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.
Aimee Hall reports: <<I manage a graphic designer and a technical writer,
and I do a little bit of each myself. I was thrown into the position of
manager about 4 months ago when my boss abruptly left the company... now
it's time to do the yearly reviews, and I need a little guidance. The
technical writer that I manage is a classic example of the "font monkey.">>
Please use the correct technical terminology, or other managers will mock
you publicly. That should be "font fondler". <g>
<<He has turned his job into, basically, data entry--the engineers give him
a draft or a marked-up copy of an old manual, and he "formats" it. He
doesn't seem to suggest improvements, clear up inconsistencies, or actually
*write* anything. The manuals include numerous grammar errors, and even his
"formatting" is flawed--cross references that reference nonexistent
sections/pages, 11 point type mixed with 12 point type, inconsistent spacing
between paragraphs, sporadic use of stylesheets...>>
The first step in correcting any employee problem is to bring it to the
person's attention, define the problem concretely (e.g., "this
cross-reference doesn't go to the right topic" rather than "you do sloppy
work"), and express your desire that the situation improve. Do it in
writing, with a copy to the Human Resources (HR) department for proof. If
you haven't done this yet, you can't really criticize the employee for not
rising to your standards. What you can do is lay down the law now and state
that things will have to change for the better.
The types of errors that you mention are all things that are easily
"counted", and you can thus establish an objective metric to determine
whether the change has occurred. Make a list of the problems you've found,
and define each one so there's no wiggle room--create the definitions with
the employee so he can't object or claim to have misunderstood. Each problem
now provides a metric you can track ("number of errors of type X"), and from
this point onwards, review each document he produces and calculate the value
of each of these metrics.
Establish a deadline for improvement, and define what level of improvement
you expect. For example: "By January 1st, reduce the number of incorrect
cross-references to zero." (Assuming you've defined "incorrect" previously.)
If the guy is really hopeless, do triage: pick the most important things or
the ones with the biggest payback first, and work on those.
<<When I was promoted, I was given the option of firing my technical writer
and hiring a "secretary" to do his job.>>
If the writer proves really recalcitrant, that's an awfully big club you can
wield: "Look, I've tried to bring you up to speed rather than firing you
like Big Boss suggested. If you can't fix the problems we've discussed, I
won't be able to keep you here anymore."* That's kinda like using a nuke,
though, if you're serious about wanting to train him to improve:
* That's a paraphrase of what you've said. You shouldn't play "good cop, bad
cop" with an employee if you can avoid it because if they find out, they'll
never trust you again. So only say this if it's true and you really mean it.
<<I rejected this option in favor of trying to train this guy into a good
(or at least average) technical writer. He has shown some improvement in the
brief time that I've been managing, although there is still a lot of room
for improvement.>>
Working together to define the problems so that he can't claim not to
understand them is an important first step. Setting performance targets for
resolving these problems is an excellent second step. For some things, such
as incorrect cross-references, you can legitimately expect him to aim for
"zero defects" in a short period of time. For others, such as "create more
original material", you may have to accept a slower rate of progress, but
even there, you can define a clear goal. For example: "By January 1st,
document the Print topic entirely on your own, with the only input from Joe
Developer being a technical review of what you've written." Then talk to Joe
to make sure he's onboard and understands the rules of the game.
<<When I do his evaluation, is it fair for me to give him a failing grade on
"quality of work" when he has not had proper guidance in what constitutes
acceptable quality?>>
That question pretty much answers itself, right? No, it's not fair. But if
you provide "proper guidance" starting today (as suggested above), you can
certainly fail him next time around if he's not making progress.
<<Can I assume that these are skills he should already have developed? Or
should I give him the benefit of the doubt that he will
improve if I work with him?>>
Not everyone is interested in improving, so don't assume. But if you define
your expectations clearly and work to help him meet those expectations, you
should certainly expect an improvement. If that improvement doesn't happen,
then you need to take action. This usually comes in the form of "improve or
we'll cut you loose"--expressed more diplomatically, of course. But if you
take that path, you need to clearly document the problems and the progress
towards resolving them.
Get your HR department involved, because they're the ones who can tell you
what the local regulations are for dismissing a nonperforming employee. But
the gold standard that protects you from an unjust dismissal lawsuit is
generally something along the lines of "explain the problem clearly in front
of an HR witness, establish objective metrics that everyone agrees on, track
those metrics, and provide a couple of written warnings with copy to HR if
the objectives aren't being met". In short, document everything, with
reliable witnesses, and CYA.
<<As a possibly-related aside, I was hired 3 months after him, for the same
job description, at what I would later find out was 25% less pay... Even
after my promotion, he still makes 10% more than me.>>
Except for star employees (which this guy isn't), there's no excuse for a
manager earning less than the staff they manage. One thing to keep in mind
(watch for symptoms): Does he resent your promotion over his head? If so,
you've got a much more delicate problem to solve.
--Geoff Hart, ghart -at- [delete]videotron -dot- ca
Forest Engineering Research Institute of Canada
580 boul. St-Jean
Pointe-Claire, Que., H9R 3J9 Canada
"Wisdom is one of the few things that look bigger the further away it
is."--Terry Pratchett
RoboHelp for FrameMaker is a NEW online publishing tool for FrameMaker that
lets you easily single-source content to online Help, intranet, and Web.
The interface is designed for FrameMaker users, so there is little or no
learning curve and no macro language required! Call 800-718-4407 for
competitive pricing or download a trial at: http://www.ehelp.com/techwr-l4
---
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.
