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.
Subject:Re: Was: ISO better tools - Now Feedback From:quills -at- airmail -dot- net To:techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com Date:Thu, 10 Dec 2009 00:07:42 -0600
A hit on the first shot. Outside of the privacy issue raised by Robert,
this is the most crucial issue. How do you interpret the raw data?
Most company's that have Knowledge Base setups, often have a section at
the bottom where you are asked to rate the information presented as to
whether it answered your question or solved your problem.
If you collected that information along with the other tracking data,
THEN and ONLY THEN, does the data become valuable. Otherwise the answer
is 22 trucks, or lay wire, depending on whether you are going through
the Infantry Office Basic Course or the Infantry Officer Advance Course.
As shown in the previous sentence, the data is useless without context.
Raw data in any form is subject to gross misinterpretation and misuse.
Scott
On 12/9/09 5:17 PM, Rick Stone wrote:
> Hi all
>
> Okay, it would be way cool if someone could please post something that
> substantiates the use of feedback mechanisms such as how many views, etc.
>
> I see these questions all the time across various fora. Company X
> advertises that their tool Y is capable of tracking all this wonderful
> feedback about how many times topic Z has been hit.
>
> Can someone please advise how this helps me in the real world? Sure,
> topic Z may be more popular than topic A. Does that make topic A more
> valuable than topic C that seldom gets hit? Does it mean that topic C
> becomes an eventual candidate for deletion and removal from the help
> system? What about topic Z? Does it mean that you do something special
> with it? Develop an FAQ that contains topic Z perhaps?
>
> Or what about statistical reports that infer a user normally traverses a
> path from topic Z to topic B to topic D before finally stopping at topic
> L? How do you know topic L is really the topic that solved the issue and
> not simply where everyone eventually concludes the help had nothing they
> were looking for and they gave up?
>
> These reports are great and all, but how do real world help authors use
> them when the moment release 7.1 is made public management is pouncing
> on you asking why documentation isn't yet complete for 7.2 or 8?
>
> Cheers... Rick :)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Are you looking for one documentation tool that does it all? Author,
build, test, and publish your Help files with just one easy-to-use tool.
Try the latest Doc-To-Help 2009 v3 risk-free for 30-days at: http://www.doctohelp.com/
Help & Manual 5: The all-in-one help authoring tool. True single- sourcing --
generate 8 different formats and as many different versions as you need
from just one project. Fast and intuitive. http://www.helpandmanual.com/
---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-
