The value of our work

I’ve been thinking a lot of late about the value we provide as technical communicators. What do our users value? What do our clients value? What do we value? Ideally, all three interests align, but in the real world, we all know they conflict. For example, we might want to deliver the most delightful user experience we’re capable of, but our clients (the ones who pay our bills) want us to hit a deadline, whether we’ve had enough time to polish or not.

That’s why I sympathize with the staff reporters at the Wall Street Journal. After the WSJ was acquired by Rupert Murdoch, they had to know big changes were afoot, but apparently they weren’t expecting to be informed, in a memo by managing editor Robert Thomson, that what they valued wasn’t what their readers valued, at least as he viewed it. This account is from Condé Nast’s Portfolio.com:

Pre-Murdoch, Journal reporters had a mandate to pursue the sort of in-depth, counter-intuitive and/or quirky stories that would result in the lengthy page-one articles known as “leders.” Publishing leders was widely seen as the highest aim of the Journal writer.

But Thomson’s memo outlined a newsroom whose occupants are constantly on the lookout not for leder-worthy ideas but for tiny news bites that can be pushed out over the wire immediately, there to bestow a momentary competitive advantage on subscribers.

“Even a headstart of a few seconds is priceless for a commodities trader or a bond dealer — that same story can be repurposed for a range of different audiences, but its value diminishes with the passing of time,” wrote Thomson. “Given that revenue reality, henceforth all Journal reporters will be judged, in significant part, by whether they break news for the Newswires.”

How did the staff take the news? Not well (note the pejorative use of the word “scriveners”):

“… [T]here’s nobody on the Journal’s staff who wants to write that stuff. You didn’t sign up to write 130-word squibs. You signed up to file 3,000-word mini-New Yorker stories for the front page … You’re turning us all into wire reporters. It’s all going to be nuggets written by scriveners who get 700 words to spread their wings.”

One passage that caused particular alarm was his assertion that the value of news “is sometimes better recognised by our readers than our journalists.”

“That’s a pretty nasty little slap, when you think about it,” says the ex-staffer, “because when you flip it, it means reporters know nothing.”

No, it doesn’t. Assuming Thomson is correct, it means there’s a mismatch between what the reporters value (leders) and what subscribers value (timely news). To put it bluntly, the Journal has a right to get value from its employees. If it wants squibs, it should get squibs; if the reporters aspire to write New Yorker pieces, they should work for the New Yorker.

The cover story in the March 2009 issue of Intercom, “Adapt or Die”, by Elissa Matulis Myers, is an important article on the value we provide as technical communicators, and the pressure we face to change with the times. (Full disclosure: I contributed some background material for this article.) What do we do that our clients value? Not all that much, it seems, given how readily employers shed tech writers when times are tough — and we know how tough the times are! But Myers probes beneath the surface and tells us what employers really value. It may not be what you expect.

For example, according to a 2000 study by Accenture, a stunning 20% of consumer electronics purchases are returned, but two thirds of the items test out as working correctly. In 2007, the total cost of receiving, retesting, and restocking these items was nearly $14 billion! If consumers only understood how to use these products, most of that cost could have been avoided. So… If you tell the CFO that you provide an excellent user experience with well-crafted prose, you might not get the respect you feel you deserve, and your job might not be as secure as you feel it ought to be. But if you say that you make the customer understand how to work the product so it won’t be returned, you’re speaking the magic words that make you a valuable corporate asset.

One type of document I admit I don’t enjoy writing is an installation guide. An engineer I worked with once referred to the installation guide as “the monkey-doc,” as in “so simple even a monkey could do it.” Clearly he didn’t value installation guides! And he’ll never put much effort into one. But hardware products sold in the European Union are required by law to include printed installation instructions. Guess what? Without the “monkey-docs,” you can’t legally sell your product in one of your biggest markets! It’s not exciting writing, but it’s valuable.

Come to the Summit!

The economic downturn has affected us all, and this year’s Annual Summit (May 3-6) may seem like an expense you can live without. But I think that this is the best time in many years to invest in yourself and your career. And like many investment opportunities these days, you can pick it up for a bargain price!

