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.
> Or, phrased differently, if you could mandate a single
> course/class/training session/on the job experience
> for your co-workers or employees (as the case might be),
> what would it be? Editing 101? Rereading Strunk and White
> 5 times fast? Three years in customer service? Computer
> tech support for your product? Computer tech support
> for Frame?
If this is a question of creating a checklist of specific skills that
every technical communicator should have, then I have to wonder at the
validity of the question. As technical communicators, our core subject
matter, technology, is evolving at a pace at which any specific skill
set will be obsolete in a very short time. Is there any point to
specifying a skill set that is technology-based when that very
technology will be but a memory in one or two years? This is not a
sturdy base on which to build a career. Certainly, good writing skills
are a requirement. But beyond that, what skill can you specify that is
not subject to rapid technological change?
However, if this is a question of defining what makes a GOOD
technical communicator, then the answer is necessarily more esoteric.
The ability to learn quickly, to grasp the fundamentals of a new
technology, to identify and analyze the critical concepts without
getting bogged down in the details, to understand the applications of
a technology without becoming an expert, and finally, to take that
information and communicate it to another person, these are the
"skills" that a good technical communicator must have. Unfortunately,
there is no class or university that teach these things. Yes, they
make a valient effort at helping students imitate the actions of a
person who does these things, but there is a world of difference
between imitation and doing.
What differentiates a good doctor from a mediocre one? A good lawyer
from an average one? Why can two people, equally intelligent, receive
the same training, receive the same grades, apply themselves with
equal effort, and yet one becomes good and the other simply
sufficient?
I propose that as we move closer to becoming a profession, and not
merely a line of work, that we are going to have to recognize the part
played by innate ability. Whether we like it or not, no specific set
of skills can define a good technical writer (a more marketable one,
perhaps, but that is a different question altogether). Rather, one
either "has it," or they do not.
The behaviorists will howl in protest, no doubt, that no one is more
gifted or better suited or more capable than anyone else for a
particular task. Any person, they will say, given the right training,
can just as easily become a doctor, a lawyer, a tech writer, or a
garbage collector. Balderdash.
Michael Aimino
TechComm, LLC
TECHWR-L (Technical Communication) List Information: To send a message
to 2500+ readers, e-mail to TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU -dot- Send commands
to LISTSERV -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU (e.g. HELP or SIGNOFF TECHWR-L).
Search the archives at http://www.documentation.com/ or search and
browse the archives at http://listserv.okstate.edu/archives/techwr-l.html
