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.
The Gene Kim-Eng wrote:
> You charged the same rate all the time? I had a
> schedule of rates I sometimes used when I did
> more contracting. It goes something like this
> (the numbers will be 4-5 years out of date
> because I've not revised it lately):
Excellent! I expect that the effect of your fee menu is pest
control--clients manage the work they give you best when they can't
avoid the real costs of assigning scut work. I believe that is ideally
how a tech writer who knows the work should control the work contracted
for.
The system, especially the W-2 system of contracting, would benefit from
learning such a taxonomy of tech writing work, instead of focusing on
tech writing titles like Senior, TW I or II, etc.
This is fertile ground, so I want to plant a few seed ideas:
When we sign on for a fixed rate and attempt to do anything/everything
the employer asks, I think it fuels the perception of us as
one-size-fits-all (OSFA), which IMHO sets the stage for cascading
failures of expectations and delivery. An agency or employer who sees
only a uniform task called "tech writing" and believes they're hiring
the OSFA tech writer is bound to create misery. Examples abound; Gene's
fee structure anticipates this problem by letting his fees reflect the
difficulty. In most cases, a client could frame the work in one of the
lower fee areas by actively factoring the technical writing into a
project, and generally behaving as if it matters.
And one more logical seed:
Anyone attempting to evangelize tech communications would help us by
focusing on the tech writer's view of value and costs, and focus on it
more, possibly to the exclusion of the abstract marketing schtick about
how we create value in so many ways.
Our value is plain and simple: If they need us to write, then their
cost/benefit model ought to give us credit. If it doesn't, then it is
cockeyed, skewed for some reason. That direction of skewness might be
the notion that no one reads our work, or that our value is marginal
because we suck up SME resources that aren't in the budget, or any of
the other usual impediments to our claiming value and professional dignity,
All of those impediments and attempts to calculate the value of our work
are inconsistent with acknowledgement of the need for tech writing and
the fact that they call on us to do it. The work they give us and the
fees we charge are what defines our value. We can't create value for
them if they don't value having the work they give us done by us.
Employers know the value we add, that's why they call us.
That is the direct route to the heart of the matter concerned with the
value of what we do on the job. To that we can add the dollar value in
reducing the number of calls for tech support, etc.
OK, seeds planted and fertilized, please stay on the path.
Ned Bedinger
doc -at- edwordsmith -dot- com
The Gene Kim-Eng wrote:
> You charged the same rate all the time? I had a
> schedule of rates I sometimes used when I did
> more contracting. It goes something like this
> (the numbers will be 4-5 years out of date
> because I've not revised it lately):
>
> Research and write your documents from
> hands-on access to your product as it is
> developed, $50/hr.
>
> Write your documents from information fed
> to me by your developers and then test and
> correct immediately prior to release based
> on the final product, $65/hr.
>
> If you want to watch me work and comment
> on my hours, work location or methods (by
> law you are not permitted to direct any of
> these), $80/hr
>
> If you're calling me in with less than 30 days
> remaining until your product release because
> you ignored your documentation or already
> tried to do it yourself or with a different writer,
> $100/hr.
>
> Gene Kim-Eng
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Create HTML or Microsoft Word content and convert to Help file formats or
printed documentation. Features include support for Windows Vista & 2007
Microsoft Office, team authoring, plus more. http://www.DocToHelp.com/TechwrlList
True single source, conditional content, PDF export, modular help.
Help & Manual is the most powerful authoring tool for technical
documentation. Boost your productivity! http://www.helpandmanual.com
---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-
