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.
STC chapter question -- what should an employer expect? (take II)
Subject:STC chapter question -- what should an employer expect? (take II) From:Geoff Hart <ghart -at- videotron -dot- ca> To:"TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com> Date:Sat, 05 Mar 2005 12:41:42 -0500
T.W. Smith wondered: <<So, what could the STC do to get you there, such
that you, as boss of the pubs manager, would be happy to let each
member of the pubs dept. sign up for the STC on the company dime? ...
But, what about tangible improvements in writing, etc.? I mean, tool
stuff is easy to arrange, and gets old. I suppose there could be
grammar symposiums, meetings on outlines and structuring content. But,
as the boss of the pubs manager, what would you expect your writers to
get from their STC membership that you, the boss 'boss, paid for?>>
I'd expect my staff to get their brains in gear and make an effort to
learn new things, whether directly from STC (journal, magazine, SIG
newsletters) or by talking to fellow members and asking their help in
solving problems. Membership alone is worthless: you have to put
something into it to get something out of it. Or as Robert Heinlein
used to say: TANSTAAFL (there ain't no such thing as a free lunch).
In terms of getting more out of STC, your suggestion of grammar
symposiums and other stuff with practical application is a good one.
For example, I recently gave a talk on improving your editing skills
("soft skills, software skills, and survival skills") that was well
received.
As a member of a local chapter, it's your responsibility to suggest
potential meeting topics to the board executive if they haven't asked
you what you want to see and hear. In the absence of such feedback,
we're left on our own to guess at member needs and pick topics that we
hope will be of interest to you. As a rule, our batting average is
impressive enough to earn us 6-figure incomes in professional baseball,
but that still means that we fail to pick compelling topics about twice
as often as we succeed. The topics interest us, but not everyone else!
Bill Swallow suggested: <<To be honest, the STC needs to focus on tech
pubs ROI... how to help writers become more productive, become more
technically tuned into their work, and feed them the info they need to
be on the bleeding edge (not the dull middle or back) of technical
writing technology and methodology developments.>>
All good thoughts, though in defence of STC, a healthy percentage of my
articles in Intercom and elsewhere have focused on doing your job
faster and better. But we certainly need to devote significant effort
to demonstrating the ROI of our profession. (I've also written on this
topic, fwiw.) I recently put one of my former colleagues, a really
bright economist with expertise in determining "unpriced values" (such
as the value of editing), in touch with STC's research grants committee
to see if he can do a study on this. Stay tuned!
<<One thing that I think hurts the STC is the amount of job hunting
info they roll into general events and publications. I never understood
why an employer would pay to send someone to a conference with sessions
that help writers hunt for better jobs. Make job hunting a SIG.>>
STC is no different from any other professional society, all of which
offer employment services to members because that is what members
repeatedly request. As manager, I would send my people to the
conference to learn new things, not to find a new job, and STC
conferences offer plenty of opportunity to learn new things. The risk
of someone being headhunted is relatively small compared to the
potential payback. If one of my employees wants to leave, they'll find
a way with or without STC's help. My job is to make them want to stay
and ethically, if someone still wants to leave, I feel it's my
responsibility to help them to the extent they have earned that help.
<<I do like the SIG approach, though. I like the opportunity to focus
in on a few core disciplines that either interest me or I know I'm
weaker in. This focused approach can sit well with employers, because
for a minimal cost over the already low enrollment fee they know their
employees are receiving targeted info for building specific skills.>>
The latest enrollment fee structure gives you the alternative (for no
extra cost) of joining either one geographical chapter plus one SIG as
part of the standard cost, or joining three SIGs instead. It's a nice
alternative for people with specialized needs, or who don't have time
(or desire or ability) to participate in a local chapter.
<<On the conferences again, and I know I've beaten this to death in
previous threads, but I honestly and truly believe the STC needs to
compensate their speakers and look outside the STC for talent that
would be willing to come in and hold a session or two.>>
This is one point I made very strongly (and repeatedly) as part of the
planning committee for the Seattle 2005 conference. Obviously I'm
biased, but for my own stem (writing and editing), I insisted that my
peer reviewers be considerably more ruthless than in previous years
about bouncing poorly considered or useless proposals, while still
trying to cover lots of ground so as to offer "something for everyone".
The results won't satisfy everyone, but I think we did a good job of
creating an interesting program from the submissions we received.
More to your point, I know the guy who has been appointed to completely
revamp the STC approach to conferences for next year (a personal
friend), and he has a lot of sympathy for the notion of hiring top
talent as presenters. I make no promises, but I do expect to see
significant changes next year if he can hack through the red tape and
fend off the "let's not change anything" types. I expect that in
future, we'll see more events like the old WinWriters conferences, plus
more specialized conferences with high-powered speakers recruited
rather than just accepting proposals.
We'll also see better choice of conference cities and facilities. STC
conferences are a bargain in terms of membership price, but the
conference hotels are never a bargain. I don't recall the last time I
stayed in a conference hotel, and this year is no exception.
<<By allowing members to speak for a reduced entry fee, session
attendees don't necessarily have confidence in whether the
content will be good or not, whether the speaker will be adequately
prepared to address a potentially full audience, and you risk throwing
away your time and money on a bad session.>>
Paying someone is no guarantee that they'll give you good value for
their money. Of course, if not, you don't invite them back the second
time. And we do have some top-notch presenters at every annual
conference who enjoy participation so much that they don't require pay.
(I hope I'm one of them!)
<<Same thing with their Intercom and Technical Communication
publications. Spend the money to solicit solid content from industry
experts, or at least have a expert panel of reviewers for each content
type to deem whether the articles are accurate before publishing
them.>>
That's a good idea for Intercom (a magazine), but Tech. Comm. is a
peer-reviewed journal, which can't work that way. In particular, I
agree with you that Intercom needs to do a better job of
reality-checking what they publish. Their record on this is fairly
spotty, and it arises in part from the fact that their staff aren't
trained technical communicators so far as I know. I've had some <ahem>
interesting discussions </ahem> about my own articles in the past.
<<The STC needs to offer solid, targeted info that help writers become
more knowledgeable, more productive, and more agile in what tasks they
can perform (and thus add more value back to the organization for which
they work).>>
Agreed, but you also have to expect members to make an effort to use
the information that they do receive. Most people I know throw away the
journal unread, which is a shame; it strikes a decent balance between
academic respectability and practical content in the form of theory
supported by research that can be applied on the job. (Caveat: I'm on
the editorial board, so I'm biased. <g> But the journal has changed
tremendously for the better over the past 5 years since George Hayhoe
took over as editor.)
WEBWORKS FINALDRAFT - EDIT AND REVIEW, REDEFINED
Accelerate the document lifecycle with full online discussions and unique feedback-management capabilities. Unlimited, efficient reviews for Word
and FrameMaker authors. Live, online demo: http://www.webworks.com/techwr-l
Doc-To-Help 7.5 Professional: New version with new features, improved performance and reliability, plus much more! Download your free trial today at www.componentone.com/techwrlfeb.
---
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- techwr-l -dot- com
Send administrative questions to lisa -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit http://www.techwr-l.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.
