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.
Lisa (not 23) wrote:
>On the other hand, I would definitely not advocate putting her feelings or
>her education ahead the company's needs. That is, if fixing what she's done
>is going to take more time and result in an inferior product as opposed to
>what would result if you were to take charge of the project and have her
>work in a different capacity.
On the other hand, training/mentoring a newbie into an experienced technical
writer is (or ought to be) a company need: and done badly (for example, by
giving her the impression that you think nothing she does is right) she may
just decide to take her training and walk out in a year or two, so that the
company loses everything it's invested in her.
It's a question, it seems to me, of long-term gain v. short-term gain:
investment in training isn't just a matter of paying for training courses or
time spent by experienced staff in mentoring new staff, but of accepting
that a newbie won't do the same quality of work at the same speed as an old
hand, and shouldn't be expected to do so. For a while, a newbie is going to
do lower-quality work at a lower speed: that's an inevitable phase. If she's
made to feel bad, she'll go somewhere else, and if she's as good as
described and *wants* to be a technical author, that would be a shame.
Jane Carnall
Technical Writer, Compaq, UK
Unless stated otherwise, these opinions are mine, and mine alone.
