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: Work harder, not smarter From:Andrew Plato <intrepid_es -at- yahoo -dot- com> To:"TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com> Date:Mon, 19 Nov 2001 20:12:52 -0800 (PST)
--- Steve Hudson <steve -at- wright -dot- com -dot- au> wrote:
> > Somebody wrote something to me today that I've heard thousands of
> times,
> but it really hit me today seeing as how we're debating doc plans.
>
> I guess the flipside to your rant is that I can't stand people who are
> arrogant enough to think that there is no room for improvement. Its hard
> to
> improve what you cannot (or refuse to) define. Let alone most of us are
> employed by someone else who regularly wants some sort of report stating
> what has been done, what is being done, and what will be done.
>
> Plus the simplest way to improve Quality is to consistantly apply a
> process.
Again - sounds great. Reality is often somewhere in the chaos. I don't
think any of us would support a "don't improve" work ethic. My point is
that by applying oneself to their work (working hard) you will get better
and you will figure out how to improve the process. When you can produce
quality work, you will by definition have a quality process - since it is
the outcome that ultimately matters.
> The cats end up "infinitely more efficient" purely because, on their own
> back, they investigate a variety of processes for catching mice, add a
> relative weighting to the methodology based on the outcome and repeat.
> Sooner or later their process stablises and they achieve consistant
> results.
Bingo.
> Now, what we are doing can't be 'remembered' / 'documented' by our
> instincts - as is the case in your analogy. Thus we need to write it
> down.
> Additionally, if its written down another set of impartial eyes can be
> run over it.
Ahhh, transferrance. Sounds nice. You write it down and teach the next
generation...who screws it up and designs a new process.
Again - these things must be internalized. Writing them down to pass on
your brilliance to others might feel swell. But the people who come next
must be able, willing, and capable of adopting said processes and
internalizing them - not merely regurgitating what they have been ordered
to to. Following directions makes you a good drone, not a good employee.
Part of "improving the process" is to challenge its fundamental
assumptions.
Andrew Plato
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month. http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Collect Royalties, Not Rejection Letters! Tell us your rejection story when you
submit your manuscript to iUniverse Nov. 6 -Dec. 15 and get five free copies of
your book. What are you waiting for? http://www.iuniverse.com/media/techwr
---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.