RE: Academic Research in TechComm

["Jim Shaeffer" <jims -at- spsi -dot- com>]

Bill Swallow wrote: 
> 
> Excellent post Eric.

I second that. 

> On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 10:45:04 -0400,
> eric -dot- dunn -at- ca -dot- transport -dot- bombardier -dot- com
> <eric -dot- dunn -at- ca -dot- transport -dot- bombardier -dot- com> wrote:
> >
> > Why the never ending angst about techwriting "value"?
> 


I think Technical Communicators may be frustrated when they try to
extend the value proposition in the following fashion: 

If Technical Communication is valuable, then higher quality Technical
Communication will be more valuable. Therefore, management should
support our efforts to improve the quality of Technical Communication. 

I would argue, if we define "quality" along the lines used in STC
competitions, that the difference in the business value of quality
technical communication versus the business value of merely adequate
technical communication often approaches zero. 

Further, if increases in perceived quality come with an increase in
cost, such a change effort may actually have a negative value to the
business.  

Jim Shaeffer 


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

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

---
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.