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.
RE: Convincing others of your value (was: Metrics in its own thread)
Subject:RE: Convincing others of your value (was: Metrics in its own thread) From:"Boudreaux, Madelyn (GE Healthcare, consultant)" <MadelynBoudreaux -at- ge -dot- com> To:"TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com> Date:Wed, 24 Mar 2010 12:54:48 -0400
Leonard C. Porrello challenged me to a duel with:
>I'd love to hear specifics about how you and
>the other TWs contributed.
As I recall -- and note that 1) it was a long time ago, 2) I was only on
my own team, not fully aware of what others were doing, and 3) I was not
at the top of my game -- we all ended up acting as project managers,
coordinating the parts of the project and helping the team members
function well together.
At the beginning, each team selected a team leader who oversaw the
project, but each of us TWs became the leader's right-hand woman. We
were all good at thinking on our feet (figuratively, in my case) and
understanding and solving problems quickly. It was the team lead who
made the final decision on MVP, after the team members voted. That much
I remember well, because I had been annoyed not to be selected lead, and
later realized that I got the better deal in the long run. Where "better
deal" is "a silly certificate."
Did I mention that this was a timed event? We were working on a tight
deadline, I think of 1 hour. Additionally, there were rules along the
lines of: the space station had the have moving parts, had to fit on a
2' square board, had to stand at least 2 feet tall, and had to stay
upright when we moved it. At the end, we had to describe or explain the
purpose of the parts, so we couldn't just throw some stuff together
without ANY planning. This may not be a complete snapshot of the rules,
but that was the spirit of the game.
I know that when we started talking about the needs of our space
station, a conversation that had to happen in about 5 minutes, I had
what my then boss liked to refer to as "a clear vision on the matter,"
and others ran with it. They kept coming back to me to talk about each
part (deflector shield, docking bay, inverse tachyon chamber, space
guns... I don't know, I'm making this up now, but I was making it up
then, too. What do I know from space stations?).
I recall having to troubleshoot the connecting of two parts built by two
different team members, having them try different methods and build a
couple of different connectors, etc., until we got something that would
hold the parts as needed. Not being able to do anything myself was
probably an advantage, since it required me to communicate my ideas
better than if I'd been mobile.
***
Why do you ask? Are you considering using an exercise like this? It
really was a lot of fun. There's probably something wrong with me, that
I can consider a team building exercise "fun," with or without nearly
getting sunstroke.
This all sounds terrifically self-aggrandizing, too! Ugh!
Use Doc-To-Help's XML-based editor, Microsoft Word, or HTML and
produce desktop, Web, or print deliverables. Just write (or import)
and Doc-To-Help does the rest. Free trial: http://www.doctohelp.com
Explore CAREER options and paths related to Technical Writing,
learn to create SOFTWARE REQUIREMENTS documents, and
get tips on FUNCTIONAL SPECIFICATION best practices. Free at: http://www.ModernAnalyst.com
---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-