A back-to-school list: un-rules of grammar

August 28th, 2010

Jan Freeman, who blogs about language at Throw Grammar from the Train, lists here ten picky rules of grammar that are wrong. Oh, dear! I think I believe(d) all these rules 8^( How about you?

What will certification do for me?

August 15th, 2010

In speaking with people since the Summit about certification, I’ve been asked many variations on the question “what’s in it for me?” It’s a natural question that must have a good answer, but there’s more than one way to look at it.

The primary driver we identified for certification in technical communication is to legitimize the contributions of, and respect for, our profession. How many times I’ve heard technical writers complain that no one respects us! It’s painful, and I’m for anything that would improve things. But what people really want to know is whether certification will be valuable for us as individuals. What is the value of certification? I’ll answer that, but first I’ll reframe the question.

An analogy comes to mind. Imagine that you are an organically grown apple. Of what use to you is a label that says “USDA Organic”? Does it matter to you? No! One way or the other, you’re going to end up eaten.

But now imagine that you’re a consumer of apples. Of what use is the label to you? A lot, if you’re interested in organically grown apples. The label identifies the apple as something you want. In fact, people pay a premium for organically grown apples, and the label identifies the apple as what you’re looking for.

And how about the grower of organic apples? The label validates that the apple is, as priced and advertised, organically grown. Since there’s a premium market, the grower realizes additional revenue. I have also read that it’s cheaper to grow organic food, but I wouldn’t know. But either way, there’s value in that certification for the grower.

(Disclaimer: I live in apple country in Massachusetts, and tend to one apple tree that has, from time to time, yielded some excellent apples. But I don’t grow them organically.)

The question you should ask is “what’s in it for employers?” Obviously, we want, among other things, higher salaries as certified professionals. But why would an employer pay more for one? It turns out that there’s a general economic argument that explains why they do. Employers find that certified professionals are cheaper to hire, because HR departments can screen on the keyword, and because it takes less time to establish the credentials of certified professionals, because you can safely assume that they know certains things. Empliyers find certified professionals are cheaper to train, partly because they know their domains. Finally, employers find certified professionals cheaper to replace, siply because they don’t have to replace them as often. (This is also why training is cheaper–it has to be repeated for replacements less often.) Replacing an employee means going back through the recruitment and training phases again, and it’s expensive: I’ve seen estimates of four months’ salary per position. Given these conditions, employers seek out certified professionals. And once this competition begins, the demand has increased, and salaries naturally rise.

This is not some economist’s pipe dream, this is reality, demonstrated time and again in other certified professions. The Project Management Institute, for example, has 25 years of salary data, and they see that PMP-certified mid-career professionals earn on average 17% more than uncertified professionals. That’s not a one-time boost, but more per year, every year, until retirement.

Now, no one can promise you a direct line from certifiaction in any profession to an immediate, or even an assured, higher salary. And it won’t happen overnight. Life doesn’t work that way. But as a general rule, certifiation boosts salaries across professions, for reasons that have nothing to do with any specific profession. The laws of supply and demand hold for all goods and services. We have seen no reason why technical communication would be any different. So, speaking in the broadest sense of the word “you,” that’s what’s in it for you.

Steve’s upcoming speaking engagements

August 14th, 2010

[Updated 2010-08-25] So far I’ve talked about certification at the New York metro chapter, in June. I have a few more engagements lined up, some in person and some virtual:

  • On Thursday evening, August 19 I will be speaking at the Carolina chapter in Morrisville, North Carolina on certification. This trip and the meeting venue is courtesy of Tekelec, my employer. (Thanks!) The presentation will be webcast; for more information, go to http://tinyurl.com/26dugf8
  • On Wednesday evening, September 8, I will be speaking at the Northern New England chapter on structuring information from the ground up.
  • Later in the fall I will be speaking at the Boston chapter on certification (date (TBD).
  • On Tuesday afternoon, January 11, 2011, I will be speaking virtually to the Eastern Iowa chapter on certification.

I am willing and able to speak to your community on certification or any other topic you’d like. Let me know and we’ll see if we can work something out!

California Tech Writers win overtime settlement, and why it may be bad news

July 29th, 2010

In 2006, a technical writer filed a wage and hour lawsuit against Sun Microsystems, alleging that the company violated California labor law by not paying overtime. Well, a judge has given preliminary approval to a $5 million settlement in the case, which grew to a class action with 152 plaintiffs.

I have mixed feelings about this development. The settlement works out to $21,000 per plaintiff after attorneys’ fees, and I’m happy for my colleagues. We know the kind of hours technical writers put in as deadlines loom. I have worked at companies where overtime was considered normal, and it’s not conducive to good work, good health, or good family relations. I’ve also worked contracts where I’ve received overtime, which made staying up all night finishing a proposal much more palatable. In future, more tech writers may find their long hours of effort renumerated, or their employers may put more effort into planning and staffing to avoid the need for overtime.

But the plaintiffs’ case in part rested on the argument that technical writers do not exercise discretion or independent judgment. They deprecated themselves as inferior in that regard to software engineers. As someone who has always considered himself a professional, and who is actively trying to establish technical communication as a profession, the argument, which has apparently carried the day, is self limiting. It’s great to get overtime pay, but not at the expense of becoming an administrative worker.

Even worse are the possible repercussions. Exempt employees earn a fixed salary, so there’s no upside, but there’s no downside, either: you don’t punch a clock, you don’t get docked if you come back a few minutes late from lunch. It’s a two-way street. And that’s peanuts compared to losing your job altogether. Before the settlement, one employment attorney said he would advise his high-tech clients to move their technical writers out of the state rather than pay them overtime in California. So this could wind up being a Pyrrhic victory–excuse me, an epic fail.

Like we’ve been saying all along…

July 14th, 2010

SMEs will sometimes tell you that the information is the only thing that matters; spell checking and copyediting are unnecessary frills.

Not that we had any doubts about this, but I recently stumbled across a study done at Clemson University that demonstrates that correct information is regarded as less authoritative if poorly written:

http://cujo.clemson.edu/manuscript.php?manuscript_ID=142