"Design" was Re: Tech Writing a Growing Field?

[Ned Bedinger]

Opinion-wise, I agree with Harry that a strong development methodology 
like the Capability Maturity Model (CMM) is a blessing for tech writing. 
But perversely, software development organizations seem to be allergic 
to any methodology that imposes documentation requirements on the 
developers. They hiss and moan that it is a waste of time because it 
doesn't fit the established way they work, etc.


The odd thing is that CMM is a framework, designed to be customizable 
and modifiable so that it can fit any project in any programming 
language. Still, I've seen the dev team break out in hives and gasp for 
air at the very mention of working within a CMM-inspired methodology. 
They're like wild horses at the round-up, yearning to be free.


I've been hired in the past to facilitate a dev team's transition to a 
documentation-intensive methodology, and I've found that when management 
makes it inevitable that development proceeds with a strong methodology, 
I can smooth the transition by being versed in the documentation 
requirements, and providing the developers with the templates and 
outlines they need. I usually end up writing the dev docs anyway using 
their notes and my SME interviews.


But woe to the tech writer who tries to drive such documentation 
requirements without management direction. While I don't want to 
stereotype developers, the ones I've worked with in software become bad 
animals if they sense the slightest possibility that a tech writer ( as 
opposed to their management) is requiring them to produce documentation.


I don't blame them, by the way. I think there's a valid cognitive issue 
with shifting back and forth between code and English, and it is the 
rare person who can do it and do it well. Programming is a style of 
thinking that, for me at least, takes over the language center in my 
brain, making English grammar seem like a horribly dull and arcane 
requirement. Maybe people like me are wired differently--for instance, 
when I learn a new langauge, it seems to push what I know about other 
non-native languages out of my head. If I learn Portuguese, I can't 
speak French anymore, the vocabulary and syntax become Portugee with a 
French accent. But aanyway, for most developers I've worked with, 
imposing a documentation requirement on them would be like asking a 
plumber to fill out a bunch of forms detailing their design for plumbing 
a house--they're thinking it is a bureaucratic-like waste of time, no 
one will read it, anyone who needs to know can inspect the finished work 
and will understand it without someone writing about it, ...


I think we'd have to start working with developers at a very early age 
if we want to naturally slip into the kind of design role Chris B. was 
talking about earlier in this thread. And as Harry implied, that design 
role is essentially the role that a strong methodology plays. Tech 
writers can have a good time working that way, but I grok Gene's 
admonition about prefering employment . I'd have to say that the 
opportunities to work in this design role are not the same as every tech 
writing position, because many development teams just aren't ready, 
willing, or able to invest more project time in becoming more mature in 
the CMM sense. A tech writer who want to work that way in a group who 
doesn't has to be very careful and willing to work with far less than 
the optimal level of information.


There's a lotta love in this thread :-)


Ned Bedinger
doc at edwordsmith.com

Gene Kim-Eng wrote:
> Well, I do to in an ideal work environment.  However, 
> my opinion on this takes a back seat to my desire to
> remain employed, at least until I can find another
> place that seems a bit closer to an ideal work
> environment to me.
>
> Gene Kim-Eng
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: <HBacheler at aol.com>
>   
>> I believe that all/most  technical writers have the same viewpoint.