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: Place of documentation team From:"Huber, Mike" <mrhuber -at- SOFTWARE -dot- ROCKWELL -dot- COM> Date:Tue, 24 Jun 1997 09:08:27 -0500
I recently ran a draft of document that I'm working on through our
usability lab. I was concerned about the conflict of interest inherent
in my writing both the document being studied and the test procedures.
The usability lab results were extremely helpful, and the document is
much better for it.
On the other hand, the test procedures test for what I consider to be
important, and the document addresses what I consider to be important.
If I'm wrong, the failings of the document match the blind spots in the
testing.
What you need to examine is the purpose of testing the documentation. If
you are testing for serious validation, the conflict of interest is
likely to make the results suspect. In industries that require
validation, that could be a real concern. But if the purpose is to
improve the documentation, the combination can work. The tests may not
be fair, but they certainly will locate problems. If the purpose of the
testing is to induce the rest of the company to take documentation
seriously, or to respect the documentation process, take a good long
look - I don't think it will work. The statement that "the documentation
is a component of the product which deserves representation" raises a
flag for me. Certainly, it's a true statement, but it doesn't define a
goal that testing is likely to attain, unless the testing process is
respected enough in your company that the respect "rubs off." The tone
of the question, along with the proposal that the testing group be
combined with the documentation group, indicates that that is not the
case.
In my experience with documenting software, writers do a lot of testing
in the course of gathering information and setting up screen captures.
The testing done by the documentation group tends to have a different
focus than that of the dedicated test group. More of a "this doesn't
make sense" than a "this doesn't work." Both are extremely valuable.
Mike Huber
mike -dot- huber -at- software -dot- rockwell -dot- com
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Eric J. Ray [SMTP:ejray -at- RAYCOMM -dot- COM]
>Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 1997 6:58 AM
>To: TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU
>Subject: FWD: Place of documentation team
>
>... My reaction is that (a) the documentation is a
>component of the product which deserves representation; (b) whoever heads a
>combined group responsible for both product documentation and testing has a
>conflict of interest, unless they aren't serious about the tested quality
>of the documentation;
>...
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
