RE: Friday afternoon thought.

Subject: RE: Friday afternoon thought.
From: "Guy A. McDonald" <guy -at- nstci -dot- com>
To: "John Posada" <jposada01 -at- yahoo -dot- com>, "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Fri, 5 May 2000 18:46:48 -0500

John Posada wrote:
In the publication WEBtechniques (a CMP publication), there is a
quote by the Executive Editor:

"Fortunately, developers aren't required to understand the
nuances of English. They're sought after for their knowledge of
other languages, like Java and Perl..."

Just something to think about.
Thank you John - something I was thinking about this week dovetails with
your Friday thought...

I once interviewed for a technical writer position at a small company of
about 300 employees. The job description listed "Minimum of 1 year of C++
programming experience working from design documents"

Okay - no problem, thinketh me. Competent tech writers who have successfully
taken C++ courses, written from design specs and understand high level
programming concepts should apply -- right???

- Wrong -

The company asked me to speak with the Development Manager. After a few
minutes, we both realized his need for a developer outweighed my need for a
job. Later, I asked the HR representative who arranged the interview to
follow the lead of Microsoft. At that company, there is a clear distinction
between Technical Writers/Communicators and Programmer/Writers.

One side note - A developer in this hot market may decide to become a
technical writer. However, it wouldn't be for the money. There may be a few
writers on this list who bill at the same rate as developers -- I've read
the boastings and am happy for them.

Guy McDonald
guy -at- nstci -dot- com

Previous by Author: RE: Justifying a tech. writer?
Next by Author: RE: We can sink battle ships - and subs!
Previous by Thread: Friday afternoon thought.
Next by Thread: Citing numbers for decreased tech support costs

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads