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.
Brenda Duncanson wonders: <<We have recently had a change of top management
and now I need to justify why our programmers can't and shouldn't write the
documentation [we are years out of date]. I have been asked to write a
justification for hiring a tech writer to document our systems - we are in
dire need but have to convince the higher ups of this need.>>
All kinds of good reasons, but here's a simple one that even a manager can
understand <g>: let's say a techwhirler costs $50/hour, benefits included,
and a programmer costs $100/hour, all else included. Let's further assume
that both could produce equally good documentation in the same amount of
time (which we know is false, but you'd have to do a "before and after"
documentation comparison to make your point). You could then hire a
technical writer and leave the programmers to do what you hired them to do,
or you could sacrifice some arbitrary number of their worknig hours per year
writing documentation. Multiply the number of hours of work by the hourly
rate. Which solution is more cost-effective?
Ediot (ed' e ut) n. A person (usually an engineer) who, after giving you
material to edit, continues revising that same material without informing
you. -- Kimberlee Davis
