TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: Tech Writer Compensation From:Bonni Graham <bonnig -at- IX -dot- NETCOM -dot- COM> Date:Mon, 13 Feb 1995 15:21:50 -0800
Jan asks for a new answer
>How about a new and improved answer that addresses the point?
Admittedly, I just rejoined the list, so I may have missed the original
point, but it seems to me that the direction this thread is going
implies that markerting writing is somehow "easier" than technical
writing. I've done both, and I'd say they're about equivalent, in terms
of pure writing energy.
I usually charge a little *more* for brochures, though, unless my role
is strictly copywriting (rare, in my experience). I usually have to
spend more time tweaking text to fit in a brochure, since space is fixed
(more so than in manuals, anyway) so my editing time and effort is
higher.
Getting all the information in a restricted amount of space is no mean
challenge and the client should expect to be billed to reflect the time
and energy required to meet that challenge successfully.
About Shelly's point, I certainly would not expect to get the same FLAT
fee for a project that takes an hour vs one that takes all summer. I
surely would, however, expect to get the same HOURLY fee. My time is my
time -- it and my expertise are all I HAVE to sell.
Hope that helps, rather than hinders, the discussion.
Bonni Graham
Owner, Manual Labour
bonnig -at- ix -dot- netcom -dot- com
