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: Help needed for Damage Control - LONG From:"Mitman, Rikki" <Rikki -dot- Mitman -at- COMPAQ -dot- COM> Date:Thu, 21 Aug 1997 14:04:38 -0500
I think he was looking for helpful suggestions, not recrimination. I
also think he admitted quite clearly that he shares in the blame for
>From: John Posada [SMTP:JOHN -dot- POSADA -at- EY -dot- COM]
>Sent: Thursday, August 21, 1997 1:15 PM
>To: TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU
>Subject: Re: Help needed for Damage Control - LONG
>Let's see...you agree that your stuff was weak. He described what he wanted
>do and you "lapped it up". He showed you something done his way and "it was
>nice piece of work"
>The, all of a sudden, you're complaining. Either you glossed over a whole
>chapter of the situation, or it appears that maybe you guys aren't blameless
>this situation. Did you monitor what was happening, monitor schedules, have
>benchmarks, regular status meetings, draft reviews, etc.? What happened in
>"weeks later". He worked FOR your organization. You have ultimate
>responsibility for the progress of the project.
>At the least, it seams that you've been somewhat weak on project management,
>and in the worst case, negligent in running the project. Look in the mirror
>and you may find some of the fault.