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.
I recognize that SME, or subject matter expert, is the standard
> jargon; however, I agree with John that "matter" is extraneous.
> It's the kind of language that editors and writers are taught to
> watch for and eradicate. So why do we perpetuate it?
> As John says, the best approach is to just say what the subject
> is: bird brain expert, widget interface expert, technical
> writing expert. If the subject is obvious from the context, just
> say expert.
While I agree in theory with all that Beverly and John are saying, the fact is
that "subject matter expert" or "subject expert" or "expert" or whatever is
NOT something most of us generally use in our documentation. It is our way of
identifying a person who provides us with input of whatever sort. I have never
seen or heard this term used outside of informal communication between tech.
writers.
Nobody ever comes to me and says "who's your subject matter expert for XYZ
project?" They say "who's your SME?" (pronounced "smee"). It's just a way of
abbreviating the question. It's also, I think, sort of a cute way of making
these people seem less intimidating--"my SME" is a friendly, intimate way of
talking about someone, I think.
In any case, I feel that relative wordiness of what SME is an abbreviation for
isn't really the point. SME is now a word on its own.
Nora
merhar -at- alena -dot- switch -dot- rockwell -dot- com
