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.
Personally, I think that managing offsite personnel should not be the
hassle that you claim it to be. Research, testing, and meetings may
require onsite presence. However, writing is by nature a solitude task -
where it is performed should only depend on where the tools are located.
The near disasters that I have encountered in my work have most often been
initiated by other departments (e.g., engineering or marketing), and been
negotiated without requiring writers to be present (at least physically).
Managing writers has nothing to do with being "physically present". The
common element here is communication no matter whether the personnel are
onsite or offsite.
Communication doesn't always work efficiently by having people onsite. Case
in point: I was on a contract recently which required being onsite
(manager's demand). I needed key information to complete my manual. The
engineers were onsite as was I, but neither the engineers nor their
managers could be reached. This went on for days. I couldn't find them in
the building, and when I did, they were too busy to talk. What eventually
cleared the logjam was a slew of well placed emails, followed by phone
calls to voice mailboxes which finally prompted responses when the
engineers were able to respond... typically between the wee hours of 12 AM
and 6 AM.
Frankly, in most instances requiring workers to be onsite is simply a
copout for ineffective management methods or fear of lack of productivity.
Regarding the inability to keep track of productivity of offsite personnel,
spend a day monitoring onsite people. You will be amazed at how much waste
goes on for the sake of having your people under your thumb.
Jon Leer
----------
> From: Rahel Bailie <rbailie -at- CASTLETON -dot- COM>
> To: TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU
> Subject: Re: Offsite Management
> Date: Tuesday, June 23, 1998 12:28 PM
>
> Managing an on-site group from an off-site location is practically
> suicide. (Ask how I know ... and I was just on another floor!) The
> dynamics of supervision means catching the near-disasters you overhear
> being discussed in the hallway outside your door/cubicle, watching for
> tensions between parties with conflicting deadlines and priorities, and
> so on. That's not to say working at home a day a week is a bad thing,
> but there's no substitute for physical presence as a manager.
>
> Rahel (feeling relatively ineloquent this morning)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eric J. Ray [mailto:ejray -at- RAYCOMM -dot- COM]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 1998 8:58 AM
> To: TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU
> Subject: FWD: Offsite Management
>
>
> Name withheld upon request. Please reply on list.
>
> *************************************************
>
>
> I would be interested to know if anyone has, or feels it is possible to
> manage a pubs department while working off-site either part time or full
> time. Does the size of the department affect one's ability to do this?
> Or
> do you think it just is not a good idea?
>
>
> ~~~
>
>
>
>