Summit Events

When times are tough, we all worry about our jobs. Why not demonstrate a commitment to your profession and set yourself above the rest? At the Summit you can learn best practices, evaluate the newest tools, and hone new skills. You can choose from over 100 continuing-education sessions in six tracks covering the entire profession.

What if the axe has already fallen? The Summit is still a great resource! Bring your resume to the Employment Booth. Log in to the Career Center. Attend multiple social events to expand your personal network. Get updates on industry trends. Be the first to hear new software announcements and demos. Learn everything you need to stay current in the field.

Either way, you can register for the Summit online at http://conference.stc.org/.

Room Sharing

This year’s Summit is already affordable. Hotel rates in Atlanta are 20% lower than last year, and discounted room rates have been extended until April 21. Members whose companies are in the Corporate Value Program get an additional group discount.

But you can cut your bill in half again by sharing a room. Members who want to share rooms in the Hyatt Regency Atlanta can match themselves on the STC Forum.

Split-Payment Options

Mindful of the current situation, we’ve made additional resources available. Members in good standing can pay for registration in two installments, half with your registration form and half on site. Spreading the cost over two billing cycles can help if your budget is already stretched thin.

Payments cannot be completed online, so download the Conference Registration Form and pay your first installment by credit card (sorry, no checks). Mail the completed form to the STC office or fax it to +1 (703) 522-2075.

Scholarships

Up to 250 scholarships of $400 are available for members in good standing to attend the Summit. These scholarships may be awarded to members who are currently unemployed or forced to take at least a 10 percent cut in salary. Consultants or those who own their own business may apply if their business revenue is down at least 10 percent. You must stay at the Hyatt Regency Atlanta to take advantage of this benefit. Scholarships will be awarded on a first-come, first-awarded basis until April 21 or they are all awarded.

To apply, download the Scholarship Registration Form and complete the section indicating your employment status. Fax the completed form with a credit-card payment to +1 (703) 522-2075, or mail it to the STC office with a check. Scholarship recipients will be notified within 48 hours.

For more information, go to stc.org. I look forward to see you in Atlanta!

Messy

I noticed a few months ago that my blog entries were being shown oldest first. It looked as if I hadn’t posted anything in a couple of years! My actual posting rate is (somewhat) better than that. The WordPress Web site said a SQL bug was causing the problem, and a newer release solved the problem.

Because my Web site is hosted by an ISP, upgrading the software was nontrivial. I shied away from undertaking the upgrade for a while, but eventually bit the bullet and, with help from the support staff, completed the upgrade. To keep my (handful of) old blog entries, I kept the previous version.

I posted a few more blog entries. Yesterday I realized that I was posting new entries to the old software!

I’ve spent a pleasant afternoon trying to straighten things out, upgrading to the newest release of WordPress, moving blog posts to the correct place and backdating the datestamps (which seems ethical under these circumstances). I now think things are straightened out.

Software… Thank God it’s so hard to describe, eh?

The Best Technical Document in the World

This past weekend I served as a consensus judge at STC’s International Technical Publications Competition (ITPC). I’ve participated before, as a telephone (remote) judge, on-site judge, and Best-of-Show judge. This year STC conducted an experiment in cost cutting. The Boston and Northern New England chapters, which (if I do say so myself as a member and local participant) jointly run one of the strongest local competitions, were asked to host the judging and provide the bulk of the International judges. We rose to the challenge, and In the Publications competition more than half of the 12 on-site judges were local members (who yet had International experience).

The competitions themselves are one of the major events in the Society. Winners of Awards of Distinction at local competitions in publications, art, and online categories are eligible for the International competition. Winners of Awards of Distinction in each of the three categories in the International competition are eligible for the Best of Show awards.

Each category has slightly different criteria, but broadly speaking we looked at writing and organization, copyediting, and visual design and production–corresponding roughly to the work products of writers, editors, and illustrators. The criteria are hardly rocket science. They’re highly practical questions, such as how concise the writing is, whether there are copyediting mistakes, whether graphics are crisp and clear, and whether the work product is free from defects. We’re not awarding prizes for the longest entry, or the most colorful, or the fanciest print job, but whether entries are well designed, well executed, and effective.

