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.
Subject:RE: STC Transformation -- info From:eric -dot- dunn -at- ca -dot- transport -dot- bombardier -dot- com To:"TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com> Date:Wed, 14 Jul 2004 11:16:17 -0400
bounce-techwr-l-106467 -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com wrote on 07/14/2004 10:36:37 AM:
> My point is, others are doing it, why not STC? Think of the thousands
> of dollars they could generate from certification and recertification
> fees alone. If they are finding their revenue sources squeezed,
> certification would open up a whole new revenue stream for them.
> Roberto in Toronto
So why not let the other organisations do the certification? What added
value would the STC have over the certification from www.editors.ca or
www.cstd.ca? If the electronics industry wants minimum technical training
for their writers, why would they go to the STC and not the IEEE for
certification? What could STC certification or training offer in
non-technical areas that a writing or language certificate from any number
of institutions don't offer?
What control does STC have over the hiring of technical communicators?
To be able to convince writers and hiring managers that STC certification
is worthwhile the STC needs to have at least perceived added value over
other organisation, institution, or university certification courses. You
can't just create a revenue stream if you don't control the market or add
real value compared to others. One of two things has to happen before the
STC could exploit a certification revenue stream. Either professional laws
governing the title and practice of the 'profession' like that for
engineers or doctors needs to be enacted, or the letters/titles/honours
bestowed by the STC and prepended or appended to your name and CV need to
give a distinct advantage over certificates and training gained elsewhere
(or not gained at all). But seeing as the first is unlikely, as there is
no significant professional liability that is uniquely attached to our
craft nor is there an issue of public trust signing your name with Senior
Technical Writer, the second scenario is the only real option. But if the
STC can't define itself and gain the influence to have a majority of
technical communicators participate and become members now, how are they
going to gain the influence to impose standards and certifications?
Nobody has yet addressed my earlier suggestion. Why doesn't the STC start
recognising programs, committees, regulations, standards, and practices of
other recognised organisations and institutions as applicable? As ANSI is
the mortar between the brick of national and international standards (a
voluntary ones at that), STC could be the "mortar" in the technical
communications world.
ROBOHELP X5: Featuring Word 2003 support, Content Management, Multi-Author
support, PDF and XML support and much more!
TRY IT TODAY at http://www.macromedia.com/go/techwrl
WEBWORKS FINALDRAFT: New! Document review system for Word and FrameMaker
authors. Automatic browser-based drafts with unlimited reviewers. Full
online discussions -- no Web server needed! http://www.webworks.com/techwr-l
---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archiver -at- techwr-l -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.
