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.
This is prompted by the recent thread, but I didn't want to pollute
either that thread or this (attempted) thread, so... new subject line.
It's been decades since I had a hand in writing or editing a corporate
HR document or a Policy & Procedures manual, but my thought is that
they still exist, and that some companies put some stock in them.
If I were writing/editing one, these days, I'd be tempted to
include a section on conscientious objection (possibly
even whistle-blowing) according to the (ostensible?) corporate culture.
"If you are asked/directed to perform an action that seems
to contradict the law of the land or other portions of this
document, it might be that the person giving the request/direction
is in possession of relevant information to which you are not
privy - NEVER QUESTION AUTHORITY!"
or
"If you are asked/directed to perform an action that seems
to contradict the law of the land or other portions of this
document, it might be that the person giving the request/direction
is in possession of relevant information to which you are not
privy - ask for the request/instruction/direction in writing,
over the signature of the person who is doing the asking/directing.
To avoid imposing on a busy senior person, write a quick, legible
summary of your understanding of what you have been asked/told,
and present it with: 'Is this what you are directing me to do?
Please initial here, by today's date, if I have it correct.'
This is not a tactic to be used for frivolous reasons, but if
you have a genuine concern about the legitimacy of a requested
action, no officer, manager, or supervisor of this company
will refuse to confirm their instructions to you in writing.
At most, they should correct your misunderstanding of the
desired action, or they should be willing to put their name
to an instruction if you are not mistaken about the content
of the request/direction."
Thoughts?
Better approaches?
Obviously, such things get vetted by several people before
seing the light of day... but if I put in something
like the latter example, and was told to remove it, I'd
be sure to keep a copy of the original and a copy of
the instruction to remove... you know... for the auditors
or the prosecutors, down the road... :-)
Then I'd think about touching up my resumé.
Kevin McLauchlan
Senior Technical Writer
SafeNet, Inc.
--
<bumpf-start>
The information contained in this electronic mail transmission
may be privileged and confidential, and therefore, protected
from disclosure. If you have received this communication in
error, please notify us immediately by replying to this
message and deleting it from your computer without copying
or disclosing it.
Gain access to everything you need to create and publish documentation,
manuals, and other information through multiple channels. Choose
authoring (and import) as well as virtually any output you may need. http://www.doctohelp.com/
- Use this space to communicate with TECHWR-L readers -
- Contact admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com for more information -
---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-
