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.
And your supervisor will probably say "O.K., Pagemaker it is!".
Managers want to know why they should spend time and money
on a new software, and rightly so. I have done a cost analysis
just about every time I asked for a new tool. Justifications are
very important to the bean counters. I understand why as long as it
doesn't get anal and go overboard. I have known too many people
who requested software because they wanted to play with it or to
list another tool on their resume.
Yes, a cost analysis is guess work, educated guess work.
I just did a simple cost analysis on why I needed Pagemaker (I have
been creating color brochures in Word, the ultimate hell). It was
easy, I just explained how I had spent 4 days redoing a brochure
3-times because Word could not handle the intensity of the graphics
and continued to corrupt the file. Also, we could not lay it out as we
wanted to because of Words limitations. If I had been able to use PM,
I believe I could have had it done in half a day. Considering what
they pay me, that justified Pagemaker.
If I had to do a cost analysis for Frame verses Pagemaker, these are
some of the things I would compare (just approximate):
1. the time it takes to generate TOCs, TOFs, indexes, etc.
2. the time and ease of generating and updating cross-references
3. how print shops deal with each (if this is a factor)
4. limitations (paginating, file size, etc.)
5. those small little irritations which just seem to suck up time
6. any special features which would be a benefit but are not necessary
Put the result in person hours and benefits and they can figure out the
cost saving in dollars. It does not have to be perfect; it just needs to
say in black and white why you need Frame.
I have a lot of experience and the respect of my managers. Every once
in awhile they will do something because "I said so". Most of the time,
they want to know my reasoning and I don't blame them. They are not
questioning my judgement or my abilities. They simply want to know
why.
Melonie R. Holliman
Technical Writer
CPD Marketing
Advanced Micro Devices
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Simon Gendreau [SMTP:Simon -dot- Gendreau -at- pwc -dot- ca]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 1999 7:42 AM
> To: TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU
> Subject: Re: Cost Analysis for FrameMaker
>
> Kari,
> I agree 101% with Fabien comments. Take the time to print some messages
> found on
> this list and give those to your super.
> And ........ they hired because they trusted you so ........ isn't it ?
>
> Good luck.
>
>
