TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
> While I agree that it is not a perfect parameter, "cost per page" seems
> to be the parameter of choice when benchmarking technical documentation
> costs within the industry. Not for companies who produce 2-3 manuals per
> year ofcourse, but for larger corporations who output hundreds of
> thousands of pages per year.
Large companies tend to stick to old metrics unless those metrics need
to drastically change to support a new goal. I've worked with large
and small companies. Where cost per page was used, way too much time
and effort was spent looking for meaningful ways to present the
metrics both to upper management and to those doing the work. That, to
me, says they were the wrong metrics to gather.
> "Cost per word" would be very misleading, since a 100 page manual with
> technical illustrations then would "cost" almost nothing to produce for
> a corporation. Which isn't true ofcource, hence the "cost per page"
> parameter, which takes into account labour, salaries, IT solutions,
> real-estate, etc.
Cost per Word is just another definition of a metric. Labor, IT
solutions, real estate, and other items can be equally represented in
a word or a page. Both require a definition, but either way your
measurement is still on output and does not speak at all to quality,
customer satisfaction, or translates into any kind of useful business
metric. It's just volume.
> There are several whitepapers and theses about this, e.g. in "Technical
> Communication". I just couldn't find any direct figures to compare our
> figures with.
I think you will find that they are either old or are measuring
something very specific.
Let's back up. Why do you need to collect metrics in the first place?
What problem are you trying to analyze?
Help & Manual 5: The complete help authoring tool for individual
authors and teams. Professional power, intuitive interface. Write
once, publish to 8 formats. Multi-user authoring and version control! http://www.helpandmanual.com/
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-