Re: help system in pdf files

[magk -at- mindspring -dot- com]

My current client (a small start up) wants a context-sensitive help system that is basically a series of pdf files. Click on the help button and a pdf file displays for that screen. He (the CTO of this company) stated that a TOC, Index, and search tabs are "not important for IT staff." The software is used by sophisticated system administrators.

Does anyone have any ideas as to how I can make this work? My source file is in MS Word. If possible, I would like to single source this.
I'm wondering if there is any way to have the screens link to topics in the pdf file.

Thanks,
Gina

-----Original Message-----
>From: techwr-l-request -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>Sent: Jul 3, 2007 2:00 AM
>To: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>Subject: TECHWR-L Digest, Vol 21, Issue 1
>
>Send TECHWR-L mailing list submissions to
>	techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>
>To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>	http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/listinfo/techwr-l
>or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>	techwr-l-request -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>
>You can reach the person managing the list at
>	techwr-l-owner -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>
>When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>than "Re: Contents of TECHWR-L digest..."
>
>
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>Create HTML or Microsoft Word content and convert to Help file formats or 
>printed documentation. Features include support for Windows Vista & 2007 
>Microsoft Office, team authoring, plus more.
>http://www.DocToHelp.com/TechwrlList
>
>True single source, conditional content, PDF export, modular help.
>Help & Manual is the most powerful authoring tool for technical
>documentation. Boost your productivity! http://www.helpandmanual.com 
>
>---
>
>
>Today's Topics:
>
>   1. Re: Most illogical documentation (Edwin Skau)
>   2. FWD: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>      (TECHWR-L Administrator)
>   3. RE: Most illogical documentation (Dori Green)
>   4. RE: Most illogical documentation (Dori Green)
>   5. Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do? (Geoff Hart)
>   6. RE: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do (James Barrow)
>   7. Re: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>      (Pro TechWriter)
>   8. Re: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do (Gene Kim-Eng)
>   9. RE: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>      (Bonnie Granat)
>  10. Re: FWD: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>      (Chris Borokowski)
>  11. RE: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>      (Gilbert, Brian)
>  12. Re: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>      (Pro TechWriter)
>  13. Re: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>      (Pro TechWriter)
>  14. Re: FWD: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>      (John Posada)
>  15. RE: FWD: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>      (Condo, Candis)
>  16. Re: FWD: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>      (Chris Borokowski)
>  17. Re: FWD: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>      (Ned Bedinger)
>  18. Re: FWD: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>      (John Posada)
>  19. Re: FWD: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>      (Gene Kim-Eng)
>  20. RE: Most illogical documentation (Ladonna Weeks)
>  21. Re: Most illogical documentation (Gene Kim-Eng)
>  22. 40-hour weeks (was Re: FWD: Lack...) (Mary Arrotti)
>  23. Re: 40-hour weeks (was Re: FWD: Lack...) (Pro TechWriter)
>  24. Re: 40-hour weeks (was Re: FWD: Lack...) (Chris Borokowski)
>  25. Re: 40-hour weeks (was Re: FWD: Lack...) (John Posada)
>  26. 40-hour weeks (was Re: FWD: Lack...) (Geoff Hart)
>  27. Re: 40-hour weeks (was Re: FWD: Lack...) (Mary Arrotti)
>  28. Spell-checking text entered in MS Word forms? (DonaLuisa)
>  29. Re: 40-hour weeks (was Re: FWD: Lack...) (Chris Borokowski)
>  30. RE: Spell-checking text entered in MS Word forms?
>      (Steve Cavanaugh)
>  31. Re: FWD: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>      (Suzette Leeming)
>  32. RE: 40-hour weeks (was Re: FWD: Lack...)
>      (richard -dot- melanson -at- us -dot- tel -dot- com)
>  33. RE: 40-hour weeks (was Re: FWD: Lack...)
>      (richard -dot- melanson -at- us -dot- tel -dot- com)
>  34. RE: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do (Lauren)
>  35. RE: FWD: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do (Lauren)
>  36. RE: 40-hour weeks (was Re: FWD: Lack...) (Melissa Nelson)
>  37. RE: 40-hour weeks (was Re: FWD: Lack...) ( Connie Giordano )
>  38. RE: FWD: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>      (Dan Goldstein)
>  39. Re: FWD: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>      (Gene Kim-Eng)
>  40. RE: Spell-checking text entered in MS Word forms?
>      (Chinell, David F (GE Indust, Security))
>  41. RE: FWD: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>      (Chris Borokowski)
>  42. RE: Spell-checking text entered in MS Word forms? (Lauren)
>  43. RE: 40-hour weeks (was Re: FWD: Lack...) (Lauren)
>  44. Re: FWD: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>      (Gene Kim-Eng)
>  45. RE: Spell-checking text entered in MS Word forms? (DonaLuisa)
>  46. Re: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do (Mike Starr)
>  47. RE: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do (Lauren)
>  48. Re: 40-hour weeks (was Re: FWD: Lack...) (Ned Bedinger)
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Message: 1
>Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 00:52:48 +0530
>From: "Edwin Skau" <eddy -dot- skau -at- gmail -dot- com>
>Subject: Re: Most illogical documentation
>To: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>Message-ID:
>	<a5fe7370707011222n3f5169b7j31fe9c0c75fa14f3 -at- mail -dot- gmail -dot- com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
>One of my writers once wrote the documentation for a service management
>system (IN) in the telecom domain. Installing the system was a complicated
>and cumbersome affair, and it took a little over a couple of months before
>we had a procedure that worked fairly successfully.
>
>The engineering manager insisted that the installation procedure should be
>included in online help.
>
>We fought long and hard over the decision, and although the engineering
>folks eventually agreed it was  not the smartest idea in the world,  they
>decided to go that way.  We also shipped a PDF document.
>
>So after you installed the service management system, you could go into
>online help and read about how to do it right.
>
>Edwin
>
>P.S. And how about those trouble-shooting guides that just tell you to call
>up tech support...?
>
>
>
>
>On 6/30/07, Lauren <lt34 -at- csus -dot- edu> wrote:
>>
>> What part of the 143 pages did you find you find troublesome?  Oh, wait.
>> Was it the 143 pages?  One of the IRS standards is "simpler forms."  Maybe
>> a
>> standard should be simpler instructions.
>>
>> Lauren
>>
>>
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: techwr-l-bounces+lt34=csus -dot- edu -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>> > [mailto:techwr-l-bounces+lt34=csus -dot- edu -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com] On
>> > Behalf Of Chris Borokowski
>> > Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 2:30 PM
>> > To: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>> > Subject: RE: Most illogical documentation
>> >
>> >
>> > http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/i1040.pdf
>> >
>> > The people who work there are often wonderful, but I sense some
>> > invisible force of unspeakable evil crafted these instructions.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > http://technical-writing.dionysius.com/
>> > technical writing | consulting | development
>> >
>> >
>>
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>
>> Create HTML or Microsoft Word content and convert to Help file formats or
>> printed documentation. Features include support for Windows Vista & 2007
>> Microsoft Office, team authoring, plus more.
>> http://www.DocToHelp.com/TechwrlList
>>
>> True single source, conditional content, PDF export, modular help.
>> Help & Manual is the most powerful authoring tool for technical
>> documentation. Boost your productivity! http://www.helpandmanual.com
>>
>> ---
>> You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as eddy -dot- skau -at- gmail -dot- com -dot- 
>>
>> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
>> techwr-l-unsubscribe -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>> or visit
>> http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/options/techwr-l/eddy.skau%40gmail.com
>>
>>
>> To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr-l-join -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>>
>> Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-  Visit
>> http://www.techwr-l.com/ for more resources and info.
>>
>>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 2
>Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 06:28:18 -0600
>From: TECHWR-L Administrator <admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com>
>Subject: FWD: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>To: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>Message-ID: <4688EF62 -dot- 6070503 -at- techwr-l -dot- com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
>
>Forwarded anonymously on request. Please respond on list--
>no responses will be privately forwarded. TECHWR-L Admin
>&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
>
>I manage 10 writers. We are largely geographically dispersed
>and, with the exception of 2 writers, all have less than 2
>years with the company (I have just over 2 years). I'm building
>this group from a collection of people who work for the same
>company into a team that consistently produces quality
>information. It's been a long and hard 2 years but we've made
>a lot of progress. We just won a bunch of awards at the local
>STC competition and I'm very proud.
>
>Tom was assigned to my department 8 months ago and is physically
>in my building. He's been with the company for 10 years and
>has the most senior writing title available at the company. In
>the 10 years, he's worked as a course developer in a group that
>had no leadership until just before he transferred out to be the
>engineering writer. As the engineering writer, he wrote (?)
>technical material that went on the support site and did other
>writing. Reading his work from both times, I suspect strongly he
>gathered what others wrote and put it all together into one place.
>
>Tom spent 3 months training on our process, our writing style and
>guidelines, and so on. At the end of that time, he assured me he
>understood what, why, and how we were doing what we do. He met with
>me and my boss and said he felt ready. So I started giving him
>assignments appropriate to his job title.
>
>He's not flourishing. Tom violates our process, our writing
>guidelines, and our style guide. His writing is weak - passive
>voice and not user-focused. He works 40 hours a week in a department
>where we all work 45+ hours a week. He doesn't take ownership of his
>projects and drive them the way we expect a most senior level writer
>to do.
>
>This would all seem to be a training issue except in his self
>evaluation, he gave himself Greatly Exceeds (5) in almost all
>areas. He said he's the Go To Guy for tools (he's weak in our
>tools), he listed writing one Work Procedure as a big deal (the
>other writers in the same year wrote 6 to 10 each), and so on.
>He wants to be a team lead. The disconnect is serious. He was
>shocked at my review (barely 3 and backed by my boss), as he was
>rated at a 5 in the past years. By people who knew nothing
>about professional technical writing.
>
>He's not worked in a professional group of writers before and
>never under leadership with process and procedure. Tom says he
>understands our process and then continues to do what things how
>he's used to. It looks passive aggressive, but I'm not sure that's
>it. He seems to genuinely want to do it right but it's not
>happening. There's a disconnect in his head between what
>he says he knows and what he does. Tom thinks they map and they don't.
>
>Recent example: He previously ignored our process and released
>several manuals and help that had not gone thru peer or production
>reviews and then was shocked I was upset. For his current project,
>Tom decided he was done and we went thru the release process (which
>was good). I found out at a senior staff meeting this week that as
>far as he knows, the software hasn't even been compiled yet. He
>hasn't tested the docs or the help in the build. He's declared the
>docs gold and issued an errata because a reviewer found a
>problem in the docs after he locked down the docs. Except as far
>as he knows, he says, there is no build and he hasn't tested the help
>or the docs. Meaning he CAN'T lock the docs down yet. And he seems
>genuinely puzzled why I'm upset.
>
>Tom isn't able to generalize from data points. This is a known issue
>with him - my boss (who has worked at the company for 7 years) had
>expressed frustration with him that he lacks the ability to abstract.
>And I think this is part of the problem as well. The example above
>is a good example of not generalizing - he got in trouble for not
>following the peer and production review process so this time he did
>those. Except he did them maybe as much as 3 weeks too early.
>
>I've coached, I've raised my voice, I've talked to him. I'm at
>wits end - I don't know what to do next. Every time we talk about
>what he's done, he is shocked to discover that he did it wrong and
>promises to not do it again. And he doesn't do that specific thing
>again but he does the general class of things again because he can't
>abstract. I don't know how to get thru to him.
>
>Functionally, he's a baby writer, except he's paid and titled at
>the most senior level in the company. He doesn't know our technology
>(although people think he does because he's been here so long) and
>his writing is fairly weak. I can't match him with a less senior
>writer for buddy learning because most of my other writers are
>technically less senior than him. I can't let him team lead my new
>writer to teach him our way (the best way to learn a subject may be
>to teach it) because he could screw the new writer up badly and we
>don't have time to unlearn the new writer.
>
>I'm sorry this is so long. I'm looking for ideas because I'm flat
>out. Tom is easy going and well liked in the company. But for some
>reason, I can't get thru to him. I'm beginning to think this is a
>failure of my management.
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 3
>Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 08:38:34 -0400
>From: "Dori Green" <dgreen -at- associatedbrands -dot- com>
>Subject: RE: Most illogical documentation
>To: <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
>Message-ID:
>	<91D1801A72C88D47AA06165D5A7974AA986D27 -at- smailm -dot- associatedbrands -dot- com>
>Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>Richard Combs wrote:
>
>I once worked at a place where you weren't allowed to call IT, you had
>to request help via email. 
>
>****************
>
>Same here.  We have an IT guy on-site but we can't even ask him if we can ask him our question or if we need to e-mail it to the anonymous "IT" address.  He won't answer, then we get an e-mail scolding us for asking him instead of sending the e-mail to IT.  They have all of these intricate procedures but have not distributed them (or made them available) to anybody else.
