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.
My first reaction was "Erk... editors evaluating writers..." but I'll look
beyond that. ;-)
I'd say be very objective (of course). Things to consider (and I'm guessing
by 'applications' that you mean the tools they use to get the job done, not
what they document):
* their consistent use of templates
* their level of understanding of the tools used (how many use-based
questions do they ask?)
* their adaptability to the tools (do they learn and retain everything or do
they flounder?)
* are they actively current in their technology use, or is it a chore to get
them to upgrade and apply that upgrade to their job successfully?
* how many formatting errors do you catch, and is it a result of
questionable content or sloppiness
Bill Swallow
Technical Writer
Aptis
a subsidiary of Billing Concepts
phone: 518.433.7698
fax: 518.433.7680
<mailto:wswallow -at- commsoft -dot- net>
<http://www.aptissoftware.com>
> -----Original Message-----
> Does anyone have a list of tips/criteria for evaluating writers?
>
> As the company's editor, I have been asked by my boss to give a brief
> report/evaluation of the writers and their competence with the
> applications
> we use. All ideas will be appreciated.
>
