Re: Walk-throughs/Reviews

[Suzette Seveny <sseveny -at- PETVALU -dot- COM>]

This is similar to something that happened at a company I once worked for.
 They didn't proof work either, and there was great resistance on the part
of the client representatives to have any type of editorial review of
anything they wrote.  In responding to a Request for Information from a
potential client, somebody had answered a requirement with "Lie about
this".  That's exactly how it went out.  Needless to say, they did not get
the business.  They never learnt though, and they don't proof stuff before
it does out the door.
Suzette Leeming

-----Original Message-----
From:   John W. Sliger [SMTP:jsliger -at- PDQ -dot- NET]
Sent:   Wednesday, June 03, 1998 12:09 AM
To:     TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU
Subject:        Re: Walk-throughs

An interesting story about unreviewed material (manuals and so forth): =
One of my first assignments as a tech writer was to updates a manual for =
a product that the company had been selling for two years. As I got to =
the section covering one of the older options, I asked my boss how long =
this manual had been shipped out. He said, "Two years. Why?" I showed =
him the manual. This particular section read: "How does this option =
work? Who the hell knows and who the hell cares?" The boss just gulped.

The company didn't learn anything, however, because they still wouldn't =
allow me to have my work proofed.

Regards,
John W. Sliger
Technical Writer
Phone: (281) 353-0567
E-mail: jsliger -at- pdq -dot- net


-----Original Message-----
From:   George Mena [SMTP:George -dot- Mena -at- ESSTECH -dot- COM]
Sent:   Tuesday, June 02, 1998 11:07 AM
To:     TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU
Subject:        Re: Walk-throughs

A couple of things show up for me:

1)  The "powers that be" at your place are out to lunch big time.
Anyone in a supervisory or managerial position who says he doesn't want
to sit down and review the manual for technical accuracy is looking to
re-enter the unemployment line and to make corporate profitability
suffer by letting unreviewed manuals go out the door with the products.
Find another job with a better company ASAP.  Protect your professional
reputation.

2)  At a minimum, you as the writer should have gone through at least
some of the procedures in the manual yourself with the product.  Taking
the hands-on approach in checking what you wrote by actually performing
the procedures in the manual is a good way to make sure you in fact KNOW
what you're writing about.  Have you sat down with the product and
actually performed the task yourself?  It's very important you try to do
that as much as possible, as it adds to your proactive credibility as a
tech writer.  You don't wait for someone to tell you the answer:  you go
out and find the answer.

It would definitely help to know what the product being documented is
and in what kind of environment the product is used in.

George Mena

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kate Skilton [SMTP:KNSkilt -at- ACCUSORT -dot- COM]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 1998 6:49 AM
> To:   TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU
> Subject:      Walk-throughs
>
> Hi all -
>
> I was wondering if anyone out there had ever conducted a manual
> walkthrough, either in the preliminary or final stages. I'm looking
> for a different approach to our walkthroughs. I work for a company
> where nobody wants to sit down and dedicate a few hours to the
> quality of our manuals.
>
> Ideas anyone?
>
> Kate Skilton
> Engineering Technical Writer
> Accu-Sort Systems, inc.
>
> &^~~~
> Send commands to listserv -at- listserv -dot- okstate -dot- edu (e.g., SIGNOFF
> TECHWR-L)
> Find TECHWR-L-related books at
> http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/books.htm
>

~~
Find TECHWR-L-related books at =
http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/books.htm