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.
> But aren't the metrics based on quality documentation? The estimated page count
> should be based on the "time consuming" lowest possible page count.
>
In the best of all worlds, yes, but in reality, not necessarily.
However, this does suggest a solution to the problem: base the dollar
estimate on a time estimate, then justify the time. I.e.: does the
customer want 5 hr/page documentation, or 5 page/hr documentation? This
now gives you an opportunity to explain the difference, and hopefully
justify the expense.
This method, however, may have some pitfalls. Some clients use any extra
information about your process as an excuse to try to reduce time, and
therefore the amount they are paying you: "A copy-editing pass? You
don't need that; we'll read it over ourselves. Subtract that from the
estimate." I guess you have to base your estimating method on your
assessment of the seriousness of the client and how realistic they will
be themselves in budgeting for the project, or in accepting the validity
of your bases for estimation. Clients who are too silly about that sort
of thing are often best avoided in any event.
