oiled sausage grinder that can turn out a new product platform design in
a fairly predictable cycle time. This might take a year of prototyping,
testing, and regulatory approval.
At a third level, the marketing organization exploits the new platform
to churn out product designs, one after another, to appeal to different
audiences at different price points, with different feature sets and in
different shell shapes and colors.
This third level of new product development really is repeatable and
predictable, with known, deadline-driven cycle times. Mark Baker's model
of automatically generated feature trees and button-pushing instructions
is certainly applicable. At this level, new product development (and the
associated tech writing) really does resemble manufacturing. It's almost
an integrated part of the manufacturing cycle, because it constitutes
the engine that keeps the factory churning out new products.
At the first and second levels, though, I think Steve's model begins to
break down. Yes, you can have a defined process for managing an R&D
operation. But no, you can't just write down some procedures for making
new scientific discoveries and hire some kid off the street to run the
procedure. You can't micromanage creative contributors. What you can do
is give them a list of deliverables and negotiate deadlines with them,
then manage to those deadlines. In other words, you can tell them what
you want and when you want it, and then you can give them the resources
to get the job done. But you can't tell them how to do their work or
which tab goes in what slot, because doing so won't get you the results
you want.
The kind of tech writing that corresponds with these levels requires
some creativity and is unlikely to be reduced to a series of algorithms,
in my opinion.
Dick
---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses at mail.fiam.net]
ROBOHELP IS THE INDUSTRY STANDARD IN HELP AUTHORING
New RoboHelp X5 includes all new features such as,
content management, multi-author support, distributed
workforce support, XML and PDF support, and much more!
---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archiver -at- techwr-l -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.