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:FWD: Re: What to do about a recommendation? From:Administrator at TECHWR-L <admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com> To:techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com Date:Wed, 25 Oct 2006 04:08:25 -0600
Response from original poster--also forwarded anonymously on request.
*********************************************************************
Robotti, Anne wrote:
> >I bet Anonymous doesn't mean they *never* said anything to the guy about
> >expectations, or deadlines, or scope of work, or negative reviews of
> >docs. They just never sat him down for the Big Talk.
Yes. We have given feedback. One of the problems is that the feedback isn’t
taken well. A couple of examples:
* I get a draft. I mark up 30 things that should be fixed. Only 20 actually
get fixed.
* Contractor sends an email that borders on rudeness. I tell the contractor
a polite way to convey the same message. Contractor sends another email
with the same tone as the first.
It’s not that we haven’t said *anything,* but we haven’t dealt with it in a
comprehensive way. We’ve only addressed each individual incident, and we
haven’t addressed the attitude problem. That was the tactical decision that
we made: Address what needs to be addressed to get the doc out the door in
one piece. Let the other issues slide.
Gene Kim-Eng wrote:
> >The contractor's contributions were obviously good enough
> >that the OP was not moved to fire the person.
Yes. The contractor's contributions were good enough that we were not moved
to fire the person. The doc that we got out of this was acceptable. It
wasn’t great, but it was acceptable. It also required lots of extra work
from other people on the team to make sure that it came out OK.
Gene, thank you for responding. From reading your other techwr-l posts, I
have a pretty high regard for your opinions.
James Barrow wrote:
> >I'm trying to imagine a meeting between contractor and manager
during which
> >the 'no, with no explanation' approach was used. Lots of awkward
silence,
> >don't you think.
I think that scenario actually sounds easier than the “end-of-contract
review” that Gene advocates.
Thank you to everyone for their feedback. After reading people’s comments,
I’m going to decline to give a reference. I’m going to try the
end-of-contract review, but based on past experience with providing
feedback to this person, I’m not sure it will be taken.
Also, just to be clear, I didn’t “take a management position.” I was
cruising along happily as a sole writer. We had a blip and needed a
contactor, so I got handed the responsibility for taking care of the
contractor. I hope to very soon go back to cruising along happily as a sole
writer.
WebWorks ePublisher Pro for Word features support for every major Help
format plus PDF, HTML and more. Flexible, precise, and efficient content
delivery. Try it today! http://www.webworks.com/techwr-l
Easily create HTML or Microsoft Word content and convert to any popular Help file format or printed documentation. Learn more at http://www.DocToHelp.com/TechwrlList