>
>Yes, boys and girls, I am living in Shelfware Land and they don't want to change.  This is going to be an ongoing story.
>
>Supposedly the plan in IT is to boost efficiency by having requests go to the central IT mailbox so the job can be grabbed by the first available member of the 5-man IT team serving Toronto and Medina.  Makes sense, sorta.
>
>It would be nice if they'd sign a name to their e-mails, though.  It gives a really creepy feeling that Colossus is among us when they all sign their responses "IT Department".
>
>Sigh, weirder things have happened.  Charles Forbin is alive and well and soapy.  (Actor Hans Gudegast/Eric Braeden is still a main character on a soap opera.)
>
>Dori Green
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 4
>Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 08:45:14 -0400
>From: "Dori Green" <dgreen -at- associatedbrands -dot- com>
>Subject: RE: Most illogical documentation
>To: <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
>Message-ID:
>	<91D1801A72C88D47AA06165D5A7974AA986D28 -at- smailm -dot- associatedbrands -dot- com>
>Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>Nancy Allison wrote:
>
>I am also quite fond of the warnining that is placed at the end of the procedure. As in--after you've finished making your electrical connections--"WARNING! Connect the yellow connector first, to minimize the danger of electrocution."
>
>
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>That's exactly why the MIL STD for placement of warnings in techdocs was (still is?) _before_ the step containing the hazard.  Notes go after, cautions (possible hazard to equipment or product) and warnings (possible hazard to people) go before.
>
>I think this came from the Navy.  Lost too many midshipmen and it's hard to replace a good electrician in the middle of the ocean.  At least that's what my father the Lt. J-G told me.  But he also told people that the garage sale painting in the living room was the family castle on the Rhine, and that our family name meant "Big Wind Over the Alps".
>
>Dori Green
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 5
>Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 09:32:44 -0400
>From: Geoff Hart <ghart -at- videotron -dot- ca>
>Subject: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do?
>To: TECHWR-L <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
>Message-ID: <A9602942-E631-45C6-85FB-9DD19671660E -at- videotron -dot- ca>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
>
>The perpetually stressed Anonymous, who historically has an  
>astounding range of problems compared with the rest of us <g>,  
>reports a serious problem with someone promoted to the position of  
>senior writer in another department, and then transferred into Anon's  
>department -- and who now proves to be unable to do the work, or to  
>understand what they're doing wrong despite repeated explanations.  
>(Many details snipped.) Anon, Anon. asks: <<Tom says he understands  
>our process and then continues to do what things how he's used to. It  
>looks passive aggressive, but I'm not sure that's it. He seems to  
>genuinely want to do it right but it's not happening. There's a  
>disconnect in his head between what he says he knows and what he  
>does. Tom thinks they map and they don't... I can't get thru to him.  
>I'm beginning to think this is a failure of my management.>>
>
>Communication always takes two parties for success: if you're  
>failing, then clearly he must share some of the responsibility for  
>the failure too. From your description, it seems like you're being  
>more than reasonable and helpful and doing your absolute best to make  
>the problem clear and help Tom fix it. That tells me the vast  
>majority of the responsibility is Tom's, not yours.
>
>Sometimes, what it comes down to is that the person simply won't work  
>in the current position, and you have to do the difficult thing of  
>firing them, or moving them elsewhere where they can succeed. To do  
>that, you've got to do due diligence to prove your point. A few  
>thoughts on how you should do this: http://www.geoff-hart.com/ 
>resources/2002/employees.htm
>
>Of course, you also note: <<As the engineering writer, he wrote (?)  
>technical material that went on the support site and did other  
>writing. Reading his work from both times, I suspect strongly he  
>gathered what others wrote and put it all together into one place.>>
>
>Sometimes it's possible to ignore a bunch of weaknesses and instead  
>focus on one strength. For example, I talk a good line about graphics  
>(I understand it thoroughly), but lack the physical or mental skills  
>to actually draw. But I can work with a graphics person to produce  
>kickass graphics because I know the techniques and I know what needs  
>to be done and why -- even if I can't do it myself. If you feel that  
>Tom did a great job of gathering material together (i.e., research  
>and organization), could you make that his primary job, and leave the  
>writing to those who can write? By doing this work, he takes some of  
>the burden off others and lets them focus on what they're good at,  
>namely the writing that Tom can't do.
>
>If not... well, sometimes the only solution really is to fire the  
>employee or move them elsewhere, hard though that may be.
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------
>-- Geoff Hart
>ghart -at- videotron -dot- ca / geoffhart -at- mac -dot- com
>www.geoff-hart.com
>--------------------------------------------------
>***Now available***  _Effective onscreen editing_
>(http://www.geoff-hart.com/home/onscreen-book.htm)
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 6
>Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 07:10:16 -0700
>From: "James Barrow" <vrfour -at- verizon -dot- net>
>Subject: RE: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>To: <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
>Message-ID: <001101c7bcb2$b8357460$6501a8c0 -at- us -dot- deloitte -dot- com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
>Tom has to go.
>
>Sit him down, tell him why, wish him well, wave goodbye.  
>
>If you want to be warm and fuzzy about it, then put him on a 30-day
>probation and list the things that he will be measured against (process,
>writing guidelines, style guide, etc.).  Keep a daily journal of the things
>that he does that cost you and the company time to repair (if he releases
>something prematurely and you have to do damage control).
>
>IMHO, you're not flat out of ideas, you're flat out of ways to hold his hand
>and still get him to be independently productive.
>
>Put the burden on Tom, not you.
>
>- Jim
>
>-----Original Message-----
>On Behalf Of TECHWR-L Administrator
>Forwarded anonymously on request. 
>[]
>Tom was assigned to my department 8 months ago and is physically
>in my building.
>[]
>He's not flourishing. Tom violates our process, our writing
>guidelines, and our style guide. His writing is weak - passive
>voice and not user-focused. He works 40 hours a week in a department
>where we all work 45+ hours a week. He doesn't take ownership of his
>projects and drive them the way we expect a most senior level writer
>to do.
>[]
>I'm sorry this is so long. I'm looking for ideas because I'm flat
>out. Tom is easy going and well liked in the company. But for some
>reason, I can't get thru to him. I'm beginning to think this is a
>failure of my management.
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 7
>Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 10:17:11 -0400
>From: "Pro TechWriter" <pro -dot- techwriter -at- gmail -dot- com>
>Subject: Re: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>Cc: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>Message-ID:
>	<6b35bddb0707020717u650aa943s2ac36698d25c8b0d -at- mail -dot- gmail -dot- com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
>Hello Anon:
>
>This is not a problem with your management style. This is a problem with an
>employee who will not follow your rules or process.
>
>I felt the same way when I managed this very person. (Or they sound very
>much the same, so much so that it is eerie.)
>
>There are some people who cannot seem to follow a process or work as part of
>a team. These folks do best with a small, one-writer company kind of job.
>
>In the meantime, here is my advice, and it's worth what you paid for it:
>free :-). I will say, though, that I started managing people in various
>positions in the early 70's. I've had lots of training to manage
>effectively, and have managed a group about the size of yours. That's when I
>had the same issues in my group, with one addition: the writer that reported
>to me plagarized another vendor's documentation, and then put his name on
>it. We narrowly avoided being sued by the vendor. It was bad.
>
>   1. If you have not started, begin documenting all the issues you have
>   had with the writer, and do it right now. You will need this information to
>   begin the process to let him go if he does not improve.
>   2. Pay *close* attention to the rest of your team. How is their
>   morale? Are they noticing that someone who makes more and is at a higher
>   level is "getting away" with not following process? This, by far, should be
>   your biggest concern. You cannot allow one person in the department to run
>   amok with no concern for the "rules" that the rest of you must follow. It
>   will destroy the team's morale.
>   3. Go to HR and discuss your company's procedures for warning and
>   firing personnel.
>   4. Time for the first warning. List all of the areas that must be
>   improved, and exactly what must be done to do so. (Such as, have appropriate
>   reviews before releasing documentation.) Meet with the writer. If you can
>   have your department head or someone from HR attend with you, do it. Do
>   *not* do this alone. You need a witness. During the meeting, go over each
>   item point by point, and state what you want the writer to do to correct it,
>   and the time period. Then talk about the consequences. (Correct this within
>   30, 60 or 90 days, or you will be let go.) Explain that he has choices, but
>   these are the consequences of the choices. The first consequence could be a
>   demotion, if you want to give him an extra chance.
>   5. You will need to team with this writer yourself. You can't ask
>   another writer to do it, because you are the one who has authority over him.
>   He should go through you for all work products, period.
>   6. If he does not improve in the amount of time alloted, let him go!
>   One person cannot and should not be able to disrupt a whole department.
>
>I know this sounds harsh, but I am sure that your company has procedures in
>place to do this. If you want to keep your good writers, and your sanity,
>you must apply standards and requirements fairly and consistenly, and all
>must adhere to them. He cannot be an exception.
>
>Good luck. This is the "not" fun part of being a manager. You may still be
>able to get a decent employee out of this, but I don't think so, sorry to
>say.
>
>PT
>
>
>
>-- 
>PT
>pro -dot- techwriter -at- gmail -dot- com
>I'm a Technical Technical Writer!
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 8
>Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 08:21:10 -0700
>From: "Gene Kim-Eng" <techwr -at- genek -dot- com>
>Subject: Re: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>To: <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
>Message-ID: <002201c7bcbc$9f6af950$8700a8c0 -at- genekoptx2>
>Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
>	reply-type=original
>
>Unfortunately, for the most part it is.  You've discussed Tom's
>shortcomings with him previously, but then you gave him a 
>review rating of 3, which in most companies means "meets 
>expectations" *for the employee's current position.*  Having
>just officially declared that Tom's performance meets all the
>expectations for his senior writing position, you must now
>throw out everything you have said to him in the past about
>his shortcomings and start the performance documentation/
>improvement process from the beginning the next time he 
>fouls up (which, from your description probably won't be 
>very long).   See Pro Techwriter's response for a description 
>of a possible improvement/poor performance documentation 
>process, but in your case move Step 3, Go to HR, up to 
>Step 1.
>
>Gene Kim-Eng
>
>
>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: "TECHWR-L Administrator" <admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com>
>> He wants to be a team lead. The disconnect is serious. He was
>> shocked at my review (barely 3 and backed by my boss), as he was
>> rated at a 5 in the past years. By people who knew nothing
>> about professional technical writing.
>
>> I'm sorry this is so long. I'm looking for ideas because I'm flat
>> out. Tom is easy going and well liked in the company. But for some
>> reason, I can't get thru to him. I'm beginning to think this is a
>> failure of my management.
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 9
>Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 11:26:37 -0400
>From: "Bonnie Granat" <bgranat -at- granatedit -dot- com>
>Subject: RE: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>To: "'TECHWR-L Administrator'" <admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com>,
>	<techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
>Message-ID: <00ce01c7bcbd$6403cd00$1cb80340 -at- GranatEditOne>
>Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="us-ascii"
>
>It does appear that something is amiss with a management process that allows
>a known inferior writer to release anything on his or her own.
>
>Don't you guys use project schedules and supervision?
>
>Bonnie Granat
>http://www.GranatEdit.com
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: 
>> techwr-l-bounces+bgranat=granatedit -dot- com -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com 
>> [mailto:techwr-l-bounces+bgranat=granatedit -dot- com -at- lists -dot- techwr-l
>> .com] On Behalf Of TECHWR-L Administrator
>> Sent: Monday, July 02, 2007 8:28 AM
>> To: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>> Subject: FWD: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>> he says he knows and what he does. Tom thinks they map and they don't.
>> 
>> Recent example: He previously ignored our process and released
>> several manuals and help that had not gone thru peer or production
>> reviews and then was shocked I was upset. For his current project,
>> Tom decided he was done and we went thru the release process (which
>> was good). I found out at a senior staff meeting this week that as
>> far as he knows, the software hasn't even been compiled yet. He
>> hasn't tested the docs or the help in the build. He's declared the
>> docs gold and issued an errata because a reviewer found a
>> problem in the docs after he locked down the docs. Except as far
>> as he knows, he says, there is no build and he hasn't tested the help
>> or the docs. Meaning he CAN'T lock the docs down yet. And he seems
>> genuinely puzzled why I'm upset.
>> 
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 10
>Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 08:27:00 -0700 (PDT)
>From: Chris Borokowski <athloi -at- yahoo -dot- com>
>Subject: Re: FWD: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>To: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>Message-ID: <817125 -dot- 61224 -dot- qm -at- web57802 -dot- mail -dot- re3 -dot- yahoo -dot- com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
>Everywhere I have worked, I have found that those who work more than 40
>hours a week are doing something less efficiently than they should.
