RE: Nobody reviewed the manuals

Subject: RE: Nobody reviewed the manuals
From: "Dan Goldstein" <DGoldstein -at- riverainmedical -dot- com>
To: <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 13:06:30 -0400

It's also been reported that there were established procedures for
capping the exploratory well before moving the rig, and that those
procedures weren't followed. Even if you have the clearest, best-written
instructions in the world, you still need to make sure they're followed.
The company has to invest in writing and validating the instructions, of
course -- but also in training the employees and auditing subsequent
behavior. In my experience, the writing is the easiest part!

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Al Geist
> Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2010 12:59 PM
> To: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
> Subject: Nobody reviewed the manuals
> I'm sure everyone by now has heard about the big oil spill
> going on in the Gulf or Mexico. Associate Press today
> announced that an analysis of BP's contingency plans show
> they were "riddled with omissions and glaring errors." It
> seems that the authors face what most of us in the field
> confront on a daily basis..everyone wants the manuals done by
> some impossible deadline, but nobody has anytime to review
> the material to see if it is relevant, accurate, or complete.
> If those documents are like some I've had to clean up, they
> are virtually useless because they were copied from previous
> documents, which were copies of older documents, which were
> copies... In management's eyes, this is good, economic use of
> resources. In the department heads eyes, it's a checkbox that
> is filled without having to take an engineer or programmer
> off some critical task. In the user's eyes, it means fumbling
> around to figure things out before the system crashes and
> management starts looking over your shoulder. Been fighting
> for better manuals for nearly 40 years and I will guarantee
> that there are more BP-type contingency plans out there. What
> management doesn't realize is that it cost a lot more to
> clean up the mess than it would to produce is relevant,
> accurate, and complete material in the first place. BP knows
> the consequences many other companies (small or
> large) have had their eyes opened?

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.


Gain access to everything you need to create and publish documentation,
manuals, and other information through multiple channels. Choose
authoring (and import) as well as virtually any output you may need.

- Use this space to communicate with TECHWR-L readers -
- Contact admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com for more information -

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

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 for more resources and info.

Please move off-topic discussions to the Chat list, at:


Nobody reviewed the manuals: From: Al Geist

Previous by Author: RE: Google Chrome not working with WebHelp ?
Next by Author: RE: Nobody reviewed the manuals
Previous by Thread: Nobody reviewed the manuals
Next by Thread: RE: Nobody reviewed the manuals

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads