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:Ranking Criteria for Writers From:cyd dunning <c_dunning -at- HOTMAIL -dot- COM> Date:Wed, 21 Oct 1998 09:41:53 PDT
Hi all,
Here's a question for managers or others involved in the review process
for writers within an organization. We are a small, but growing,
writers' group. Our organization is young, but it is becoming apparent
that we need to set growth standards for writers of different levels. We
would like to establish some measurable criteria for ranking writers.
"Years of service" might be one criterion, but beyond that, what types
of measurable standards do you set in your organization to quantify
achievement and set goals for growth and salary increases?
For instance, what achievable guidelines might be designated for
positions such as the following:
Associate (or Junior) Writer
Technical Writer I (What other titles
Technical Writer II might be used here?)
Senior Writer
I'd appreciate any feedback. Please email directly to me (I am on digest
mode), and I will summarize for the group.