>
>As far as "Tom" goes, the answer is pretty clear: he's not a fit. Good
>luck.
>
>--- TECHWR-L Administrator <admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com> wrote:
>
>> He works 40 hours a week in a department
>> where we all work 45+ hours a week. 
>
>
>http://technical-writing.dionysius.com/
>technical writing | consulting | development
>
>
>       
>____________________________________________________________________________________
>Get the free Yahoo! toolbar and rest assured with the added security of spyware protection.
>http://new.toolbar.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/norton/index.php
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 11
>Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 10:41:02 -0500
>From: "Gilbert, Brian" <BGILBER -at- transunion -dot- com>
>Subject: RE: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>To: <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
>Message-ID:
>	<F90464FDBE4D4042A8A05A9D157CDD2C8FABA3 -at- CHI4EVS05 -dot- corp -dot- transunion -dot- com>
>Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="us-ascii"
>
> 
>
>I agree with just about everything Pro TechWriter states.  Document
>issues, pay attention to your team, talk to HR, team with writer
>yourself, and follow up.
>
> 
>
>One thing that I do a little differently is the first warning.  I agree
>that you need to meet with the writer and meet with someone else
>present.  Be careful not to use generalizations without specifics to
>back it up.  Discuss the issues/problems that you have observed. Talk
>about the possible and real consequences of those issues or ask him to
>list some of the consequences of those issues and supplement as needed.
>Ask him to help you come up with a plan of action to avoid those issues.
>Make sure that it's not just a "I'll follow the process next time," but
>there are specific observable steps such as 
>
> 
>
>"I will:
>
>Create a checklist of things that I specifically need to do to close out
>each project
>
>Give you the list within two business days
>
>Check each item on the list as they are accomplished
>
>Give you the list before I close the project"
>
> 
>
>If he can't come up with the steps or if you need something else to
>happen, make sure that is added to the plan. Schedule a follow-up
>meeting to discuss his progress. After that, talk about the consequences
>of not following the action items.  It is also important to document the
>meeting and send him a copy.
>
> 
>
>One other thing...keep samples of his work and copies of emails (yours,
>his, customers, etc.).  If there are issues later on, you need to make
>sure you have everything documented.
>
> 
>
>Note: Be careful about the reviews.  Grade inflation happens (to me a 3
>means meets expectations).  This can get you into trouble later on.  If
>he meets expectations, why is he being let go (if you have to go that
>far).
>
> 
>
> 
>
>-----Original Message-----
>Subject: Re: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>
><snip>
>
>   4. Time for the first warning. List all of the areas that must be
>improved, and exactly what must be done to do so. (Such as, have
>appropriate reviews before releasing documentation.) Meet with the
>writer. If you can have your department head or someone from HR attend
>with you, do it. Do *not* do this alone. You need a witness. During the
>meeting, go over each item point by point, and state what you want the
>writer to do to correct it, and the time period. Then talk about the
>consequences. (Correct this within 30, 60 or 90 days, or you will be let
>go.) Explain that he has choices, but these are the consequences of the
>choices. The first consequence could be a demotion, if you want to give
>him an extra chance.
>
></snip>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 12
>Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 12:20:15 -0400
>From: "Pro TechWriter" <pro -dot- techwriter -at- gmail -dot- com>
>Subject: Re: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>To: "Gilbert, Brian" <BGILBER -at- transunion -dot- com>
>Cc: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>Message-ID:
>	<6b35bddb0707020920v7ae70302k5362db5fc26489d2 -at- mail -dot- gmail -dot- com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
>Very good. Gilbert, do you ask the person to sign the "I will" statement?
>
>I am definitely going to hang on to these tips, as they add another level of
>detail that is good to have.
>The "personal responsibility" angle looks like it would be effective.
>
>Thanks Gilbert!
>PT
>
>
>On 7/2/07, Gilbert, Brian <BGILBER -at- transunion -dot- com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> snip....
>
>
>
>
>One thing that I do a little differently is the first warning.  I agree
>> that you need to meet with the writer and meet with someone else
>> present.  Be careful not to use generalizations without specifics to
>> back it up.  Discuss the issues/problems that you have observed. Talk
>> about the possible and real consequences of those issues or ask him to
>> list some of the consequences of those issues and supplement as needed.
>> Ask him to help you come up with a plan of action to avoid those issues.
>> Make sure that it's not just a "I'll follow the process next time," but
>> there are specific observable steps such as
>>
>>
>> "I will:
>>
>> Create a checklist of things that I specifically need to do to close out
>> each project
>>
>> Give you the list within two business days
>>
>> Check each item on the list as they are accomplished
>>
>> Give you the list before I close the project"
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> Subject: Re: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>> --
>> PT
>> pro -dot- techwriter -at- gmail -dot- com
>> I'm a Technical Technical Writer!
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 13
>Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 12:23:30 -0400
>From: "Pro TechWriter" <pro -dot- techwriter -at- gmail -dot- com>
>Subject: Re: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>To: "Gene Kim-Eng" <techwr -at- genek -dot- com>
>Cc: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>Message-ID:
>	<6b35bddb0707020923m2a6858eak9bf4951ca929fd66 -at- mail -dot- gmail -dot- com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
>I missed the "3" on the performance review part. (My apologies.) Gene is
>right, that does add another level of difficulty with your task at hand, and
>I agree. Move step 3 to step 1, go to HR.
>
>HTH,
>PT
>
>
>On 7/2/07, Gene Kim-Eng <techwr -at- genek -dot- com> wrote:
>>
>> Unfortunately, for the most part it is.  You've discussed Tom's
>> shortcomings with him previously, but then you gave him a
>> review rating of 3, which in most companies means "meets
>> expectations" *for the employee's current position.*  Having
>> just officially declared that Tom's performance meets all the
>> expectations for his senior writing position, you must now
>> throw out everything you have said to him in the past about
>> his shortcomings and start the performance documentation/
>> improvement process from the beginning the next time he
>> fouls up (which, from your description probably won't be
>> very long).   See Pro Techwriter's response for a description
>> of a possible improvement/poor performance documentation
>> process, but in your case move Step 3, Go to HR, up to
>> Step 1.
>>
>> Gene Kim-Eng
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "TECHWR-L Administrator" <admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com>
>> > He wants to be a team lead. The disconnect is serious. He was
>> > shocked at my review (barely 3 and backed by my boss), as he was
>> > rated at a 5 in the past years. By people who knew nothing
>> > about professional technical writing.
>>
>> > I'm sorry this is so long. I'm looking for ideas because I'm flat
>> > out. Tom is easy going and well liked in the company. But for some
>> > reason, I can't get thru to him. I'm beginning to think this is a
>> > failure of my management.
>>
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>
>> Create HTML or Microsoft Word content and convert to Help file formats or
>> printed documentation. Features include support for Windows Vista & 2007
>> Microsoft Office, team authoring, plus more.
>> http://www.DocToHelp.com/TechwrlList<http://www.doctohelp.com/TechwrlList>
>>
>> True single source, conditional content, PDF export, modular help.
>> Help & Manual is the most powerful authoring tool for technical
>> documentation. Boost your productivity! http://www.helpandmanual.com
>>
>> ---
>> You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as pro -dot- techwriter -at- gmail -dot- com -dot- 
>>
>> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
>> techwr-l-unsubscribe -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>> or visit http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/options/techwr-l/pro.techwriter%40gmail.com
>>
>>
>>
>> To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr-l-join -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>>
>> Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com . Visit
>> http://www.techwr-l.com/ for more resources and info.
>>
>>
>
>
>-- 
>PT
>pro -dot- techwriter -at- gmail -dot- com
>I'm a Technical Technical Writer!
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 14
>Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 10:28:31 -0700 (PDT)
>From: John Posada <jposada01 -at- yahoo -dot- com>
>Subject: Re: FWD: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>To: Chris Borokowski <athloi -at- yahoo -dot- com>, techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>Message-ID: <784244 -dot- 37853 -dot- qm -at- web35414 -dot- mail -dot- mud -dot- yahoo -dot- com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ascii
>
>>Everywhere I have worked, I have found that those who work more than 40
>>hours a week are doing something less efficiently than they should.
>
>Chris...that's a very small, limited, short-sighted, condesending  opinion for a condition that can have any number of legitimate answers. It also sounds like it's coming from someone who believes that anyone who doesn't conduct their life the exact same way is obviously experiencing a reduced quality of life.
>
>For the most part, except for maybe the last week or two before a deadline 2-3 times a year, I get done what I have to get done in 40 hours or less. However, I want to do more than that. I want to be better than that. I don't have a problem putting in another 10 hours or more per week addressing new programs, learning new stuff, reworking existing stuff. It makes ME happy. 
>
>I also don't form an opinion on those who hit the shutdown button at 5:03pm either unless they first verbalize the opinion that working more than 40 hours is a symptom of poor work habits.
>
>To the uninformed, I appear to be here at 8:45am and leave at 7pm or 8pm working like a dog. I also live 9 minutes from the office, so when I leave at 7:30pm, I'm getting home about the same time as those who leave at 5:30 and have to commute two hours, not an unknown condition around here.
>
>John Posada
>Senior Technical Writer
> 
>"They say everyone needs goals. Mine is to live forever.
>So far, so good."
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 15
>Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 10:46:09 -0700
>From: "Condo, Candis" <ccondo -at- c-cor -dot- com>
>Subject: RE: FWD: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>To: "John Posada" <jposada01 -at- yahoo -dot- com>, "Chris Borokowski"
>	<athloi -at- yahoo -dot- com>,	<techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
>Message-ID:
>	<5AEB1CFE62CC7A47B884E02EAE23C644496E31 -at- beomail3 -dot- NTSCD -dot- C-COR -dot- com>
>Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="us-ascii"
>
>I could not agree MORE, John. Yup, I know that many of the reasons that
>apply to others do not apply to me (I'm happily single and child-free --
>unless you count my fur-kids) and I too enjoy making the doc better. It
>helps that I live less than two miles from the office and that I have a
>great home office and a company-provided laptop. I am currently porting
>our Frame files to Flare 2.5 and it's been a ton of work. Yes, I work
>more than 40 hours a week. Yes, I do have a life (very active in canine
>rescue) but I like what I do for a living.
>
>Oh, it helps that I don't watch television.
>
>So, I won't criticize those walking out the door at 5:03 but I would
>appreciate it if you kept your snide remarks ("You need to get a life."
>Or "Don't ever love a company because it never loves you back.") to
>yourselves as you are walking out that door.
>
>Thanks. I feel a lot better now.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Candis L. Condo
>
>P.S. I sneak the dog into my cube at night. Don't tell anyone.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: techwr-l-bounces+ccondo=c-cor -dot- com -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>[mailto:techwr-l-bounces+ccondo=c-cor -dot- com -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com] On Behalf
>Of John Posada
>Sent: Monday, July 02, 2007 10:29 AM
>To: Chris Borokowski; techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>Subject: Re: FWD: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>
>>Everywhere I have worked, I have found that those who work more than 40
>>hours a week are doing something less efficiently than they should.
>
>Chris...that's a very small, limited, short-sighted, condesending
>opinion for a condition that can have any number of legitimate answers.
>It also sounds like it's coming from someone who believes that anyone
>who doesn't conduct their life the exact same way is obviously
>experiencing a reduced quality of life.
>
>For the most part, except for maybe the last week or two before a
>deadline 2-3 times a year, I get done what I have to get done in 40
>hours or less. However, I want to do more than that. I want to be better
>than that. I don't have a problem putting in another 10 hours or more
>per week addressing new programs, learning new stuff, reworking existing
>stuff. It makes ME happy. 
>
>I also don't form an opinion on those who hit the shutdown button at
>5:03pm either unless they first verbalize the opinion that working more
>than 40 hours is a symptom of poor work habits.
>
>To the uninformed, I appear to be here at 8:45am and leave at 7pm or 8pm
>working like a dog. I also live 9 minutes from the office, so when I
>leave at 7:30pm, I'm getting home about the same time as those who leave
>at 5:30 and have to commute two hours, not an unknown condition around
>here.
>
>John Posada
>Senior Technical Writer
> 
>"They say everyone needs goals. Mine is to live forever.
>So far, so good."
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>Create HTML or Microsoft Word content and convert to Help file formats
>or 
>printed documentation. Features include support for Windows Vista & 2007
>
>Microsoft Office, team authoring, plus more.
>http://www.DocToHelp.com/TechwrlList
>
>True single source, conditional content, PDF export, modular help.
>Help & Manual is the most powerful authoring tool for technical
>documentation. Boost your productivity! http://www.helpandmanual.com
>
>---
>You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as ccondo -at- c-cor -dot- com -dot- 
>
>To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
>techwr-l-unsubscribe -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>or visit
>http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/options/techwr-l/ccondo%40c-cor.com
>
>
>To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr-l-join -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>
>Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-  Visit
>http://www.techwr-l.com/ for more resources and info.
