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:Re: Peer Reviews From:Rose Wilcox <RWILC -at- FAST -dot- DOT -dot- STATE -dot- AZ -dot- US> Date:Wed, 28 Jun 1995 12:54:00 PDT
Dick Dimock, Artfully Senior Tech Writer, wrote about peer review
difficulties:
>1) Time binds us all, and most writers share the same
> deadlines.
Oh-oh. Why is that? Are all the deliverables going out the door on the
same date? Hmm... Possibly you could still work in peer reviews at an
earlier than dead-line schedule. For instance, doing chapter-by-chapter or
early draft reviews. You could let go of some perfectionism (yes, I mean
you :-)) and have a "review my words" draft, a "review my accuracy" draft,
and a "review my format" draft separately. You might have to take a few
hits on format before you are ready to, but if each writer has to take the
same hits, it may work better.
Also take time to have periodic meetings to discuss the reviews. If two
writers discover a clash, then solve it, meet with the whole team -- or at
least disseminate the solution to the whole team by sneaker-net or e-mail.
> 2) The writer of the book usually knows the topic better
> than the writer next door.
This is not a problem. It is an opportunity.
1) You get someone to review your doc who doesn't already understand the
topic. If they cannot understand the topic from your writing, you got
writing problems to solve. Better your co-worker discover them than your
readers!
2) You get to cross-train your department so all the members have some
knowledge of all the applications. Your department then can be more
flexible in meeting unexpected deadlines. You can help each other and pinch
hit during illness and vacations. Your department gets better results,
writers get higher status, management loves you, the readers get better
books - WIN-WIN-WIN-WIN!
>Have any of you experienced successful peer review
> operations? Unsuccessful?
Very successful. Only minor ego pains which were easily assuaged by
catching the other writer's errors in return!
>Are we hopelessly Out To Lunch on this approach?
Nah, but you can use peer review meetings for an occasional "off-site
meeting" rationale, thus improving communication *and* morale ;-).
Have fun!
Rosie A. Wilcox
rwilc -at- fast -dot- dot -dot- state -dot- az -dot- us
ncrowe -at- primenet -dot- com
