RE: Worries about tools (a bit long)

Subject: RE: Worries about tools (a bit long)
From: Janet_Swisher -at- trilogy -dot- com
To: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 18:51:48 -0600

"Habegger, Nolan" wrote:
>The key to overcoming this is to demonstrate definitive and sound
>reasons for the migration. Telling management that Frame is a superior
>product will not work unless you can demonstrate the superiority in the
>context of the company's performance. <snip>
>Show how a migration will increase productivity,
>automate processes, reduce necessary server space or decrease paper
>Give accurate time and money savings, and don't forget that time saves
>almost ALWAYS translates into money saved.

Up until about a year ago, this was a Word shop. Then the day before a
particular (graphics-heavy) document was to ship, Word corrupted the
files, and resisted all attempts to solve the problem (the backups turned
out to be corrupted too). One writer managed to salvage the files using
her personal copy of FrameMaker, make the deadline and save the day. After
that, it wasn't hard to make the case for migrating to FrameMaker, and
within two months we were on our way. Basically, the "case" for
FrameMaker consisted of "here's all the problems we have with Word, and
the things we can't do with it," and "here's why FrameMaker doesn't have
those problems, and the things we could do with it that we can't do now"
(quantified in money/time terms). Of course, it helped that we had a
writer on board who was already a FrameMaker expert, and could do things
like setting up the templates and tutoring the rest of the team.


Previous by Author: References (was Re: Agencies
Next by Author: Networking RoboHelp
Previous by Thread: RE: Worries about tools (a bit long)
Next by Thread: General Inquiry

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads

Sponsored Ads