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 16
>Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 10:57:19 -0700 (PDT)
>From: Chris Borokowski <athloi -at- yahoo -dot- com>
>Subject: Re: FWD: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>To: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>Message-ID: <674851 -dot- 21302 -dot- qm -at- web57802 -dot- mail -dot- re3 -dot- yahoo -dot- com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
>In my experience, there is a way to get it done in 40 hours a week or
>fewer, and greater workloads than that most commonly lead to burnout
>and less efficiency. I have yet to encounter an exception. There are
>exceptions for emergencies or failures, obviously, but not on a
>day-to-day basis. Note that nothing was said about quality of life.
>
>If your personal sense of self-worth is threatened by that statement so
>much that you have to read into my comments things that were not there,
>it probably has nothing to do with me or what was actually written.
>
>--- John Posada <jposada01 -at- yahoo -dot- com> wrote:
>
>> >Everywhere I have worked, I have found that those who work more than
>> 40
>> >hours a week are doing something less efficiently than they should.
>> 
>> Chris...that's a very small, limited, short-sighted, condesending 
>> opinion for a condition that can have any number of legitimate
>> answers. 
>
>
>http://technical-writing.dionysius.com/
>technical writing | consulting | development
>
>
> 
>____________________________________________________________________________________
>TV dinner still cooling? 
>Check out "Tonight's Picks" on Yahoo! TV.
>http://tv.yahoo.com/
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 17
>Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 11:05:18 -0700
>From: Ned Bedinger <doc -at- edwordsmith -dot- com>
>Subject: Re: FWD: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>To: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>Message-ID: <46893E5E -dot- 5000207 -at- edwordsmith -dot- com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
>
>TECHWR-L Administrator wrote:
>> Forwarded anonymously on request. Please respond on list--
>> no responses will be privately forwarded. TECHWR-L Admin
>> &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
>> 
>> As the engineering writer, he wrote (?)
>> technical material that went on the support site and did other
>> writing. Reading his work from both times, I suspect strongly he
>> gathered what others wrote and put it all together into one place.
>
>You sound like you're stuck with the guy.  Is he the boss's nephew or 
>something?
>
>But, I think it needs saying that even if he is aggregating the work of 
>others, it doesn't bother me much in theory, because let's face it, it 
>is possible to be correct and complete without writing or rewriting even 
>2% of the source material, or winning an STC prize.
>
>What you still need for this air-tight case against continuing to employ 
>Tom is to discuss his work with the roles/people who use it for support. 
>It is a long shot, but maybe he has learned a lot, in ten years with the 
>company, about the company and what works. And maybe he's right that 
>your process is a silly bunch of whirly-twirly make-work. Unless you can 
>make the case against him in these terms, you haven't really finished 
>him off, IMHO.  Most managers would not agree with me about this, however.
>
>But honestly, I do want to say "Congratulations" on the description of 
>the worst employee in the world.  The guy is so-o-o busted. How is it 
>that you don't know that?!
>
>Anyway, I'm sure the advice others have given, about taking your problem 
>to your Human Resources department, will get you all of the official 
>support you need.
>
>HTH,
>
>Ned Bedinger
>doc -at- edwordsmith -dot- com
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 18
>Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 11:03:54 -0700 (PDT)
>From: John Posada <jposada01 -at- yahoo -dot- com>
>Subject: Re: FWD: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>To: Chris Borokowski <athloi -at- yahoo -dot- com>, techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>Message-ID: <254252 -dot- 95437 -dot- qm -at- web35409 -dot- mail -dot- mud -dot- yahoo -dot- com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ascii
>
>>and less efficiency. I have yet to encounter an exception.
>
>Well then it MUST be true...I guess whatever I've been doing the last 20 years, I better cut it out. 
>
>...and my personal worth is just fine
> 
>John Posada
>Senior Technical Writer
> 
>"They say everyone needs goals. Mine is to live forever.
>So far, so good."
>
>
>----- Original Message ----
>From: Chris Borokowski <athloi -at- yahoo -dot- com>
>To: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>Sent: Monday, July 2, 2007 1:57:19 PM
>Subject: Re: FWD: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>
>
>In my experience, there is a way to get it done in 40 hours a week or
>fewer, and greater workloads than that most commonly lead to burnout
>and less efficiency. I have yet to encounter an exception. There are
>exceptions for emergencies or failures, obviously, but not on a
>day-to-day basis. Note that nothing was said about quality of life.
>
>If your personal sense of self-worth is threatened by that statement so
>much that you have to read into my comments things that were not there,
>it probably has nothing to do with me or what was actually written.
>
>--- John Posada <jposada01 -at- yahoo -dot- com> wrote:
>
>> >Everywhere I have worked, I have found that those who work more than
>> 40
>> >hours a week are doing something less efficiently than they should.
>> 
>> Chris...that's a very small, limited, short-sighted, condesending 
>> opinion for a condition that can have any number of legitimate
>> answers. 
> resources and info.
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 19
>Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 11:06:14 -0700
>From: "Gene Kim-Eng" <techwr -at- genek -dot- com>
>Subject: Re: FWD: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>To: <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
>Message-ID: <001301c7bcd3$aeb55830$8700a8c0 -at- genekoptx2>
>Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
>	reply-type=original
>
>45 hours per week works out to one hour per day of 
>"casual overtime."  It's not exactly what I would call 
>sweatshop hours for salaried employees who don't get
>time taken out for doctor appointments and other
>personal business "out of office" hours.  If, OTOH, 
>your company requires you to take PTO hours for
>all of those, it's another matter.  
>
>Gene Kim-Eng
>
>
>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: "Chris Borokowski" <athloi -at- yahoo -dot- com>
>To: <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
>Sent: Monday, July 02, 2007 8:27 AM
>Subject: Re: FWD: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>
>
>> Everywhere I have worked, I have found that those who work more than 40
>> hours a week are doing something less efficiently than they should.
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 20
>Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 13:07:58 -0500
>From: "Ladonna Weeks" <ladonna -dot- weeks -at- comtrak -dot- com>
>Subject: RE: Most illogical documentation
>To: "'Nancy Allison'" <maker -at- verizon -dot- net>,
>	<techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
>Message-ID: <000001c7bcd3$ecd6a600$c1091bac -at- ct -dot- com>
>Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="us-ascii"
>
>How about in the early days of floppy disks when a several step
>installation procedure was written on the diskette label (and
>therefore inaccessible when the disk was in the drive)? 
>
>
>Ladonna Weeks
>ladonna -dot- weeks -at- comtrak -dot- com
>314-895-7674
>cell: 314-210-1652
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Nancy Allison [mailto:maker -at- verizon -dot- net] 
>Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 2:31 PM
>To: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>Subject: Most illogical documentation
>
>This seems a Friday-ish topic for tech writers.
>
>What is the most illogical bit of tech writing you've seen?
>
>The earliest, and still one of the best, that I've come across
>was a passage about how to open the box. You could only have
>opened the manual if you had opened the packing box beforehand.
>(Manuals were not handed out like candy by the sales people,
>either -- too expensive. So really, honestly, if you were reading
>that page, you'd already opened the box.)
>
>It even had a picture of the flaps of the box being opened and an
>arrow showing that the stuff had to come UP out of the TOP of the
>box, which is where the flaps were OPEN.
>
>Naturally, I personally have never written anything quite that
>illogical, not even under duress! I swear!
>
>--Nancy
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 21
>Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 11:18:56 -0700
>From: "Gene Kim-Eng" <techwr -at- genek -dot- com>
>Subject: Re: Most illogical documentation
>To: <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
>Message-ID: <003401c7bcd5$7519ceb0$8700a8c0 -at- genekoptx2>
>Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
>	reply-type=original
>
>As I recall, those actually worked fairly well, because unlike 
>today's CD and DVD media you could remove the floppy 
>from the drive anytime the activity light wasn't on (which was
>most of the time even during an install procedure), read the
>label snd then reinsert the floppy and continue without the
>computer initiating any autorun programs or having to spin
>back up to speed.
>
>Gene Kim-Eng
>
>
>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: "Ladonna Weeks" <ladonna -dot- weeks -at- comtrak -dot- com>
>To: "'Nancy Allison'" <maker -at- verizon -dot- net>; <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
>Sent: Monday, July 02, 2007 11:07 AM
>Subject: RE: Most illogical documentation
>
>
>> How about in the early days of floppy disks when a several step
>> installation procedure was written on the diskette label (and
>> therefore inaccessible when the disk was in the drive)? 
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 22
>Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 11:28:43 -0700 (PDT)
>From: Mary Arrotti <mary_arrotti -at- yahoo -dot- com>
>Subject: 40-hour weeks (was Re: FWD: Lack...)
>To: Chris Borokowski <athloi -at- yahoo -dot- com>, techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>Message-ID: <642237 -dot- 51973 -dot- qm -at- web59005 -dot- mail -dot- re1 -dot- yahoo -dot- com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
>It's hard to disagree with what someone describes as their experience. That said - the situation Chris describes has never been true in my many years of experience. 
>   
>  Everywhere I've worked, the people who work the extra hours generally are also going the extra mile or have heavy workloads than their coworkers. There are exceptions - I've known a few people to stay late just to look better - to give the (false) impression they're working overtime. But for the most part - in my experience, it's been people who rigidly hold to a 40-hour week who are less productive and quality-conscious. 
>   
>  I've worked overtime in situations where coworkers worked fewer hours. I've also had greater responsibilities and heavier workloads (a few times, literally twice the workload). It's important to understand that not every organization divides up work equally. Sometimes if you are considered more reliable, capable, or willing to put in extra time - you are given a heavier workload. Not saying that managers should manage this way or that it's fair - just that it's not uncommon. 
>   
>  A high priority project comes in - who do you give it to? The person who's going to leave at 5:30 every day that week or the person who's going to put in whatever time is needed & who will get the job done?
>   
>  Working overtime is not something I seek out - I would rather spend my time on other things. But it has been necessary to do my job. 
>
>
>Chris Borokowski <athloi -at- yahoo -dot- com> wrote: 
>  In my experience, there is a way to get it done in 40 hours a week or
>fewer, and greater workloads than that most commonly lead to burnout
>and less efficiency. I have yet to encounter an exception. There are
>exceptions for emergencies or failures, obviously, but not on a
>day-to-day basis. Note that nothing was said about quality of life.
>       
>---------------------------------
>Take the Internet to Go: Yahoo!Go puts the Internet in your pocket: mail, news, photos & more. 
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 23
>Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 14:47:47 -0400
>From: "Pro TechWriter" <pro -dot- techwriter -at- gmail -dot- com>
>Subject: Re: 40-hour weeks (was Re: FWD: Lack...)
>To: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>Message-ID:
>	<6b35bddb0707021147m32439f0dwa36debb3afa58064 -at- mail -dot- gmail -dot- com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
>Nicely said, Mary :-)
>
>For me, I can divide the work up between me, and .... Me! I am a lone
>writer, and my workload varies. There is *no one* else to do it, and because
>I am in a regulated industry, sometimes that means I must work overtime to
>get 'er done. And I can do a lot of work in a short time, believe me, so
>it's not inefficiency. (And I answer e-mail and post to the lists I ready
>while I compile my huge help files, if you were wondering.)
>
>This is like anything else: it is easy to over-generalize based on one's
>experience, but what is true for one company may not be the same for
>another.
>
>PT
>
>
>On 7/2/07, Mary Arrotti <mary_arrotti -at- yahoo -dot- com> wrote:
>>
>> It's hard to disagree with what someone describes as their experience.
>> That said - the situation Chris describes has never been true in my many
>> years of experience.
>>
>> Everywhere I've worked, the people who work the extra hours generally are
>> also going the extra mile or have heavy workloads than their coworkers.
>> There are exceptions - I've known a few people to stay late just to look
>> better - to give the (false) impression they're working overtime. But for
>> the most part - in my experience, it's been people who rigidly hold to a
>> 40-hour week who are less productive and quality-conscious.
>>
>>
>> --
>> PT
>> pro -dot- techwriter -at- gmail -dot- com
>> I'm a Technical Technical Writer!
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 24
>Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 11:56:01 -0700 (PDT)
>From: Chris Borokowski <athloi -at- yahoo -dot- com>
>Subject: Re: 40-hour weeks (was Re: FWD: Lack...)
>To: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>Message-ID: <7883 -dot- 54928 -dot- qm -at- web57806 -dot- mail -dot- re3 -dot- yahoo -dot- com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
>My comments had to do with the efficiency of the workplace process, not
>the sincerity or work ethic of the people involved. The work process
>does not need to take as much time as it usually does.
>
>Inefficiency is a cornerstone of the American office (overseas people
>will have to provide your own experience) and results in longer hours.
