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.
Count me against certification for the following widely-held opinion
among anti-certificationists: the skills required to be a successful
technical communicator are so varied and ever-changing that there is no
way any kind of generic certification could ever be meaningful.
Being a certified technical communicator will be of no help in getting
me a job, or a promotion, in a company that requires its technical
communicators to know Robohelp, or Java, or Framemaker, or C++, or SGML,
and I don't have the requisite skill. In my view, the certification will
be viewed as inconsequential by employers, and will eventually reflect
badly on the STC.
Before any discussion gets too involved, find out why the matter is even
coming up in the first place. Is it because technical communicators want
or think they need another piece of a paper to distinguish themselves?
If so, I don't think certification should be pursued. On the other hand,
if employers are requesting some way of distinguishing the skills of
technical communicators, then the problem should be explored--but not
with the view that certification is the answer to the problem.
A member-driven certification push is likely to result in something that
serves the need of the members, not necessarily those of the profession.
And especially not those of clients/customers. But if users of
technical communication services are looking for some way of separating
technical communicators who can meet their needs from those that don't,
maybe STC and industry representatives should do a little requirements
gathering and see what they come up with. If the debate is left to rage
within the membership alone, it'll either go nowhere or result in a
certificate that means nothing.
Michael Collier
mikecol -at- sbservices -dot- com
SOFTBANK Services Group
Buffalo, NY http://www.sbservices.com
Senior member, STC Niagara Frontier Chapter
>
TECHWR-L (Technical Communication) List Information: To send a message
to 2500+ readers, e-mail to TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU -dot- Send commands
to LISTSERV -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU (e.g. HELP or SIGNOFF TECHWR-L).
Search the archives at http://www.documentation.com/ or search and
browse the archives at http://listserv.okstate.edu/archives/techwr-l.html