I had ten entries to judge, including annual reports, magazines, quick-reference job aids, training materials, and software manuals. They were all good. solid, professional pieces, and I would be proud to have created every one of them. As always, I learned a few things from each, and like the other judges I took pains to critique each entry as objectively, thoroughly, and constructively as possible, as if the entrant were a colleague asking me face-to-face for my opinion. It took me a at least a couple of hours to go through each entry, and another hour or two to complete each judging form. So it’s a significant commitment of time. A PDF sample of the judging form is here.)

The value to entrants at both the local and international level is multifold. I worked in a group that won a high international award, and when the company issued a press release announcing our win, the stock went up, increasing our capitalization $1 million in a day–not bad! And it’s great to be recognized by your peers with an award. But there’s also the value of feedback. How else can you get at least three–more if you’re lucky!–professional technical communicators closely examine your technical document and provide thorough feedback, and for a good price at that?

A conmment on the best-of-show process: If you think it’s hard to compare a quick-reference card with a 300-page software reference guide, try picking the best of show! It’s like comparing apples, oranges, and chocolate cakes. Sometimes the consensus process is long and arduous, but sometimes, believe it or not, the winner jumps out at you as being obviously superior to the other entries (distinguished winners all).

This year’s winners? Come to the Summit and see them!

What is it that we do, exactly?

What is a technical communicator, and why would you hire one? The answer to that question is called a value proposition. In general, it’s a statement of the unique value added by any person, product, or service that explains why you’d want to spend money. For technical communicators, it’s not something we’re used to offering, and it’s hard to articulate. But it’s vitally important: If we can’t answer the question, we’re in trouble, especially these days!

Let me start with a simple example. In explaining to someone (a pointy-haired boss, say) why it takes so long to turn out what might be a brief document, you might say, “writing is not typing.” Yes, like a data-entry operator, you both type; and the operator may type more quickly and accurately than you; but while the operator is merely keying in data, you are creating it. You’re not paid for speed. So while you both possess typing as a skill–and the operator may possess more skill than you!–your skill set is broader, rarer, and thus more valuable. Similarly, if all you do is copy and paste engineering specs into templates, check the spelling, and call it a day, you’re doing formatting–what has been called “word processing”–and your skill set is not unique and, frankly, not particularly valuable. (I’ve worked with people like that, and they’re insidious.)

What other skills do we bring to the table? Here are a few more, courtesy of HelpScribe:

  • Social interaction
  • Usability engineering
  • Marketing writing
  • Project management
  • Dollops of graphic design, programming, and testing

If you throw in everything that any of us in the field might need to know or do, you have a body of knowledge for the profession. Compiling such a body of knowledge is important! But, as we see from typing, not every necessary skill is unique or even valuable.

To get at the value part, we need to determine where we can either create something that our employers can sell, do something that saves our employers money, or do something that reduces our employers’ risks. (Technical documents are sold for good profits in the “after” market, but let’s set that aside for the moment.) I know of three areas where we add value:

  1. Research conducted in the 1980s showed that we can reduce our employers’ support costs, often by 50%.
  2. Since that research was done, laws and regulations have been written that mandate certain kinds of warnings, installation instructions, and recycling information. Increasingly, directions must be available in the native languages of the market countries, which means internationalization and localization–without which products cannot legally be sold.
  3. Most recently, research on consumer electronics has revealed that a very large percentage of warranty returns (which are a cost to manufacturers) are of products that work as designed, but not as expected. (This last is a multi-billion dollar opportunity to increase customer satisfaction and reduce warranty costs!)

We can say that technical communicators help users understand their products better, reducing their calls for technical support and their warranty returns. Also, we are willing and able to navigate the legal and regulatory hurdles of producing documentation for export. The bottom line? Save money! Increase sales! Stay out of jail! I daresay that’s a valuable proposition.

