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:New things new ways, more From:Barb Philbrick <barb -dot- philbrick -at- PCOHIO -dot- COM> Date:Tue, 12 Jul 1994 16:39:00 -0500
J>A cross-functional team (engineering, marketing, tech pubs, training,
J>tech support, and customers) begins development of a new product. This
J>team reaches preliminary agreement on the content of the product and
J>the support it will receive.
This only works if two (possibly contradictory) criteria are met:
1) People have internalized the team concept. This means, in part, that
the more vocal people have learned to listen to the less vocal folks.
2) Someone has the authority to make a decision about contentious issues
(such as: Tech Pubs: BUT I LIKE COMMAS AFTER A SERIES Training: I DON'T
LIKE COMMAS). Hopefully, this person is knowledgeable about both sides
of the fence and is rational to boot.
J>The tech pubs and training developers benefit from a common vision.
<guffaw> I have yet to see this happen. Usually both sides bicker and
become enemies.
IMO, teams are committees by a different name. Committees weren't
particularly effective; neither are teams. Until people stop coming into
teams with differing agendas, they don't help the process.
My experience with teams so far has been negative. I'm sure there are
places where it works, but usually it's a neat buzzword for management
to foist around without changing anything about their perspectives.