>Every project I've seen could have been done easily in fewer hours,
>with less collateral damage to the staff.
>
>I resent the accusation that 40-hour diehards work less. There are many
>of us who want to work efficiently and get out of the office. There was
>never in my statement any slight toward those who like to work more,
>only the statement that working more than 40 hours a week, bar
>emergencies, is not necessary.
>
>--- Mary Arrotti <mary_arrotti -at- yahoo -dot- com> wrote:
>
>>   Everywhere I've worked, the people who work the extra hours
>> generally are also going the extra mile or have heavy workloads than
>> their coworkers. 
>
>http://technical-writing.dionysius.com/
>technical writing | consulting | development
>
>
>       
>____________________________________________________________________________________
>Building a website is a piece of cake. Yahoo! Small Business gives you all the tools to get online.
>http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/webhosting 
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 25
>Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 12:02:15 -0700 (PDT)
>From: John Posada <jposada01 -at- yahoo -dot- com>
>Subject: Re: 40-hour weeks (was Re: FWD: Lack...)
>To: Chris Borokowski <athloi -at- yahoo -dot- com>, techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>Message-ID: <499957 -dot- 19440 -dot- qm -at- web35402 -dot- mail -dot- mud -dot- yahoo -dot- com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ascii
>
>>I resent the accusation that 40-hour diehards work less. There are many
>>of us who want to work efficiently and get out of the office. There was
>>never in my statement any slight toward those who like to work more,
>>only the statement that working more than 40 hours a week, bar
>>emergencies, is not necessary.
>
> 
>Chris...you said:
> 
>>.. have found that those who work more than 40
>>hours a week are doing something less efficiently than they should.<
> 
>This is a DIRECT accusation that those of us who work more than 40 hours are inefficient. You can spin it all you want. Don't take offense with us because we didn't let it go or because we disagree with your statement.
> 
>John Posada
>Senior Technical Writer 
> 
>"They say everyone needs goals. Mine is to live forever.
>So far, so good."
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 26
>Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 15:11:06 -0400
>From: Geoff Hart <ghart -at- videotron -dot- ca>
>Subject: 40-hour weeks (was Re: FWD: Lack...)
>To: TECHWR-L <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>, Chris Borokowski
>	<athloi -at- yahoo -dot- com>
>Message-ID: <71C0B1E1-4438-4325-BBEE-89DD68D8C276 -at- videotron -dot- ca>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
>
>Chris Borokowski noted: <<My comments had to do with the efficiency  
>of the workplace process, not the sincerity or work ethic of the  
>people involved. The work process does not need to take as much time  
>as it usually does.>>
>
>Amen to that. You'll also see companies that are insanely  
>exploitative of their workers, and would rather work everyone an  
>extra 10 hours per week than hire an additional worker. Coming from  
>that dangerously socialist nation north of the U.S. border <g>, I  
>confess to also being strongly prejudiced in this direction. There  
>are plenty of unemployed who could use that work.
>
>That being said, I've done my share of overtime when the work demands  
>it, but I've always made it clear to my employer that when overtime  
>becomes systematic rather than an occasional thing, it's time they  
>hired someone else to shoulder part of the burden. I've also pointed  
>out how someone else's shoddy planning led to the problem, and made  
>appropriate suggestions for improvement in the doofus' next  
>performance appraisal. Someone has to say these things, and I've  
>always had the tremendous luxury of being able to shoot off my mouth  
>and remain employed*. YMMV.
>
>* In large part because they always knew they could count on me to  
>get the job done anyway, even if someone else had been insanely  
>negligent. Don't try this trick at home unless you're awfully  
>confident of the security of your position!
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------
>-- Geoff Hart
>ghart -at- videotron -dot- ca / geoffhart -at- mac -dot- com
>www.geoff-hart.com
>--------------------------------------------------
>***Now available***  _Effective onscreen editing_
>(http://www.geoff-hart.com/home/onscreen-book.htm)
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 27
>Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 12:20:42 -0700 (PDT)
>From: Mary Arrotti <mary_arrotti -at- yahoo -dot- com>
>Subject: Re: 40-hour weeks (was Re: FWD: Lack...)
>To: Chris Borokowski <athloi -at- yahoo -dot- com>, techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>Message-ID: <409063 -dot- 1524 -dot- qm -at- web59013 -dot- mail -dot- re1 -dot- yahoo -dot- com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
>I referred to people *rigidly holding* to 40-hour weeks. Again - in my experience - there are times when a job or project just can't get done in 40 hours - even by the most efficient & capable person. In that situation, if someone only works 40 hour weeks - something gets missed - either quality or the deadline. 
>   
>  I've interviewed for more than one position where it's been stated that overtime *is required.* Having to work overtime is not uncommon for many people. This does not mean that those people are incapable or inefficient.
>   
>  The point is that very, very few people want to work more than 40 hours a week. The reality is that many of us have to - our jobs and workloads (and sometimes pride & self-respect) require it. 
>   
>  
>Chris Borokowski <athloi -at- yahoo -dot- com> wrote:
>  I resent the accusation that 40-hour diehards work less. There are many
>of us who want to work efficiently and get out of the office. There was
>never in my statement any slight toward those who like to work more,
>only the statement that working more than 40 hours a week, bar
>emergencies, is not necessary.
>       
>---------------------------------
>Looking for a deal? Find great prices on flights and hotels with Yahoo! FareChase.
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 28
>Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 19:24:57 +0000
>From: DonaLuisa_nwr -at- comcast -dot- net (DonaLuisa)
>Subject: Spell-checking text entered in MS Word forms?
>To: TECHWR-L <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
>Message-ID:
>	<070220071924 -dot- 28044 -dot- 46895109000E990E00006D8C22064246139D9902A10E9C079AB40E0201BB -at- comcast -dot- net>
>	
>
>I created what I thought might be a nifty little MS Word template (Windows XP Wod 2003) using the Forms toolbar. One item has a dropdown selection. I protected the form using the padlock icon.
>
>When users in my organization enter text into the form fields, they are unable to spell-check their text, or edit what they have entered. So far, I've instructed them to unprotect the form to make changes. Now I'm probably going to remove the form functionality, and simply enter text fields into a *.dot file. I'll turn the dropdown into a checkbox field.
>
>But am I missing something? Is there a way users can use spell-check and edi entries in a protected form?
>-Donna 
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 29
>Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 12:25:16 -0700 (PDT)
>From: Chris Borokowski <athloi -at- yahoo -dot- com>
>Subject: Re: 40-hour weeks (was Re: FWD: Lack...)
>To: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>Message-ID: <372227 -dot- 34043 -dot- qm -at- web57801 -dot- mail -dot- re3 -dot- yahoo -dot- com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
>True enough. However, I think it's clear that I never attacked anyone
>for doing a good job that required more than 40 hours. If you read
>back, the original poster talked about an office where 45+ hours was
>the norm. My comment was that as a norm, this is not necessary, in any
>job.
>
>I can't see how anyone would object to that unless they're
>pathologically inclined to see quantity of work as more important than
>quality.
>
>Having pulled more than my fair share of overtime, I consider it
>required at times on every job. If the server crashes the night before
>deadline, there's going to be an all-nighter. But on a regular basis?
>If you're working more than 40 hours, it's from poor efficiency and/or
>conditions, whether you chose these or not.
>
>--- Mary Arrotti <mary_arrotti -at- yahoo -dot- com> wrote:
>
>> I referred to people *rigidly holding* to 40-hour weeks. Again - in
>> my experience - there are times when a job or project just can't get
>> done in 40 hours - even by the most efficient & capable person. In
>> that situation, if someone only works 40 hour weeks - something gets
>> missed - either quality or the deadline. 
>>    
>>   I've interviewed for more than one position where it's been stated
>> that overtime *is required.* Having to work overtime is not uncommon
>> for many people. This does not mean that those people are incapable
>> or inefficient.
>>    
>>   The point is that very, very few people want to work more than 40
>> hours a week. The reality is that many of us have to - our jobs and
>> workloads (and sometimes pride & self-respect) require it. 
>>    
>>   
>> Chris Borokowski <athloi -at- yahoo -dot- com> wrote:
>>   I resent the accusation that 40-hour diehards work less. There are
>> many
>> of us who want to work efficiently and get out of the office. There
>> was
>> never in my statement any slight toward those who like to work more,
>> only the statement that working more than 40 hours a week, bar
>> emergencies, is not necessary.
>>        
>> ---------------------------------
>> Looking for a deal? Find great prices on flights and hotels with
>> Yahoo! FareChase.
>
>
>http://technical-writing.dionysius.com/
>technical writing | consulting | development
>
>
>       
>____________________________________________________________________________________
>Got a little couch potato? 
>Check out fun summer activities for kids.
>http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=oni_on_mail&p=summer+activities+for+kids&cs=bz 
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 30
>Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 12:32:03 -0700
>From: "Steve Cavanaugh" <scavanaugh -at- nat-seattle -dot- com>
>Subject: RE: Spell-checking text entered in MS Word forms?
>To: "DonaLuisa" <DonaLuisa_nwr -at- comcast -dot- net>,	"TECHWR-L"
>	<techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
>Message-ID: <F322269585FBA447A10CCDBC5FB9E6E10171D28C -at- srv1>
>Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="us-ascii"
>
>Word Form fields were seriously flawed up to version 2000, and may still
>be.  I stopped using them when I spent a lot of time developing a form,
>then discovered that unlocking and re-locking the form could clear the
>data already entered.  Worse, if you build the form and save as a
>template, then populate many such forms based on that template, if you
>unlock the template and relock it, you can erase all of the data in
>EVERY form based on that one.  MS assured me this was a design feature
>(right) and that the form fields were working as designed.  Better to
>stick with a table.
>
>
>Steve Cavanaugh
>Sr. Technical Writer
>NAT Seattle Inc.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: techwr-l-bounces+scavanaugh=nat-seattle -dot- com -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>[mailto:techwr-l-bounces+scavanaugh=nat-seattle -dot- com -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com]
>On Behalf Of DonaLuisa
>Sent: Monday, July 02, 2007 12:25 PM
>To: TECHWR-L
>Subject: Spell-checking text entered in MS Word forms?
>
>I created what I thought might be a nifty little MS Word template
>(Windows XP Wod 2003) using the Forms toolbar. One item has a dropdown
>selection. I protected the form using the padlock icon.
>
>When users in my organization enter text into the form fields, they are
>unable to spell-check their text, or edit what they have entered. So
>far, I've instructed them to unprotect the form to make changes. Now I'm
>probably going to remove the form functionality, and simply enter text
>fields into a *.dot file. I'll turn the dropdown into a checkbox field.
>
>But am I missing something? Is there a way users can use spell-check and
>edi entries in a protected form?
>-Donna
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>Create HTML or Microsoft Word content and convert to Help file formats
>or printed documentation. Features include support for Windows Vista &
>2007 Microsoft Office, team authoring, plus more.
>http://www.DocToHelp.com/TechwrlList
>
>True single source, conditional content, PDF export, modular help.
>Help & Manual is the most powerful authoring tool for technical
>documentation. Boost your productivity! http://www.helpandmanual.com
>
>---
>You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as scavanaugh -at- nat-seattle -dot- com -dot- 
>
>To unsubscribe send a blank email to
>techwr-l-unsubscribe -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>or visit
>http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/options/techwr-l/scavanaugh%40nat-seat
>tle.com
>
>
>To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr-l-join -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>
>Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-  Visit
>http://www.techwr-l.com/ for more resources and info.
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 31
>Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 15:37:44 -0400
>From: "Suzette Leeming" <suzette -dot- leeming -at- gmail -dot- com>
>Subject: Re: FWD: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>To: "Gene Kim-Eng" <techwr -at- genek -dot- com>
>Cc: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>Message-ID:
>	<86656a5c0707021237g84c3ad9x593a7e5c5602a7c0 -at- mail -dot- gmail -dot- com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
>There's a big difference between wanting to work more than 40 hours a week,
>and needing to work more than 40 hours a week. If you're staying late for
>personal satisfaction, I don't see a problem. If, however, a company is
>paying you for 40 hours a week and realistically you need to work more than
>that on a constant basis (I'm not talking about the two weeks before a new
>release is due), then there is a problem.Five or six employees each working
>more than an hour extra per day adds up to another employee.
>
>I've seen situations where people goof off most of the day and then stay
>late to catch up, all the while expecting people to think they're great
>because they work late every night. That's an entirely different situation
>though.
>
>An employee should not be penalized because he/she chooses not to work more
>than 40 hours a week on a consistent basis.
>
>All the other stuff about Tom though, seems like he is not a good fit for
>the department. Is there perhaps another department within the company where
>he may be more suited? Marcom for example?
