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: Usability Testing From:Toni Williams TPG/SG <towilliams -at- PROCYONGROUP -dot- COM> Date:Tue, 23 Jun 1998 14:39:03 -0700
I would venture to guess that this situation is familiar to at least 90%
of tech writers. I haven't had a position in the last 15 years that
didn't encompass it to some degree. In short, I would say that it *is*
ubiquitous.
Even when I've managed to express these "concerns" to a usually
understanding management, I get much head-nodding and sympathetic noises
but no changes.
It can be very discouraging. You just do the best you can.
Toni
whose opinions are only her own.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lynn Perry [SMTP:clperry -at- WALLDATA -dot- COM]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 1998 10:03 PM
> To: TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU
> Subject: FW: Usability Testing
>
>> Barbara Karst-Sabin wrote
>>(heavily snipped)
>>... the real driving force in all of this is marketing. They
sell the
>>product as soon
> >> as someone has ... begun brainstorming. The engineers are then
> driven
> > >to provide something that will ... do the job that marketing has
> >> promised, and as quickly as is humanly possible. Quicker.
> >>
> >> Meanwhile, the tech writers are there madly trying to develop a doc
> plan
> > >on
> >> something that doesn't exist and are then forced to begin preparing
> the
> > >documentation when there are still numerous, significant issues
> regarding
> > >the
> > >products actual functionality still to be decided.
> >>
>><snip> My attempts to query things
> >> that obviously weren't going to work were met with annoyance, at
> the very
> > >best
> > >of times. <snip> so that the developers could be forced to iron out
> the
> >> wrinkles
> >> the writers had already shown them. To add insult to injury, the
> problems
> > >were categorized as "documentation faults"!
> ...
>
>Well said. I have encountered exactly this situation in most of
the tech
>writing positions I've had in the past 10 years. <snip>.
>
>I wonder how prevalent this situation is. It seems ubiquitous.
Is it?
>LyP
>clperry -at- walldata -dot- com
>My opinions do not necessarily reflect those of Wall Data
International and
>vice versa.