STC chapter question -- what should an employer expect? (take II)

Subject: STC chapter question -- what should an employer expect? (take II)
From: Geoff Hart <ghart -at- videotron -dot- ca>
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 12:41:42 -0500


T.W. Smith wondered: <<So, what could the STC do to get you there, such that you, as boss of the pubs manager, would be happy to let each member of the pubs dept. sign up for the STC on the company dime? ... But, what about tangible improvements in writing, etc.? I mean, tool stuff is easy to arrange, and gets old. I suppose there could be grammar symposiums, meetings on outlines and structuring content. But, as the boss of the pubs manager, what would you expect your writers to get from their STC membership that you, the boss 'boss, paid for?>>

I'd expect my staff to get their brains in gear and make an effort to learn new things, whether directly from STC (journal, magazine, SIG newsletters) or by talking to fellow members and asking their help in solving problems. Membership alone is worthless: you have to put something into it to get something out of it. Or as Robert Heinlein used to say: TANSTAAFL (there ain't no such thing as a free lunch).

In terms of getting more out of STC, your suggestion of grammar symposiums and other stuff with practical application is a good one. For example, I recently gave a talk on improving your editing skills ("soft skills, software skills, and survival skills") that was well received.

As a member of a local chapter, it's your responsibility to suggest potential meeting topics to the board executive if they haven't asked you what you want to see and hear. In the absence of such feedback, we're left on our own to guess at member needs and pick topics that we hope will be of interest to you. As a rule, our batting average is impressive enough to earn us 6-figure incomes in professional baseball, but that still means that we fail to pick compelling topics about twice as often as we succeed. The topics interest us, but not everyone else!

Bill Swallow suggested: <<To be honest, the STC needs to focus on tech pubs ROI... how to help writers become more productive, become more technically tuned into their work, and feed them the info they need to be on the bleeding edge (not the dull middle or back) of technical writing technology and methodology developments.>>

All good thoughts, though in defence of STC, a healthy percentage of my articles in Intercom and elsewhere have focused on doing your job faster and better. But we certainly need to devote significant effort to demonstrating the ROI of our profession. (I've also written on this topic, fwiw.) I recently put one of my former colleagues, a really bright economist with expertise in determining "unpriced values" (such as the value of editing), in touch with STC's research grants committee to see if he can do a study on this. Stay tuned!

<<One thing that I think hurts the STC is the amount of job hunting info they roll into general events and publications. I never understood why an employer would pay to send someone to a conference with sessions that help writers hunt for better jobs. Make job hunting a SIG.>>

STC is no different from any other professional society, all of which offer employment services to members because that is what members repeatedly request. As manager, I would send my people to the conference to learn new things, not to find a new job, and STC conferences offer plenty of opportunity to learn new things. The risk of someone being headhunted is relatively small compared to the potential payback. If one of my employees wants to leave, they'll find a way with or without STC's help. My job is to make them want to stay and ethically, if someone still wants to leave, I feel it's my responsibility to help them to the extent they have earned that help.

<<I do like the SIG approach, though. I like the opportunity to focus in on a few core disciplines that either interest me or I know I'm weaker in. This focused approach can sit well with employers, because for a minimal cost over the already low enrollment fee they know their employees are receiving targeted info for building specific skills.>>

The latest enrollment fee structure gives you the alternative (for no extra cost) of joining either one geographical chapter plus one SIG as part of the standard cost, or joining three SIGs instead. It's a nice alternative for people with specialized needs, or who don't have time (or desire or ability) to participate in a local chapter.

<<On the conferences again, and I know I've beaten this to death in previous threads, but I honestly and truly believe the STC needs to compensate their speakers and look outside the STC for talent that would be willing to come in and hold a session or two.>>

This is one point I made very strongly (and repeatedly) as part of the planning committee for the Seattle 2005 conference. Obviously I'm biased, but for my own stem (writing and editing), I insisted that my peer reviewers be considerably more ruthless than in previous years about bouncing poorly considered or useless proposals, while still trying to cover lots of ground so as to offer "something for everyone". The results won't satisfy everyone, but I think we did a good job of creating an interesting program from the submissions we received.

More to your point, I know the guy who has been appointed to completely revamp the STC approach to conferences for next year (a personal friend), and he has a lot of sympathy for the notion of hiring top talent as presenters. I make no promises, but I do expect to see significant changes next year if he can hack through the red tape and fend off the "let's not change anything" types. I expect that in future, we'll see more events like the old WinWriters conferences, plus more specialized conferences with high-powered speakers recruited rather than just accepting proposals.

We'll also see better choice of conference cities and facilities. STC conferences are a bargain in terms of membership price, but the conference hotels are never a bargain. I don't recall the last time I stayed in a conference hotel, and this year is no exception.

<<By allowing members to speak for a reduced entry fee, session attendees don't necessarily have confidence in whether the
content will be good or not, whether the speaker will be adequately prepared to address a potentially full audience, and you risk throwing away your time and money on a bad session.>>

Paying someone is no guarantee that they'll give you good value for their money. Of course, if not, you don't invite them back the second time. And we do have some top-notch presenters at every annual conference who enjoy participation so much that they don't require pay. (I hope I'm one of them!)

<<Same thing with their Intercom and Technical Communication publications. Spend the money to solicit solid content from industry experts, or at least have a expert panel of reviewers for each content type to deem whether the articles are accurate before publishing them.>>

That's a good idea for Intercom (a magazine), but Tech. Comm. is a peer-reviewed journal, which can't work that way. In particular, I agree with you that Intercom needs to do a better job of reality-checking what they publish. Their record on this is fairly spotty, and it arises in part from the fact that their staff aren't trained technical communicators so far as I know. I've had some <ahem> interesting discussions </ahem> about my own articles in the past.

<<The STC needs to offer solid, targeted info that help writers become more knowledgeable, more productive, and more agile in what tasks they can perform (and thus add more value back to the organization for which they work).>>

Agreed, but you also have to expect members to make an effort to use the information that they do receive. Most people I know throw away the journal unread, which is a shame; it strikes a decent balance between academic respectability and practical content in the form of theory supported by research that can be applied on the job. (Caveat: I'm on the editorial board, so I'm biased. <g> But the journal has changed tremendously for the better over the past 5 years since George Hayhoe took over as editor.)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Geoff Hart ghart -at- videotron -dot- ca
(try geoffhart -at- mac -dot- com if you don't get a reply)
www.geoff-hart.com
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

WEBWORKS FINALDRAFT - EDIT AND REVIEW, REDEFINED
Accelerate the document lifecycle with full online discussions and unique feedback-management capabilities. Unlimited, efficient reviews for Word
and FrameMaker authors. Live, online demo:
http://www.webworks.com/techwr-l

Doc-To-Help 7.5 Professional: New version with new features, improved performance and reliability, plus much more! Download your free trial today at www.componentone.com/techwrlfeb.

---
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- techwr-l -dot- com
Send administrative questions to lisa -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit
http://www.techwr-l.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.



Follow-Ups:

References:
RE: Control Issues: From: Oja, W. Kelly
STC chapter question -- what should an employer expect?: From: T.W. Smith
Re: STC chapter question -- what should an employer expect?: From: Bill Swallow
Re: STC chapter question -- what should an employer expect?: From: T.W. Smith

Previous by Author: STC chapter question -- what should an employer expect?
Next by Author: STC chapter question -- what should an employer expect? (take III)
Previous by Thread: Re: STC chapter question -- what should an employer expect?
Next by Thread: Re: STC chapter question -- what should an employer expect? (take II)


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


Sponsored Ads