STC_MGT--> Re: Certification vs Help from our members / cro

[Smokey Lynne L Bare <slbare -at- JUNO -dot- COM>]

Stan,

Of course, we all know this is a tender issue in our profession, and
personally, I feel some is based on a little job defensiveness.  But
after speaking nationally at events, I have changed my perspective as to
the reasons AS WHY the defensiveness is there.  When management drives
the guidelines for job descripts, it is no wonder experienced writers
shutter when a continuing/upgrade education is suggested when there is
little time for projects, let alone to have a personal life with
families.

Professionally, I feel certification is very important and needed.  I was
extremely lucky in college to go through a program which was
Internationally managed, very difficult, and based on the CPA-style of
testing.  It used the premise of one area specialty test at a time until
all were completed.  The international forum has a much better
understanding of standardization requirements than we do in the U.S. at
present.  Even Canada has opened their realization to this need; I
believe this is due to their international product requirements, more so
than the U.S. product lines.

Yet, we must nurture, mentor, and help tech writers and TCs/Info
Architects, as we all have talents in a variety of areas.  It is the
standardization which you seek.  I have hired college grads from TW
programs in my town that I had to let go, because business methodology
and project management and time reporting/management had not been part of
their curriculum.  They could not manage timeliness above their writing
skill sets.  Today's competitive market needs TWs and TCs to have a
business analyst application in their professional development.  The
concept of HOW to analyze client needs, HOW to deliver in a
content/format driven by project time lines, and so on comes from two
venues:  course work and/or experience on the job (hopefully with mentors
and giving managers when they have the time).

Three years ago at the Minn. STC national conference I was in a sidebar
forum with other Info Arch. for a two day think-tank session.
Certification was discussed; those of us who dealt with a broader range
of client-base materials were pro.  What was interesting I learned, those
who were very much my seniors (and well known) were against it, even
though grandfathering clauses could include them and their one group from
CA, who was also opposed.

The unique aspect is....it can be treated like ISO compliancy or
REGISTRATION, if you want this quality of a prescribed standardization in
technical writing and communications, then those who wish to pursue,
should be allowed to pursue it, and those who wish not to, should not
worry about those who do.  It would be nice if the U.S. organization
would set up and offer it as a sidebar, otherwise, those who are talking
about the Canadian version may go with that group.

Companies like to see conformity, unity, and know when they hire someone
with a certification, such as a network engineer, there is a common
knowledge base.

But until this happens, we need to be sensitive to a lack of minute
information holes in our companions experience.  I know from my own
experience (and being a reveal codes die heart) that I spent two hours
trying to center a stupid table in Word.  I could not see where the
problem was as codes are not revealed at the level I needed as with my
previous tool.  Yet, I could post a quick HELP-respond to me offline, and
get an immediate answer off our list.  I don't have time to shuffle
through the Word list, and my concept of this group is that it is here to
help.

My recommendation for issues like this would be if the calls are
editorial ones, members could have a word in the Header as:  ? for
offline - Word issue, as was the instance in my case.  Those members who
are SMEs with this tool then would reply to the person offline, and save
Eric headaches with reply wars.

Bottom line:  we need to have a place to learn.  The group I am working
with is just, JUST going from 95 to 95/OFFICE 97 this month, to NT4 next
month.  And to be compliant with Y2K means, upgrading across our whole
system and getting rid of 95.  My interest in this SME group is reading
and printing out every conversion issue and nightmare which is listed.
Their (my client) end-user team has never seen any issues ahead of time.
So, I give the printed copies to the client and my direct.  Though this
is not an editorial call like 'a' or 'an', we still can help by referring
them to sources, i.e., Chicago Manual of Electronic Style.

...now I will return to the den....

Smokey
 From ??? -at- ??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000
To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to majordomo -at- stc -dot- org
in the body enter:  UNSUBSCRIBE stcmgmtpic-l <your e-mail address>
--
To subscribe to this list, send a message to majordomo -at- stc -dot- org
in the body enter:  SUBSCRIBE stcmgmtpic-l <your e-mail address>
 From ??? -at- ??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000