>
>Suzette Leeming
>Stouffville, Ontario
>
>On 7/2/07, Gene Kim-Eng <techwr -at- genek -dot- com> wrote:
>>
>> 45 hours per week works out to one hour per day of
>> "casual overtime."  It's not exactly what I would call
>> sweatshop hours for salaried employees who don't get
>> time taken out for doctor appointments and other
>> personal business "out of office" hours.  If, OTOH,
>> your company requires you to take PTO hours for
>> all of those, it's another matter.
>>
>> Gene Kim-Eng
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Chris Borokowski" <athloi -at- yahoo -dot- com>
>> To: <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
>> Sent: Monday, July 02, 2007 8:27 AM
>> Subject: Re: FWD: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>>
>>
>> > Everywhere I have worked, I have found that those who work more than 40
>> > hours a week are doing something less efficiently than they should.
>>
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>
>> Create HTML or Microsoft Word content and convert to Help file formats or
>> printed documentation. Features include support for Windows Vista & 2007
>> Microsoft Office, team authoring, plus more.
>> http://www.DocToHelp.com/TechwrlList
>>
>> True single source, conditional content, PDF export, modular help.
>> Help & Manual is the most powerful authoring tool for technical
>> documentation. Boost your productivity! http://www.helpandmanual.com
>>
>> ---
>> You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as suzette -dot- leeming -at- gmail -dot- com -dot- 
>>
>> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
>> techwr-l-unsubscribe -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>> or visit
>> http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/options/techwr-l/suzette.leeming%40gmail.com
>>
>>
>> To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr-l-join -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>>
>> Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-  Visit
>> http://www.techwr-l.com/ for more resources and info.
>>
>>
>
>
>-- 
>Need affordable web hosting? I recommend 1 & 1 - that's where I'm hosted!
>http://www.1and1.com/?k_id=6815038
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 32
>Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 16:17:53 -0400
>From: <richard -dot- melanson -at- us -dot- tel -dot- com>
>Subject: RE: 40-hour weeks (was Re: FWD: Lack...)
>To: <jposada01 -at- yahoo -dot- com>, <athloi -at- yahoo -dot- com>,
>	<techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
>Message-ID:
>	<DBB2E440DE7DB54C80998A2D274B9EDCACE7A4 -at- temis0520 -dot- us -dot- tel -dot- com>
>Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="us-ascii"
>
>A Team full of superstars is not always going to win the championship, you need role players too. 
>I have to ask myself, how can someone be so unaware of reality that they can make such an inaccurate statement!!??!!??
>Rick
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: techwr-l-bounces+richard -dot- melanson=us -dot- tel -dot- com -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com [mailto:techwr-l-bounces+richard -dot- melanson=us -dot- tel -dot- com -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com] On Behalf Of John Posada
>Sent: Monday, July 02, 2007 3:02 PM
>To: Chris Borokowski; techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>Subject: Re: 40-hour weeks (was Re: FWD: Lack...)
>
>>I resent the accusation that 40-hour diehards work less. There are many
>>of us who want to work efficiently and get out of the office. There was
>>never in my statement any slight toward those who like to work more,
>>only the statement that working more than 40 hours a week, bar
>>emergencies, is not necessary.
>
> 
>Chris...you said:
> 
>>.. have found that those who work more than 40
>>hours a week are doing something less efficiently than they should.<
> 
>This is a DIRECT accusation that those of us who work more than 40 hours are inefficient. You can spin it all you want. Don't take offense with us because we didn't let it go or because we disagree with your statement.
> 
>John Posada
>Senior Technical Writer 
> 
>"They say everyone needs goals. Mine is to live forever.
>So far, so good."
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>Create HTML or Microsoft Word content and convert to Help file formats or 
>printed documentation. Features include support for Windows Vista & 2007 
>Microsoft Office, team authoring, plus more.
>http://www.DocToHelp.com/TechwrlList
>
>True single source, conditional content, PDF export, modular help.
>Help & Manual is the most powerful authoring tool for technical
>documentation. Boost your productivity! http://www.helpandmanual.com
>
>---
>You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as richard -dot- melanson -at- us -dot- tel -dot- com -dot- 
>
>To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
>techwr-l-unsubscribe -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>or visit http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/options/techwr-l/richard.melanson%40us.tel.com
>
>
>To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr-l-join -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>
>Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-  Visit
>http://www.techwr-l.com/ for more resources and info.
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 33
>Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 16:19:02 -0400
>From: <richard -dot- melanson -at- us -dot- tel -dot- com>
>Subject: RE: 40-hour weeks (was Re: FWD: Lack...)
>To: <mary_arrotti -at- yahoo -dot- com>, <athloi -at- yahoo -dot- com>,
>	<techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
>Message-ID:
>	<DBB2E440DE7DB54C80998A2D274B9EDCACE7A5 -at- temis0520 -dot- us -dot- tel -dot- com>
>Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="us-ascii"
>
>Tap, tap tap!!!
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: techwr-l-bounces+richard -dot- melanson=us -dot- tel -dot- com -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com [mailto:techwr-l-bounces+richard -dot- melanson=us -dot- tel -dot- com -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com] On Behalf Of Mary Arrotti
>Sent: Monday, July 02, 2007 3:21 PM
>To: Chris Borokowski; techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>Subject: Re: 40-hour weeks (was Re: FWD: Lack...)
>
>I referred to people *rigidly holding* to 40-hour weeks. Again - in my experience - there are times when a job or project just can't get done in 40 hours - even by the most efficient & capable person. In that situation, if someone only works 40 hour weeks - something gets missed - either quality or the deadline. 
>   
>  I've interviewed for more than one position where it's been stated that overtime *is required.* Having to work overtime is not uncommon for many people. This does not mean that those people are incapable or inefficient.
>   
>  The point is that very, very few people want to work more than 40 hours a week. The reality is that many of us have to - our jobs and workloads (and sometimes pride & self-respect) require it. 
>   
>  
>Chris Borokowski <athloi -at- yahoo -dot- com> wrote:
>  I resent the accusation that 40-hour diehards work less. There are many
>of us who want to work efficiently and get out of the office. There was
>never in my statement any slight toward those who like to work more,
>only the statement that working more than 40 hours a week, bar
>emergencies, is not necessary.
>       
>---------------------------------
>Looking for a deal? Find great prices on flights and hotels with Yahoo! FareChase.
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>Create HTML or Microsoft Word content and convert to Help file formats or 
>printed documentation. Features include support for Windows Vista & 2007 
>Microsoft Office, team authoring, plus more.
>http://www.DocToHelp.com/TechwrlList
>
>True single source, conditional content, PDF export, modular help.
>Help & Manual is the most powerful authoring tool for technical
>documentation. Boost your productivity! http://www.helpandmanual.com
>
>---
>You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as richard -dot- melanson -at- us -dot- tel -dot- com -dot- 
>
>To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
>techwr-l-unsubscribe -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>or visit http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/options/techwr-l/richard.melanson%40us.tel.com
>
>
>To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr-l-join -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>
>Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-  Visit
>http://www.techwr-l.com/ for more resources and info.
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 34
>Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 13:20:18 -0700
>From: "Lauren" <lt34 -at- csus -dot- edu>
>Subject: RE: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>To: "'TECHWR-L Administrator'" <admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com>,
>	<techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
>Message-ID: <20070702201705 -dot- 4FD7F720D1 -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
>Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="US-ASCII"
>
>Hi Anon Pub Manager,
>
>This is an interesting situation in that the "Senior" Tech Writer has more
>experience with the company than you do.  Don't be intimidated that he's
>been with the company longer than you have.  If the company was fine with
>Tom being senior, then they would not have hired you.  If I'm reading your
>post correctly.
>
>I like the ideas of other posters of documenting the issues and learning the
>HR process for firing.  I also like Brian's idea of creating a checklist of
>things that the writer "will" do.  I think that there might be an issue in
>making the senior writer feel singled-out with a personalized checklist, so
>I would probably develop a checklist that everyone uses for the process for
>each documentation project.
>
>Since you want to make sure that Tom follows the process, you can have Tom,
>because he is senior <wink>, develop the checklist.  You need to verify that
>the checklist is accurate and complete and you should talk to other tech
>writers as necessary.  Document and approach this 'task' according to HR's
>standards for documenting confrontations with employees.  Review the
>checklist and, if there are errors and ommissions, then confront Tom and
>bring HR into the meeting, if necessary.  Allow Tom an opportunity to
>correct the checklist, per HR standards, and get a complete and accurate
>checklist.
>
>You might also need to take control of all of the work that goes through Tom
>and set up like a "process review."  Directly tell Tom that you are
>concerned that he is not following the group's processes.  Document and
>approach this according to HR processes.  Have Tom review every step of the
>documentation process with you before checking it off of the list.
>Communicate any issues to HR according to HR standards.
>
>Eventually, Tom will either improve, quit, or give you just cause for firing
>him.
>
>Lauren
> 
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 35
>Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 13:27:00 -0700
>From: "Lauren" <lt34 -at- csus -dot- edu>
>Subject: RE: FWD: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>To: "'Chris Borokowski'" <athloi -at- yahoo -dot- com>,
>	<techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
>Message-ID: <20070702202346 -dot- 8FCA6726E0 -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
>Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="US-ASCII"
>
>I forgot about the 45+ work week requirement.  I would not take a position
>that regularly requires more than 40 hours a week.  There is no such as a
>well-managed project (all of my jobs are projects) that generally requires
>more than 40 hours a week.  Some weeks, a project will require more hours
>than other weeks, but the extra hours are compensated appropriately.
>
>It sounds like the group could benefit from well-organized, solid project
>management.  That is something to consider to manage future issues.
>
>Lauren
> 
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: techwr-l-bounces+lt34=csus -dot- edu -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com 
>> [mailto:techwr-l-bounces+lt34=csus -dot- edu -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com] On 
>> Behalf Of Chris Borokowski
>> Sent: Monday, July 02, 2007 8:27 AM
>> To: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>> Subject: Re: FWD: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>> 
>> Everywhere I have worked, I have found that those who work 
>> more than 40
>> hours a week are doing something less efficiently than they should.
>> 
>> As far as "Tom" goes, the answer is pretty clear: he's not a fit. Good
>> luck.
>> 
>> --- TECHWR-L Administrator <admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com> wrote:
>> 
>> > He works 40 hours a week in a department
>> > where we all work 45+ hours a week. 
>> 
>> 
>> http://technical-writing.dionysius.com/
>> technical writing | consulting | development
>> 
>> 
>>        
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> ______________________
>> Get the free Yahoo! toolbar and rest assured with the added 
>> security of spyware protection.
>> http://new.toolbar.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/norton/index.php
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> 
>> Create HTML or Microsoft Word content and convert to Help 
>> file formats or 
>> printed documentation. Features include support for Windows 
>> Vista & 2007 
>> Microsoft Office, team authoring, plus more.
>> http://www.DocToHelp.com/TechwrlList
>> 
>> True single source, conditional content, PDF export, modular help.
>> Help & Manual is the most powerful authoring tool for technical
>> documentation. Boost your productivity! http://www.helpandmanual.com
>> 
>> ---
>> You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as lt34 -at- csus -dot- edu -dot- 
>> 
>> To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
>> techwr-l-unsubscribe -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>> or visit 
>> http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/options/techwr-l/lt34%40csus.edu
>> 
>> 
>> To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr-l-join -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>> 
>> Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-  Visit
>> http://www.techwr-l.com/ for more resources and info.
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 36
>Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 16:50:14 -0400
>From: "Melissa Nelson" <melmis36 -at- hotmail -dot- com>
>Subject: RE: 40-hour weeks (was Re: FWD: Lack...)
>To: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>Message-ID: <BAY105-F3270D0699AF352C0FC3BC2D90D0 -at- phx -dot- gbl>
>Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
>
>I have not read all the replies to this yet, but I am ASSUMING that most 
>people are like me in the fact that there are weeks where 40 hours is more 
>than enough and there are weeks when 50 hours is barely enough.  In my case 
>anyway...this does not have a lot to do with my efficiency...as much as it 
>does whatever is going on in the office, which a large percent of the time 
>is out of my control.
>
>Melissa
>
>
>>From: <richard -dot- melanson -at- us -dot- tel -dot- com>
>>To: <jposada01 -at- yahoo -dot- com>, <athloi -at- yahoo -dot- com>, 
>><techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
>>Subject: RE: 40-hour weeks (was Re: FWD: Lack...)
>>Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 16:17:53 -0400
>>
>>A Team full of superstars is not always going to win the championship, you 
>>need role players too.
>>I have to ask myself, how can someone be so unaware of reality that they 
>>can make such an inaccurate statement!!??!!??