If this list is the core of our value proposition, what unique skills and knowledge do we bring to bear that enable us to provide the value? Typing is no longer germane, but project management is, to get the translations done on time. Formatting is not germane, but writing concisely, consistently, and clearly is, so that the text can be translated efficiently in the first place. Schmoozing is not germane, but the ability to learn complex technical products well enough to explain their operation to a consumer audience–or even the knowledge to make suggestions for improving usability–is, because if we can explain how to use products, users won’t be calling the Help Desk or asking for their money back as often.

I think this is the right train of thought. What do you think?

Top 10 IT certifications: Tools, tools, tools, and … project management?

In an opinion piece posted 12/10/2008 TechRepublic.com, Erik Eckel, former executive editor of TechRepublic, listed what he thought are the ten best IT certifications:

  1. Microsoft Certified IT Professional (MCITP)
  2. Microsoft Certified Technology Specialist (MCTS)
  3. CompTIA’s Security+
  4. Microsoft Certified Professional Developer (MCPD)
  5. Cisco Certified Network Associate (CCNA)
  6. CompTIA’s A+
  7. Project Management Institute Project Management Professional (PMP)
  8. Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer (MCSE) and Microsoft Certified Systems Administrator (MCSA)
  9. (ISC)² Certified Information Systems Security Professional (CISSP)
  10. CompTIA’s Linux+

I’m not surprised to see a heavy emphasis on software tools, but do you see something that jumps out at you? Me too. Even in an IT-oriented list on a tech Web site, the PMP’s certification is considered one of the most valuable. Eckel describes the MPM this way:

The certification measures a candidate’s project management expertise by validating skills and knowledge required to plan, execute, budget, and lead a technology project. Eligible candidates must have five years of project management experience or three years of project management experience and 35 hours of related education.

The PMP model is interesting to study. The successful candidate must have significant experience or experience and education, and must also pass an exam. That seems both reasonable and flexible.

Of course, with mass layoffs happening all around us (if not to some of us!), isn’t this a bad time to be spending money on certification? Not so, concludes Eckel: “As organizations battle tough economic conditions, having proven project scheduling, budgeting, and management skills will only grow in importance. The PMI’s PMP credential is a perfect conduit for demonstrating that expertise on a resume.”

The Joy of … Reading the Manual?

Naturally, I encourage people to read the manual; the more demand for manuals, the more demand for people who create them.

I try to practice what I preach. Reading the manual is a competitive advantage. Expose yourself to all the features of a new tool and you’re halfway to being a guru. It does my heart good to see my kids reading the manuals (which can be surprisingly complex) that come with their video games, and then buying after-market guides and looking for even more tips on the Web.

So manuals can be a source of information and, for some, employment. But… a source of happiness? Writing for the Huffington Post, Gretchen Rubin suggested some emotional and spiritual benefits:

I’m often frustrated by devices, and I have to go to great efforts not to let my irritation infect my mood. But … a big part of the problem is that I never take the time to read the manual! We recently had to replace our dishwasher, and I feel frustrated by its obscure buttons–but why haven’t I taken the time to read the directions? From now on, when I get a new gizmo of any kind, I’m going to push myself to read the instructions carefully. Why should I expect to operate something without learning anything about it?

But “reading the instruction manual” is also good advice on a metaphorical level. One of my happiness-project resolutions is to “Ask for help,” and I’m always struck by the fact that 1) I find this surprisingly difficult to do and 2) whenever I do ask for help, it’s hugely beneficial. Turns out that getting instructions makes things easier!

Rubin is not alone in her frustration. A 2008 study by Accenture found that consumer-electronics manufacturers spent over $25 billion in 2007 on assessing, repairing, repackaging, restocking and reselling returned merchandise. Faulty goods? No. Between 62-85% of returned products showed no detectable fault. The customers didn’t know how the products were supposed to work.

You can argue that the products are too complex or misleadingly advertised. You can say that some consumers are dishonest. You might even point out that a lot of the documentation out there is lousy. But clearly there’s a huge opportunity in that field to reduce business costs and increase customer satisfaction. I’m all in favor of making my readers happy!