Re: The Worst Thing About Contracting

[Andrew Plato <intrepid_es -at- YAHOO -dot- COM>]

I think Tony's ideas about contracting are a little "old school".  Yes,
contracting is difficult.  But, I don not think it isolates writers from their
skills.  In many ways, it frees them from the shackles of oppression.

Yes, some companies think of contractors as word processors. In my experience,
professional contractors avoid these nasty companies like a wasps nest. You can
always sniff out these places.  The interviewer makes in clear in the initial
meeting that as a bottom-feeding contractor you have no human rights and you
are to be the personal slave of some swaggering, smug technical writer who
strokes his/her certificates and STC plaques all day.

When I see this sh*t happening, I jump ship immediately.  Why work with them? I
am only looking at months of being humiliated by people who can barely tie
their shoes. There are thousands of other companies who respect contractors,
give them good assignments and ensure they have authority to get the job done.

More often than not here is what I see happen at good companies:

1.  The full-time writers cannot get a job done. They are woefully behind
schedule.  They are spending 99% of their time blaming someone else for their
inability to get the job done.

2.  The engineers, marketers, support, etc. become frustrated with the blazing
incompetence of these writers. So they hire a contractor. Hopefully, they get a
good, professional contractor.

3.  The contractor, a professional who is accustomed to dealing with volatile
environments, blazes through work quickly.  This makes the engineers, support,
etc. happy. It makes the full-timers look like dog poop.

4.  Naturally, the full-timers get angry. Their tender sensitivities and
intricate processes were not considered.  They make an awful racket to upper
management subsequently forcing the engineers, support, etc. to accept them
again. Naturally, all of this racket-making diverts the writers from actually
writing anything.  So while they are complaining, the contractor was getting
work done.

5.  By the time the racket is over, the contractor is done with his/her
deliverables.  He/she leaves armed with new experiences, new skills, and new
perspectives. Mostly, he/she leaves without ever having to get involved in any
of the inane company politics.

6.  The full-timers take credit for the contractor's work and return to
obsessing over fonts and spaces. The company slips back into non-productive
work, and cycles back around.

I have contracted for almost six years and I have seen this cycle play itself
out dozens times.  I have had full-time writers call me names and actually tell
me to stop doing good work.  I had one writer a few years back tell me I was
not allowed to know about some tool because that was not part of my job. "Say
what?"  I suppose next he was going to tell me I had to wear a uniform to work.


I think the whole concept of "intellectual turf" is ridiculously old-school.
The important thing is to get the job done, period.  If you obsess over who
owns what information you are not getting work done.  Every moment a writer is
not actively and aggressively working toward the delivery of material is wasted
time.

Knowledge is power and you cannot control the ability for people to gain
knowledge.  Communism and fascism tried to do this and look where it got them.
You don't see to many companies with slogans like:  "General Technologies:
Communism in Action."  Ever wonder why?

Moreover, the idea that all contractors are lost souls wandering the river Styx
is nonsense. Sure, some less-experienced contractors are milquetoast puffs of
air that float from job to job.

However, in my experience, many independent contractors have chosen the
contracting life because they loathe the whole politic charged environment of a
full-time job. I would much sooner be a "mercenary of words" than regular army
puke who marches in lock step to the fascist rhetoric of some narrow visioned
leader.

"Seig Style Guide! Seig Review Committee! Seig STC!"

The idea of some "manager" actually sitting in their cube ruminating over the
concepts of "knowledge ownership" is chilling.  Like I am not allowed to know
something because the Grand Master Style Manual hath forbade me as a Technical
Communicator Level III, Unimatrix 8 to only to work on Subjects X-20393 and
X-939309 exclusively.

It is all like some LSD induced Terry Gillam-esque Nazi nightmare - Information
Retreival SS.  -shiver-

Well, anyway - contracting is the ideal world for people who work hard, like a
little adventure, can handle volatile environments, don't like bullsh*t and
know their technologies well.  While some contractors are derailed and lost,
most of the *truly professional* contractors are right on track ready to run
down the swarms of morons.

Andrew Plato
President / Principal Consultant
Anitian Consulting, Inc.
www.anitian.com


--- Anthony Markatos <tonymar -at- HOTMAIL -dot- COM> wrote:
> I create technical communication documents for complex buisness
> software systems.  Contract software technical writers (or at least
> all that I have know) are basically wordprocessors.  And they are
> locked into that mode by the very nature of most businesses.
>
> How so?  It goes like this:
>
> 1.)  Software technical writing is, in the main, specification of
> procedure.
>
> 2.) Knowledge of procedure is turf.  And most end users and end user
> knowledgeable analysts/developers strongly defend "their" turf.
> (Beleive me, this is often the case at even higher levels within an
> organization.)
>
> 3.)  Contractors are outsiders.  People are most defensive of their
> turf against outsiders.  Therefore, contractors are setup to have a
> very difficult time gathering and (especially) verifying procedure.
> Often, it is impossible to do such.
>
> What acctually plays out on contract assignments?  You may simply re-
> hash existing developer (non user focused) notes.  Or you may type
> up what people want you to know - which is always alot about HOW the
> software works and very lean on WHAT the software does.  (Note: End
> users want to know WHAT the software does, not HOW it works.)
>
> End result - as a contractor, the technical communicator's
> professional development is derailed.  You move away from an end user
> (task oriented) approach.  You forget that such an approach even
> exists.  Unfortunately, I know of many contractor technical writers
> (many with a very good accademic backgrounds) who believe poor
> technical communications is "standard" technical communications.
>
> Contractors do make good money.  Some very good money.  However, they
> pay a heavy price for that money.
>

>


_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com


 From ??? -at- ??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000=