>>Rick
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: techwr-l-bounces+richard -dot- melanson=us -dot- tel -dot- com -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com 
>>[mailto:techwr-l-bounces+richard -dot- melanson=us -dot- tel -dot- com -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com] On 
>>Behalf Of John Posada
>>Sent: Monday, July 02, 2007 3:02 PM
>>To: Chris Borokowski; techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>>Subject: Re: 40-hour weeks (was Re: FWD: Lack...)
>>
>> >I resent the accusation that 40-hour diehards work less. There are many
>> >of us who want to work efficiently and get out of the office. There was
>> >never in my statement any slight toward those who like to work more,
>> >only the statement that working more than 40 hours a week, bar
>> >emergencies, is not necessary.
>>
>>
>>Chris...you said:
>>
>> >.. have found that those who work more than 40
>> >hours a week are doing something less efficiently than they should.<
>>
>>This is a DIRECT accusation that those of us who work more than 40 hours 
>>are inefficient. You can spin it all you want. Don't take offense with us 
>>because we didn't let it go or because we disagree with your statement.
>>
>>John Posada
>>Senior Technical Writer
>>
>>"They say everyone needs goals. Mine is to live forever.
>>So far, so good."
>>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>
>>Create HTML or Microsoft Word content and convert to Help file formats or
>>printed documentation. Features include support for Windows Vista & 2007
>>Microsoft Office, team authoring, plus more.
>>http://www.DocToHelp.com/TechwrlList
>>
>>True single source, conditional content, PDF export, modular help.
>>Help & Manual is the most powerful authoring tool for technical
>>documentation. Boost your productivity! http://www.helpandmanual.com
>>
>>---
>>You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as richard -dot- melanson -at- us -dot- tel -dot- com -dot- 
>>
>>To unsubscribe send a blank email to
>>techwr-l-unsubscribe -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>>or visit 
>>http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/options/techwr-l/richard.melanson%40us.tel.com
>>
>>
>>To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr-l-join -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>>
>>Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-  Visit
>>http://www.techwr-l.com/ for more resources and info.
>>
>>
>>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>
>>Create HTML or Microsoft Word content and convert to Help file formats or
>>printed documentation. Features include support for Windows Vista & 2007
>>Microsoft Office, team authoring, plus more.
>>http://www.DocToHelp.com/TechwrlList
>>
>>True single source, conditional content, PDF export, modular help.
>>Help & Manual is the most powerful authoring tool for technical
>>documentation. Boost your productivity! http://www.helpandmanual.com
>>
>>---
>>You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as melmis36 -at- hotmail -dot- com -dot- 
>>
>>To unsubscribe send a blank email to
>>techwr-l-unsubscribe -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>>or visit 
>>http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/options/techwr-l/melmis36%40hotmail.com
>>
>>
>>To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr-l-join -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>>
>>Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-  Visit
>>http://www.techwr-l.com/ for more resources and info.
>>
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 37
>Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 15:51:01 -0500
>From: " Connie Giordano " <connie -at- therightwordz -dot- com>
>Subject: RE: 40-hour weeks (was Re: FWD: Lack...)
>To: <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
>Message-ID: <20070702205101 -dot- 21297 -dot- qmail -at- server274 -dot- com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>This whole debate rests on the assumption that a 40-hour work week is somehow the golden measure.  It's actually a relatively recent phenomenom and not a particularly helpful predictor of efficiency OR effective organizational managment.  I've worked in places where 35 hours was standard, places where 37.5 was the wage base, places where it was 40 or 45.  No matter where you are, some are going to focus on the hours worked, some will focus on the quality and some on the quantity of the work produced. The ability of the organization to balance the bottom line with worker and customer satisfaction should be the goal, but often is not.... that is how the working life goes... don't believe me, just ask Dilbert ;-)
>
>
>Connie P. Giordano
>The Right Words
>Communications & Information Design
>(704) 957-8450 (cell)
>
>www.therightwords.com
>"It's kind of fun to do the impossible."   - Walt Disney
>
>
>>  -------Original Message-------
>>  From: richard -dot- melanson -at- us -dot- tel -dot- com
>>  Subject: RE: 40-hour weeks (was Re: FWD: Lack...)
>>  Sent: 02 Jul '07 15:19
>>  
>>  Tap, tap tap!!!
>>  
>>  -----Original Message-----
>>  From: techwr-l-bounces+richard -dot- melanson=us -dot- tel -dot- com -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com [mailto:techwr-l-bounces+richard -dot- melanson=us -dot- tel -dot- com -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com] On Behalf Of Mary Arrotti
>>  Sent: Monday, July 02, 2007 3:21 PM
>>  To: Chris Borokowski; techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>>  Subject: Re: 40-hour weeks (was Re: FWD: Lack...)
>>  
>>  I referred to people *rigidly holding* to 40-hour weeks. Again - in my experience - there are times when a job or project just can't get done in 40 hours - even by the most efficient & capable person. In that situation, if someone only works 40 hour weeks - something gets missed - either quality or the deadline.
>>  ??
>>  ??I've interviewed for more than one position where it's been stated that overtime *is required.* Having to work overtime is not uncommon for many people. This does not mean that those people are incapable or inefficient.
>>  ??
>>  ??The point is that very, very few people want to work more than 40 hours a week. The reality is that many of us have to - our jobs and workloads (and sometimes pride & self-respect) require it.
>>  ??
>>  ??
>>  Chris Borokowski <athloi -at- yahoo -dot- com> wrote:
>>  ??I resent the accusation that 40-hour diehards work less. There are many
>>  of us who want to work efficiently and get out of the office. There was
>>  never in my statement any slight toward those who like to work more,
>>  only the statement that working more than 40 hours a week, bar
>>  emergencies, is not necessary.
>>  ??????
>>  ---------------------------------
>>  Looking for a deal? Find great prices on flights and hotels with Yahoo! FareChase.
>>  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>  
>>  Create HTML or Microsoft Word content and convert to Help file formats or
>>  printed documentation. Features include support for Windows Vista & 2007
>>  Microsoft Office, team authoring, plus more.
>>  http://www.DocToHelp.com/TechwrlList
>>  
>>  True single source, conditional content, PDF export, modular help.
>>  Help & Manual is the most powerful authoring tool for technical
>>  documentation. Boost your productivity! http://www.helpandmanual.com
>>  
>>  ---
>>  You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as richard -dot- melanson -at- us -dot- tel -dot- com -dot- 
>>  
>>  To unsubscribe send a blank email to
>>  techwr-l-unsubscribe -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>>  or visit http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/options/techwr-l/richard.melanson%40us.tel.com
>>  
>>  
>>  To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr-l-join -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>>  
>>  Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-  Visit
>>  http://www.techwr-l.com/ for more resources and info.
>>  
>>  
>>  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>  
>>  Create HTML or Microsoft Word content and convert to Help file formats or
>>  printed documentation. Features include support for Windows Vista & 2007
>>  Microsoft Office, team authoring, plus more.
>>  http://www.DocToHelp.com/TechwrlList
>>  
>>  True single source, conditional content, PDF export, modular help.
>>  Help & Manual is the most powerful authoring tool for technical
>>  documentation. Boost your productivity! http://www.helpandmanual.com
>>  
>>  ---
>>  You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as connie -at- therightwordz -dot- com -dot- 
>>  
>>  To unsubscribe send a blank email to
>>  techwr-l-unsubscribe -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>>  or visit http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/options/techwr-l/connie%40therightwordz.com
>>  
>>  
>>  To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr-l-join -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>>  
>>  Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-  Visit
>>  http://www.techwr-l.com/ for more resources and info.
>>  
>>  
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 38
>Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 16:53:46 -0400
>From: "Dan Goldstein" <DGoldstein -at- riverainmedical -dot- com>
>Subject: RE: FWD: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
>Message-ID:
>	<0ADA9A22B5BC2147B360A22FD2BAD25CBD6978 -at- RMGBEX01 -dot- rmg -dot- local>
>Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="US-ASCII"
>
>Geez, what is it about Mondays and overarching generalities?
>
>Maybe it's just a tech writer vs. consultant kinda thing...
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Lauren
>> Sent: Monday, July 02, 2007 4:27 PM
>> To: 'Chris Borokowski'; techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>> Subject: RE: FWD: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>> 
>> ... There is no such as a well-managed project (all of my jobs 
>> are projects) that generally requires more than 40 hours a 
>> week...
>> 
>
>This message contains confidential information intended only for the use of the addressee(s). If you are not the addressee, or the person responsible for delivering it to the addressee, you are hereby notified that reading, disseminating, distributing, copying, electronic storing or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this message is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this message by mistake, please notify us, by replying to the sender, and delete the original message immediately thereafter.  Thank you.
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 39
>Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 14:22:52 -0700
>From: "Gene Kim-Eng" <techwr -at- genek -dot- com>
>Subject: Re: FWD: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>To: <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
>Message-ID: <006401c7bcef$26669090$5e00a8c0 -at- TDGKimEng>
>Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>If you're a salaried professional employee, your company is
>not supposed to be "paying you for 40 hours a week," but to
>accomplish your objectives and assignments as set by you
>and your manager, and your manager should be evaluating
>you accordingly.  The fact that Tom is working 40 hours a 
>week compared to the rest of the team working 45 hours is 
>only relevant because Tom is not accomplishing his objectives 
>and assignments to his manager's satisfaction (I'm assuming 
>here that Tom originally signed on to them) while the rest of
>the team appears to be accomplishing theirs.  If Tom's work 
>was otherwise on track and Anonymous was still judging him 
>negatively on the basis of his 40 hour workweek, that would 
>be another instance of bad management practice.
>
>We can't judge whether Anonymous' team working 45 hours
>a week is a bad sign or not because we don't know all the
>circumstances for the rest of the team (did they join a startup
>knowing everybody's working long hours chasing an IPO payoff,
>do they take long lunch breaks, is the company paying premium
>salaries compared to the prevailing market to attract people with
>"high levels of dedication," or bearing down on them to charge 
>PTO every time they take an hour or two off for something 
>personal, etc., etc.  
>
>Gene Kim-Eng
>
>
>  ----- Original Message ----- 
>  From: Suzette Leeming 
>
>
>  If, however, a company is paying you for 40 hours a week and realistically you need to work more than that on a constant basis (I'm not talking about the two weeks before a new release is due), then there is a problem.
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 40
>Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 17:32:44 -0400
>From: "Chinell, David F (GE Indust, Security)" <David -dot- Chinell -at- GE -dot- com>
>Subject: RE: Spell-checking text entered in MS Word forms?
>To: "DonaLuisa" <DonaLuisa_nwr -at- comcast -dot- net>,	"TECHWR-L"
>	<techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
>Message-ID:
>	<C985BEA24580F34AB09A7C25C37DE6F606222E29 -at- CINMLVEM18 -dot- e2k -dot- ad -dot- ge -dot- com>
>Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="us-ascii"
>
>DonaLuisa:
>
>Please refer to this topic for information on spell checking in
>protected documents.
>
>http://word.mvps.org/faqs/macrosvba/SpellcheckProtectDoc.htm 
>
>Note that you can isolate all the form fields in a single section and
>protect only that section, leaving other sections fully editable with no
>other action.
>
>Bear
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 41
>Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 14:35:42 -0700 (PDT)
>From: Chris Borokowski <athloi -at- yahoo -dot- com>
>Subject: RE: FWD: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>To: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>Message-ID: <819622 -dot- 93741 -dot- qm -at- web57802 -dot- mail -dot- re3 -dot- yahoo -dot- com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
>I agree, and have found that employees benefit from having fewer work
>hours that translate into a saner project management plan. If work time
>is expendable, and project management costs effort, those in charge
>will allow extra work time to take up the slack. My goal in managing
>any project is to minimize the amount of time over 40 hours required of
>my people, as the normal work schedule makes them more effective when
>they're at the job.
>
>--- Lauren <lt34 -at- csus -dot- edu> wrote:
>
>> I forgot about the 45+ work week requirement.  I would not take a
>> position
>> that regularly requires more than 40 hours a week.  There is no such
>> as a
>> well-managed project (all of my jobs are projects) that generally
>> requires
>> more than 40 hours a week. 
>
>http://technical-writing.dionysius.com/
>technical writing | consulting | development
>
>
>       
>____________________________________________________________________________________
>Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.
>http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545469
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 42
>Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 15:07:41 -0700
>From: "Lauren" <lt34 -at- csus -dot- edu>
>Subject: RE: Spell-checking text entered in MS Word forms?
>To: "'DonaLuisa'" <DonaLuisa_nwr -at- comcast -dot- net>,	"'TECHWR-L'"
>	<techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
>Message-ID: <20070702220428 -dot- AE123767DE -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
>Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="US-ASCII"
>
>Spellcheck and other features are disabled when a form is locked.  You can
>use document protection and enable users to change only certain areas, but
>you won't have your drop-down box.
>
>Why would you have users use the .dot file instead of the new .doc that is
>created when the .dot is opened?  Users should use the .doc file.
