RE: Applying On-Line

["Lin Sims" <linda -dot- sims -at- verizon -dot- net>]

On 29 Jan 2002 at 10:18, Glenn Maxey wrote:
> 
> Right or wrong, if the candidate for a technical writing position
> doesn't use Word - a common tool of our trade - correctly, they won't
> use the other tools correctly either. Right or wrong, I extrapolate
> that their tool-ignorance and tool-phobia isn't limited to Word's
> features. 

And here I'll have to step in and disagree. I have NEVER had a tech writing job where I 
needed to know Word. I used WordPerfect for years; now I use FrameMaker. I use 
both these programs "correctly", if by that you mean that I don't format on the fly but  
use the predefined styles (WP) and tags (FM). 

This means that I'm not a regular user of Word. Like others, the only reason I have it at 
all at home is for when I have to deal with resumes, and even then that's only because 
most companies won't take WP anymore.

Does this mean I'm "tool-ignorant and tool-phobic"? No, it means that I haven't had a 
need to learn the tool in-depth. I've learned to use more than 14 different word-
processing applications thanks to a career as a temp; I can learn how to use anything.

> Regardless of which tool we prefer, Word is so common-place that it
> cannot be ignored. Whether we are experts or not, others will assume
> that we - the tech writers - are. We will always have a need to use
> more of Word's features than others. 

I've been rather successfully ignoring Word for years. :-)  However, a number of my co-
workers still come to me for support on it because, even though I don't know THIS tool 
all that well, I've used so many different word-processing programs that I can pretty 
easily figure out what needs to be done. Not because I already know the answer, but 
because I know how to ask the right questions of the help system.
 
> We're not talking about elaborate bells-and-whistles in Word. We're
> talking about something that is fundamental to its proper usage. I
> should be able to expect this from a decent technical writing
> candidate.

If you're hiring for a word-processing position, yes. You want something that lets you 
see that the person has good control of the tool. If you're hiring a WRITER, though, 
what you are looking at is how the information in the resume is presented (how does it 
look on the page? is it well-written? is it concise or wordy? does it demonstrate an 
ability to organize information?) rather than the tool used to present it. Tools can be 
learned. The need to rigourously enforce style/tag usage can be learned (although if 
someone has been writing for any length of time, they ought to have learned that 
already).

Deciding not to interview someone because they don't know how to use ONE tool 
seems rather short-sighted, especially if they are well qualified in other areas. Better to 
find out if they can easily learn to use the tool you need than to dismiss them because 
they don't already have it.

Lin Sims

Of course I'm willing to take 'No' for an answer, so long as 'No' was the answer I was 
looking for.


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Collect Royalties, Not Rejection Letters! Tell us your rejection story when you 
submit your manuscript to iUniverse Nov. 6 -Dec. 15 and get five free copies of 
your book. What are you waiting for? http://www.iuniverse.com/media/techwr

Have you looked at the new content on TECHWR-L lately?
See http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ and check it out.

---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot-  Visit 
http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.