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: Job Titles for TechComm People From:"Huber, Mike" <mrhuber -at- SOFTWARE -dot- ROCKWELL -dot- COM> Date:Fri, 13 Feb 1998 17:33:36 -0600
While I also end up doing quite a bit of usability work (both casually
as a side effect of researching software I'm documenting, and formally
in the RSI usability lab) I'm not about to call myself a "Usability
Specialist" for the same reason as I would object to an administrative
assistant using the title "Technical Writer."
It's something that comes up in the course of other work, but it is not
my focus. I have only rudimentary training in usability, and only work
on it a few hours per month. I find it interesting and valuable, and
when it's convenient, I learn more about it.
We have real Usability Specialists, who take it as seriously as I take
technical writing. They work on it every day, attend seminars, study the
latest research, and give it a level of attention that I just can't,
because there are only enough hours in a day for one profession (and
several fields of interest).
mike -dot- huber -at- software -dot- rockwell -dot- com
Home: nax -at- execpc -dot- com
>From: McKenna, Colleen [SMTP:cmckenna -at- SPSS -dot- COM]
>Sent: Friday, February 13, 1998 4:24 PM
>To: TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU
>Subject: Re: Job Titles for TechComm People
>Sorry if this is a bit late; I'm on the digest. I feel compelled to
>respond to Andrew's post. While I agree that "Usability Specialist" is
>not a thoroughly descriptive job title for a technical communicator (it
>merely scratches the surface of what we do!), it is certainly an
>everyday part of my job.
>My training as a technical communicator included courses in human
>factors/ergonomics and how to design and implement usability testing. I
>believe that my job is definitely to be an advocate for users. I help
>them use the software effectively. Yes, I write documentation, but
>documenting a procedure is often an excellent way to discover ways to
>improve it. How many times have you written a procedure and said "Hey,
>why can't they combine steps A, B, and C into one step? Sure would be a
>lot easier to use!" When I see a bad design or an issue that could be
>improved by applying some basic usability principles, I never hesitate
>to speak up. If there isn't time or inclination to implement my
>suggestions, so be it. At least I tried. No one has ever "bitch-smacked"
>me for speaking up. (Does anyone else take offense to that term?)
>Anyways, technical communicators often design and implement help systems
>and other types of software.
>We usability test our documentation as well as our products, of which
>documentation is an integral part. Frankly, I think usability testing is
>a integral part of our profession. If you're not doing it, you probably