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.
I know this is an elementary question, but up until recently I've been glossing over Agile topics as they haven't applied to my work situation. Apparently we're moving to an Agile work environment, and we're doing it soon.
(We switched to Agile as a configuration control system about six months ago, at that time the standard response to my repeated question "Are we using the methodology?" was "No, we're just using it for configuration control, that's all. I learned that we're adopting the process about a half hour ago when I went to a meeting on a program, and noticed up on a wall were all sorts of yellow sticky notes arranged as "Sprint 1," "Sprint 2," and so forth. "Oh yeah, we're adopting the process" said the program manager in the meeting.)
I'm a lone writer, currently working at about 110% of capacity, managing the operator and field service manuals on about a dozen different complex products, and it's not unusual that I've got three or four different projects/product manuals in work at any given moment.
Is my life about to get easier because of this, or is it likely I'm about to get overwhelmed by the pace of changes?
Rick Lippincott, Technical Writer
American Science and Engineering, Inc. | www.as-e.com
829 Middlesex Turnpike | Billerica, MA 01821 USA | Fax +1-978-262-8702
Office +1-978-262-8807 | rlippincott -at- as-e -dot- com
New! Doc-to-Help 2013 features the industry's first HTML5 editor for authoring.