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: accuracy from reviewers? From:Chris Hamilton <chamilton -at- GR -dot- COM> Date:Mon, 7 Oct 1996 07:17:37 -0500
Rebecca Phillips wrote:
> Another way that works to some degree is a sign-off sheet. In my last job, the
> engineer had to sign off on the final review. The sheet had some kind of disclaimer
> saying that the SME had reviewed the material and found it technically accurate. I can't
> say it made everyone care, but it made a lot of the engineers say, "Hey, you mean
> I am _responsible_ for the content?" (It also covers your behind, if that sort of thing matters to you.)
On my last job all the technical leads were required to sign and date
the final document. We did this for ISO reasons (our in-house expert
said it was a good idea). If their signature was in the document for
everyone to see, they were real interested in it being just right.
While this helped assure quality, it lead to some real interesting
debates over things like margin size. Generally, it worked.
--
Chris Hamilton, Technical Writer
Greenbrier and Russel
chamilton -at- gr -dot- com
847.330.4146
-----------------------------