Re: Antwort: Re: Responsibility, blame, managers, and getting the job done

Subject: Re: Antwort: Re: Responsibility, blame, managers, and getting the job done
From: jenny_berger -at- fairfieldresidential -dot- com
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 11:21:42 -0500


Thanks for clarifying, but I think this "management guidance" is where I
disagree with you.

I agree that management has a place in providing project leadership. I
don't agree, however, that management "guidance" is the best thing to turn
a close-mouthed developer (or any SME) into a more "suitably
collaborative" one. My experience with management "guiding" unresponsive
developers to the promised land of mutual collaboration hasn't been
pretty, and it always has set up a negative feedback loop that gets harder
and harder to penetrate as time goes on. I guess I'm looking at this more
as an interpersonal, relationship issue -- not a business or management
issue. And my preference for interpersonal issues is to work it out
directly with the other person, without involving a third-party. The
developers I've worked with that way (so far) have appreciated that, as
have management.

Jenny Berger
Technical Writer
Information Systems
Fairfield Residential





"Bonnie Granat" <bgranat -at- editors-writers -dot- info>
04/08/2003 10:32 AM


To: <jenny_berger -at- fairfieldresidential -dot- com>
cc: <bounce-techwr-l-115343 -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>, "TECHWR-L"
<techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Subject: Re: Antwort: Re: Responsibility, blame, managers, and getting the job done



----- Original Message -----
From: <jenny_berger -at- fairfieldresidential -dot- com>
To: "Bonnie Granat" <bgranat -at- editors-writers -dot- info>
Cc: <bounce-techwr-l-115343 -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>; "TECHWR-L"
<techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Sent: April 08, 2003 11:18 AM
Subject: Re: Antwort: Re: Responsibility, blame, managers, and getting the
job
done


> It is also somewhat distressing to hear a fellow tech writer advocate
for
> an adversarial relationship between tech writers, developers and
> management. That is what I got when I read without emotion your comments
> about how management should order developers to "do their jobs" and pony
> up info to tech writers. And that's what I still got when I read your
> follow-up comment about making interaction between writers and
developers
> "policy." Please elaborate and correct me if I've misinterpreted.
>

Goodness! I seem to have managed quite nicely to put my foot in it,
haven't I?
I intend only to say that where writers find developers unforthcoming,
management has to assist the writer by making it clear to developers that
a
good product requires the participation of all in its creation. I'm saying
that only those developers who do not see that intuitively and act
accordingly
need to be "ordered" by management to perform their jobs.


> From my experience, such policies do more harm than good because it
tends
> to remove the tech writer's responsibility for content from the
equation.
> I know you're not meaning to say that developers should be providing
tech
> writers with content, but that's how it ends up being interpreted by
both
> developers and tech writers when it becomes "policy." Professionals
don't
> like to be micromanaged, and mandating through policy that developers be
> available to tech writers has exactly that effect.
>
>

I'm just saying that those developers who avoid answering questions and
who
behave less than collaboratively need management guidance. I am certainly
not
saying that developers should be spoon-feeding content. But I am saying
what I
think all technical writers believe -- that developers should be aware
that
documentation is part of the product itself and that writers will always
have
things that need clarification.

Perhaps I am arguing a point that is so elementary that we all agree on
it.
But it seems to always be lurking behind the "error" discussion.

In some ways, though, developers *do* give us content, of course. But
that's
not what you're asking. I'm saying that a collaborative environment can
only
be the result of management leadership, basically.

Does that clarify what I mean?

___________________________________
Bonnie Granat
Granat Editorial Services
http://www.editors-writers.info







^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Purchase RoboHelp X3 in April and receive a $100 mail-in
rebate, plus FREE RoboScreenCapture and WebHelp Merge Module.
Order here: http://www.ehelp.com/products/robohelp/


Help celebrate TECHWR-L's 10th Anniversary starting this month!
Check out the contests at http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/special/contests/
Happy birthday to you, happy birthday to you, happy birthday TECHWR-L....

---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit
http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.



Follow-Ups:

Previous by Author: Re: Antwort: Re: Responsibility, blame, managers, and getting the job done
Next by Author: Re: EHelp's Deceptive Email Practice
Previous by Thread: Re: Antwort: Re: Responsibility, blame, managers, and getting the job done
Next by Thread: Re: Antwort: Re: Responsibility, blame, managers, and getting the job done


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:


Sponsored Ads