>
>Lauren
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: techwr-l-bounces+lt34=csus -dot- edu -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com 
>> [mailto:techwr-l-bounces+lt34=csus -dot- edu -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com] On 
>> Behalf Of DonaLuisa
>> Sent: Monday, July 02, 2007 12:25 PM
>> To: TECHWR-L
>> Subject: Spell-checking text entered in MS Word forms?
>> 
>> I created what I thought might be a nifty little MS Word 
>> template (Windows XP Wod 2003) using the Forms toolbar. One 
>> item has a dropdown selection. I protected the form using the 
>> padlock icon.
>> 
>> When users in my organization enter text into the form 
>> fields, they are unable to spell-check their text, or edit 
>> what they have entered. So far, I've instructed them to 
>> unprotect the form to make changes. Now I'm probably going to 
>> remove the form functionality, and simply enter text fields 
>> into a *.dot file. I'll turn the dropdown into a checkbox field.
>> 
>> But am I missing something? Is there a way users can use 
>> spell-check and edi entries in a protected form?
>> -Donna 
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 43
>Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 15:15:24 -0700
>From: "Lauren" <lt34 -at- csus -dot- edu>
>Subject: RE: 40-hour weeks (was Re: FWD: Lack...)
>To: "'Connie Giordano'" <connie -at- therightwordz -dot- com>,
>	<techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
>Message-ID: <20070702221213 -dot- 331FF76E0B -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
>Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="US-ASCII"
>
>The 40-hour work week is a legal limitation so that workers are not treated
>as slaves, essentially.  It was established in 1938 to protect factory
>workers.  Employees today have the right to work more than 8 hours a day, 5
>days a week, but an employer cannot mandate this for hourly employees and
>employers are required to provide overtime compensation.  Salaried and
>certain public employees are usually exempt from the legal requirements.
>Employees earning more than a certain amount per hour are also exempt in
>certain cases.  There are discussions and proposals to change the law, but I
>think that it is healthier for people to learn how to not make work their
>biggest priority.  Personal and family health suffers when people work long
>hours.
>
>Dept. of Labor overtime law,
>http://www.dol.gov/dolfaq/go-dol-faq.asp?faqid=320&faqsub=Work+Hours&faqtop=
>Wages+%26+Work+Hours&topicid=1
>
>Returning to the 40-hour work week,
>http://www.homepages.indiana.edu/040904/text/workweekreturning.shtml
>
>Lauren
> 
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: techwr-l-bounces+lt34=csus -dot- edu -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com 
>> [mailto:techwr-l-bounces+lt34=csus -dot- edu -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com] On 
>> Behalf Of Connie Giordano
>> Sent: Monday, July 02, 2007 1:51 PM
>> To: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>> Subject: RE: 40-hour weeks (was Re: FWD: Lack...)
>> 
>> This whole debate rests on the assumption that a 40-hour work 
>> week is somehow the golden measure.  It's actually a 
>> relatively recent phenomenom and not a particularly helpful 
>> predictor of efficiency OR effective organizational 
>> managment.  I've worked in places where 35 hours was 
>> standard, places where 37.5 was the wage base, places where 
>> it was 40 or 45.  No matter where you are, some are going to 
>> focus on the hours worked, some will focus on the quality and 
>> some on the quantity of the work produced. The ability of the 
>> organization to balance the bottom line with worker and 
>> customer satisfaction should be the goal, but often is 
>> not.... that is how the working life goes... don't believe 
>> me, just ask Dilbert ;-)
>> 
>> 
>> Connie P. Giordano
>> The Right Words
>> Communications & Information Design
>> (704) 957-8450 (cell)
>> 
>> www.therightwords.com
>> "It's kind of fun to do the impossible."   - Walt Disney
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 44
>Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 16:07:03 -0700
>From: "Gene Kim-Eng" <techwr -at- genek -dot- com>
>Subject: Re: FWD: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>To: "Ned Bedinger" <doc -at- edwordsmith -dot- com>,
>	<techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
>Message-ID: <008901c7bcfd$b51ad1d0$8700a8c0 -at- genekoptx2>
>Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
>	reply-type=original
>
>I wouldn't be one of those arguing with you.  It might be a long shot
>indeed, but since Anonymous has not been coming in with a very high
>manager score in my book so far it would be a very good idea for
>him/her to have a talk with Tom's customers, both internal (the people
>whose input Anonymous thinks Tom may be gathering up and putting
>together) and external (the end users of the support site Tom has been
>writing for), to see how they perceive what Tom is doing vs. what the
>rest of the document group is doing.  If Anonymous is one of those new
>age STC "user-experience communicator" types and Tom's SMEs and 
>end users are all Neanderthal ironmonger engineering types, they might 
>just be using the team's output for doorstops or frisbees while they 
>head straight for Tom's material for their answers.
>
>Gene Kim-Eng
>
>
>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: "Ned Bedinger" <doc -at- edwordsmith -dot- com>
>> What you still need for this air-tight case against continuing to employ 
>> Tom is to discuss his work with the roles/people who use it for support. 
>> It is a long shot, but maybe he has learned a lot, in ten years with the 
>> company, about the company and what works. And maybe he's right that 
>> your process is a silly bunch of whirly-twirly make-work. Unless you can 
>> make the case against him in these terms, you haven't really finished 
>> him off, IMHO.  Most managers would not agree with me about this, however.
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 45
>Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 23:49:54 +0000
>From: DonaLuisa_nwr -at- comcast -dot- net (DonaLuisa)
>Subject: RE: Spell-checking text entered in MS Word forms?
>To: "Chinell, David F (GE Indust, Security)" <David -dot- Chinell -at- GE -dot- com>,
>	"TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
>Message-ID:
>	<070220072349 -dot- 18707 -dot- 46898F2200092D6C0000491322064244139D9902A10E9C079AB40E0201BB -at- comcast -dot- net>
>	
>
>Thanks for the tip. In the past, I've had difficulty with template macros working across the various platforms used by our organization. But I'm willing to try. I tried it today: I couldn't get it to work.
>
>I created the macro by pasting in the code at the link you provided, In my .doc test, I received a popup with the message, "Compile error: Sub or Function not defined" and the VB editor displayed the following as highlighted: "Call CheckProtectedSection".
>
>I only have 8 form fields in one table, one field is a dropdown, all in one section. In the template, I protected via the forms toolbar. 
>
>I will probably not use the form feature, and try to figure out how to use checkboxes in place of the dropdown selection. But I am curious why the macro doesn't work. Any idears?
>
>-DonaLuisa
>
> -------------- Original message ----------------------
>From: "Chinell, David F (GE Indust, Security)" <David -dot- Chinell -at- GE -dot- com>
>> DonaLuisa:
>> 
>> Please refer to this topic for information on spell checking in
>> protected documents.
>> 
>> http://word.mvps.org/faqs/macrosvba/SpellcheckProtectDoc.htm 
>> 
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 46
>Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 19:39:45 -0500
>From: "Mike Starr" <mikestarr-techwr-l -at- writestarr -dot- com>
>Subject: Re: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>To: <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
>Message-ID: <A93025CFE5C84AED8E042A88D3F44159 -at- LiteStar>
>Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
>	reply-type=original
>
>Everyone seems to be jumping on the "pitch him out" bandwagon but I wonder 
>if HR can establish a process whereby he's demoted from his senior level 
>status if he can't improve his performance. Maybe make it a two-step 
>process... improve your performance within 60 days or get demoted two 
>levels. Then if you still haven't improved after another 60 days, we'll have 
>to let you go. Of course, you've always got the option of seeking a more 
>suitable position elsewhere in the company.
>
>As far as his working 40 hours when the rest of the team is working 45 
>hours, I say ignore the number of hours and concentrate on whether he's 
>achieving his assigned objectives. However, I'm also inclined to believe 
>that good management assigns objectives that can be accomplished by a 
>skilled employee in a 40-hour work week.
>
>Mike
>--
>Mike Starr                            WriteStarr Information Services
>Technical Writer   -   Online Help Developer   -    Website developer
>Graphic Designer    -    Desktop Publisher   -       MS Office Expert
>Phone: (262) 694-1028 - Tollfree: (877) 892-1028 - Fax:(262) 697-6334
>Email: mike -at- writestarr -dot- com      -      Web: http://www.writestarr.com
>
>----- Original Message -----
>Subject: FWD: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>
>
>> Tom was assigned to my department 8 months ago and is physically
>> in my building. He's been with the company for 10 years and
>> has the most senior writing title available at the company. In
>> the 10 years, he's worked as a course developer in a group that
>> had no leadership until just before he transferred out to be the
>> engineering writer. As the engineering writer, he wrote (?)
>> technical material that went on the support site and did other
>> writing. Reading his work from both times, I suspect strongly he
>> gathered what others wrote and put it all together into one place.
>>
>> Tom spent 3 months training on our process, our writing style and
>> guidelines, and so on. At the end of that time, he assured me he
>> understood what, why, and how we were doing what we do. He met with
>> me and my boss and said he felt ready. So I started giving him
>> assignments appropriate to his job title.
>>
>> He's not flourishing. Tom violates our process, our writing
>> guidelines, and our style guide. His writing is weak - passive
>> voice and not user-focused. He works 40 hours a week in a department
>> where we all work 45+ hours a week. He doesn't take ownership of his
>> projects and drive them the way we expect a most senior level writer
>> to do.
>>
><snip>
>>
>> Functionally, he's a baby writer, except he's paid and titled at
>> the most senior level in the company. He doesn't know our technology
>> (although people think he does because he's been here so long) and
>> his writing is fairly weak. I can't match him with a less senior
>> writer for buddy learning because most of my other writers are
>> technically less senior than him. I can't let him team lead my new
>> writer to teach him our way (the best way to learn a subject may be
>> to teach it) because he could screw the new writer up badly and we
>> don't have time to unlearn the new writer. 
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 47
>Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 19:50:47 -0700
>From: "Lauren" <lt34 -at- csus -dot- edu>
>Subject: RE: Lack of self-awareness in a writer...what to do
>To: "'Mike Starr'" <mike -at- writestarr -dot- com>,
>	<techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
>Message-ID: <20070703024735 -dot- 60C267AA87 -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
>Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="US-ASCII"
>
>> From: Mike Starr
>
>> Everyone seems to be jumping on the "pitch him out" bandwagon 
>> but I wonder 
>> if HR can establish a process whereby he's demoted from his 
>> senior level 
>> status if he can't improve his performance. Maybe make it a two-step 
>
>I thought about that too, but he's been there 10 years and the rest of team,
>except one person, have been there 2 years or less.  Some companies place a
>lot of weight in how long a person has been at the company and it might be
>difficult to demote a person with 10-year seniority to the level of a person
>with less than 2-year seniority.
>
>If Tom is persistently resistant to the team's process, then maybe he should
>be transferred to another group rather than fired.  I'm starting to think
>that the OP might not really be in a position to fire Tom, but it is really
>unfair to let him stay in a department where he doesn't fit in.
>
>Lauren
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 48
>Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 20:17:49 -0700
>From: Ned Bedinger <doc -at- edwordsmith -dot- com>
>Subject: Re: 40-hour weeks (was Re: FWD: Lack...)
>To: Mary Arrotti <mary_arrotti -at- yahoo -dot- com>
>Cc: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>Message-ID: <4689BFDD -dot- 90603 -at- edwordsmith -dot- com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
>
>Mary Arrotti wrote:
>
>>   The point is that very, very few people want to work more than 40 hours a week. The reality is that many of us have to - our jobs and workloads (and sometimes pride & self-respect) require it. 
>
>My co-worker tells me that a 30-35 hour work week is the norm in other 
>parts of the world (outside of US, and even in some US sectors).  Is 
>anyone looking at a work week shorter than 40 hours?
>
>Personally, I think that anyone who can do their work in 40 can probably 
>do it in 35.
>
>Ned Bedinger
>doc -at- edwordsmith -dot- com
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>You are currently subscribed to 
>TECHWR-L.
>To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
>http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/listinfo/techwr-l
>Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-  Visit 
>http://www.techwr-l.com/ for more resources and info.
>
>End of TECHWR-L Digest, Vol 21, Issue 1
>***************************************



^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Create HTML or Microsoft Word content and convert to Help file formats or 
printed documentation. Features include support for Windows Vista & 2007 
Microsoft Office, team authoring, plus more.
http://www.DocToHelp.com/TechwrlList

True single source, conditional content, PDF export, modular help.
Help & Manual is the most powerful authoring tool for technical
documentation. Boost your productivity! http://www.helpandmanual.com

---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- 

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
techwr-l-unsubscribe -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
or visit http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/options/techwr-l/archive%40web.techwr-l.com


To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr-l-join -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com

Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-  Visit
http://www.techwr-l.com/ for more resources and info.