Re[4]: Best Documentation

[Harry Hager <hhager -at- dttus -dot- com>]

     Tony,
     
     I simply cannot agree with your position. 
     
     You seem to say that tech writers are replaced because the written 
     material was inadequate but it wasn't poor writing technique. The 
     failure was alway due to some other problem. 
     
     As an aside, in about 1982 or 1883, I was the lead tech writer of a 
     three person effort at a then major computer manufacturer. I asked the 
     manager to remove one technical writer from the project and replace 
     him with another one because the first one simply could not master the 
     technique needed to perform on that specific project. This part of the 
     project was late, but it was completed by another tech writer. For 
     this particular project, there were doc plans, schedules, user 
     analysis, and the whole nine yards. This one element of the project 
     was the only element that was late. This writer simply could not 
     perform at the required level on this project. He was good enough for 
     some other projects, but not for this one. A few years later, he did 
     quite well on a similar project. At least that's the way I remember 
     it.
     
     Then you seem to say that even when development efforts fail it's 
     never because of lack of knowledge of coding technique. The failure is 
     always due to some other problem. 
     
     Unless I'm misinterpreting your position, you are saying that there 
     are no incompetent tech writers; there are no incompetent developers, 
     at least not incompetent enough to really screw up a project or 
     directly lead to the failure of a project. 
     
     Maybe there are no incompetent doctors either. All those successful 
     malpractice suits were wrong because the problem was really with the 
     planning, estimating, analysis, and so forth and never with the actual 
     technique or bad judgement used in the surgery. Then too, maybe there 
     are really no incompetent major league baseball players, not even 
     Marvelous Marvin Thornberry (sic?). All those errors in the Mets 
     outfield (1969?) should have really been chalked up to estimating, 
     analysis, and so forth.
     
     I don't really want this to become a never ending story, but as I said 
     earlier, I guess we need to agree to disagree. 
     
     Jim Hager (not Hagar)
     
     
     ______________________________ Reply Separator 
     _________________________________
     Subject: Re: Re[2]: Best Documentation
     Author:  tonymar -at- hotmail -dot- com at Internet-USA
     Date:    2/8/00 1:23 PM
     
     
     Harry Hagar asks:
     
     In 15 years of your tech comm experience, are you saying
     you've never worked on a project or heard of a project where a writer 
     was replaced for failing to write adequate material?
     
     Tony Markatos:
     
     I have seen lots of failure - and in fact have had to 'clean-up' more 
     than one mess.  The material was very inadequate, but NOT because of 
     poor writing technique.  Failures occur because of shortcomings in in 
     analysis (including discussions with end-users), estimating, 
     organizing, and do to a lack of standardization.
     
     Geepers man!  I see the exact same thing in development.  When was the 
     last time you heard of a development effort failing because of a lack 
     of knowledge of coding technique - it never happens.  Development 
     projects fail for the same reasons as TW do - inadequate analysis, 
     estimating, organizing, and standardization.
     
     Tony Markatos
     (tonymar -at- hotmail -dot- com)
     
     
     
     ______________________________________________________ Get Your 
     Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com