RE: Reviewers who don't review

Subject: RE: Reviewers who don't review
From: "Bonnie Granat" <bgranat -at- granatedit -dot- com>
To: "'Gene Kim-Eng'" <techwr -at- genek -dot- com>, "'Siliconwriter'" <siliconwriter -at- comcast -dot- net>, "'TECHWR-L List'" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2006 19:26:57 -0400

I see. Isn't the product manager going to be interested in a defective
product being delivered to customers? Are you saying that the tech support
manager is untouchable?

Bonnie Granat

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gene Kim-Eng [mailto:techwr -at- genek -dot- com]
> Sent: Monday, July 31, 2006 7:18 PM
> To: Bonnie Granat; 'Siliconwriter'; 'TECHWR-L List'
> Subject: Re: Reviewers who don't review
> What I am suggesting is not so much "agreeing" to the other
> person's terms as beating him over the head with them.
> Unfortunately, the reality of life, especially in this romper room
> we call Silicon Valley, is that as tech writers and publications
> managers we do not get to define the job requirements of other
> developers and most especially other managers, but are often
> still held accountable if we are unable to secure their participation
> some way or another. Hence the common advice you see about
> doing things like bribing engineers with candy and cookies.
> This is the stick to that carrot. Taking the recalcitrant person
> at his word and doing what he suggested, to whatever over-the-
> top extremes are necessary to achieve the results he claims it
> will yield, is sometimes the only thing one can do to make a dent
> in an otherwise rock-hard skull.
> However, I have also worked in environments where publicly
> calling the schmuck in question a schmuck as John suggested
> and talking to him as if he really was the child whose behavior he
> is emulating can also work. You just have to know where you are
> and what kind of response your company's culture calls for and
> accepts.
> Gene Kim-Eng
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bonnie Granat" <bgranat -at- granatedit -dot- com>
> > Of course you cannot ensure people won't behave
> outrageously. That's not
> > the
> > point really.
> >
> > I think agreeing to the person's terms is not a good idea.
> The writer is
> > kept from productive work and babysitting someone who
> should be able to
> > perform his job without supervision.
> >
> > Perhaps if his job performance requirements included, in
> writing, the
> > accuracy of the documentation, he would pay some attention.
> It is *his*
> > job
> > that needs to performed right, and if I am the technical
> writer's manager,
> > I
> > do *not* want her babysitting a grown man who needs to be
> financially
> > motivated to perform his job.


WebWorks ePublisher Pro for Word features support for every major Help
format plus PDF, HTML and more. Flexible, precise, and efficient content
delivery. Try it today!

Doc-To-Help includes a one-click RoboHelp project converter. It's that easy. Watch the demo at

You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- infoinfocus -dot- com -dot-

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
techwr-l-unsubscribe -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
or visit

To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr-l-join -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com

Send administrative questions to lisa -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit for more resources and info.


Re: Reviewers who don't review: From: Gene Kim-Eng

Previous by Author: RE: Reviewers who don't review
Next by Author: RE: Reviewers who don't review
Previous by Thread: Re: Reviewers who don't review
Next by Thread: Re: Reviewers who don't review

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

Sponsored Ads