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.
> Our department writes training manuals, IS user manuals, and company
> policies and procedures. We have always written these in present tense,
> active voice. The lawyers are now wanting us to write everything in future
> tense (and thus putting it in passive voice).
As Dick said, what everyone said... ;-)
But I think Dick is on target. I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that the lawyers
are worried about the company policies and procedures portion, and that
they're looking for imperatives and expectations. As litigious as our
society is, there are huge liability issues related to company policy
documents. Here are a few snippets from an "Electronic Usage Policy" doc
that just happens to be handy:
"...employees shall not use any electronic communications device in a manner
that would violate..." [imperative]
"Any employee who uses any electronic communications device will therefore
be subject to corrective action, up to and including termination, for..."
[future, setting expectations]
"Vendor licensing regulations will be followed for all commercial software
installed..." [imperative]
"The IT Department will inspect the company's computers periodically to
verify..." [future, setting expectations]
Like Dick, I'm inclined to use second person for the imperatives: "Follow
vendor licensing regulations...," "Don't use any...device in a manner that
violates..."
I'm less sure of what to do about some of the expectation-setting
constructions. Because of word connotations or whatever, "The IT Dept.
periodically inspects..." just sounds less forceful than "...*will*
inspect..." And "you can be punished" seems wimpy compared to "you *will* be
punished."
I suggest you take a look at your policy docs with an eye toward how
imperatives and expectations are expressed, maybe come up with some
alternatives for how to express them, and then sit down with the lawyers and
talk about how to best satisfy their liability concerns. Remind them that
clarity, directness, and readability can be issues with legal ramifications,
too.
But, remember, I'm not a lawyer and this isn't legal advice. ;-)
Richard
------
Richard G. Combs
Senior Technical Writer
Voyant, a division of Polycom, Inc.
richardDOTcombs AT polycomDOTcom
richardDOTcombs AT voyanttechDOTcom
303-223-5111
------
rgcombs AT freeDASHmarketDOTnet
303-777-0436
------
ROBOHELP FOR FRAMEMAKER AS LOW AS $299! Offer expires March 31.
Publish your FrameMaker documents online -- quickly and easily!
New licenses are only $899 for one and $499 for additional licenses.
Use a competitor's product? Switch to RoboHelp for FrameMaker
for only $299! Buy today: CALL 1-800-462-4420 or 1 858-847-7900.
Hurry, offer expires March 31 2004.
---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archiver -at- techwr-l -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.
