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:Place of documentation team From:"Daniel G. Dresner" <daniel -dot- dresner -at- NCC -dot- CO -dot- UK> Date:Wed, 25 Jun 1997 09:14:35 +0000
****** Original Message ************
I'm team leader of a group of 3 writers in the Engineering department
of a software house. The department is planned to grow from about 25
people now to about 50 by the end of the year, and I've just seen the
proposed new department structure. It has the 5 programming team
leaders, who are responsible for a total of 38 people, reporting
directly to the Engineering manager, as they do now. However the
documentation team leader reporting to the new position of QA team
leader. Total reports to the manager are 8, and he doesn't want any
more.
The rationale I've been given for combining documentation and QA is
that (a) we know who we want for QA team leader, and he's got
documentation experience so he's an additional champion for the
documentation cause; (b) documentation and testing are each too small
to warrant separate direct reports to the boss. 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; (c) we need at least one additional writer anyway,
which brings the documentation team up to the same size as two of the
development groups.
What does the list think? Am I right to be unhappy about this? I've
come up with one possible different structure, which adds an extra
reporting layer to combine 3 of the programming teams. Can you see
other alternatives? Assuming this structure does come into effect,
what's my best strategy for dealing with it?
***************************************
Reply:
You could turn this to your advantage. QA functions should address
the proper execution of every stage of the product lifecyle. There
is no one who benefits more (within the company) from quality
management than technical writers. Technical writers need to be on
the receiving end of so much information at the right time (for
example, specification, change requests) that quality management (and
subsequent assurance that it is going on) can help to deliver what
the tech. writer needs.
I suggest that you take on this structure and turn it to your
advantage - for example to get the user manuals recognised as test
plans in their own right with all the formality of a customer
acceptance test plan.
Good luck . . .
************************************************************
Danny Dresner
NCC Quality Manager
The National Computing Centre Ltd.
Oxford House, Oxford Road
Manchester M1 7ED, UK
daniel -dot- dresner -at- ncc -dot- co -dot- uk
Tel: +44 (0)161 228 6333 Direct Line: +44 (0)161 242 2352
Fax: +44 (0)161 236 9877 http://www.ncc.co.uk/
ISO 9001/TickIT Certificate: 928858a
"Logic . . . merely allows one to be wrong with authority!"
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
