Re: Manual evaluation without metrics (Unclassified)

[Chuck Banks <chuck -at- ASL -dot- DL -dot- NEC -dot- COM>]

Whew, Simon, how you _do_ go on!

Seriously, Simon, on your chicken-or-the-egg question, I've
seen both methods work quite well.  At NEC, we have writers
who were once technicians and engineers and we have writers
who came to us with vast writing credentials and little or
no technical experience.

We use a JPL-style "Levels of Edit" system to take advantage
of the best skills and knowledge of all involved.  Of course,
this leads to harmonious discussions on content and style
with little blood shed I'm happy to relate.

I don't think we could achieve the same qualities of clear
language, form and purpose relationship, and certainly not
the current level of completeness of information without
both types of writers.

One thing I have noticed about the two types of writers is
the difference in their approaches to their jobs.  The
technician or engineer now a writer seems to prefer to
see examples, touch the product, disect what is and improve
it to better support the poor devil actually doing the job.
The writer being taught technology is more skilled as
researching and sifting source information, pulling new
designs out of a hat, translating situations into communication
models.  The skills and knowledge of the two groups do
complement each other very well.

So, I don't support either method of growing good technical
writers to the exclusion of the other.  There is a need
for both types of writers.

Chuck Banks
--
__        ________     ______
|\\   |  ||          //              Chuck Banks
| \\  |  ||_______  ||               Senior Technical Writer
|  \\ |  ||         ||               NEC America, Inc.
|   \\|   \\______   \\______        E-Mail:      chuck -at- asl -dot- dl -dot- nec -dot- com
America, Incorporated                CompuServe:  72520,411