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: STC Quality SIG: RE: How to get writers to follow proceduresr±p4È PST
Subject:re: STC Quality SIG: RE: How to get writers to follow proceduresr±p4È PST From:Bill DuBay <bill_dubay -at- PHOENIX -dot- COM> Date:Mon, 17 Nov 1997 17:37:54 PST
Hi, Steve,
I have seen an awful lot of documents going through review processes that emerge consistently bad. (By saying that, I recognize that my judgement about the results is subjective. Is there any way of getting around the subjectivity of what quality is?)
I have to agree that when you force all documents to go through reviews by excellent workers, you will come up with consistently better documents. All things being equal, a process (e.g., regular reviews, testing, and edits) is better than no process. But does that guarantee quality? Let's say an end user finds a set of instructions difficult during a usability test. What if no one is capable of recognizing the person's difficulty, the source of the difficulty, and its solution? Someone has to be there who can step up to the plate and fix the problem. Here, certainly, it is not an issue of process but of available skills. What good is a review if the reviewer does not have the required skills?
