Tech-writers û a necessary evil
New to tech-writing, or thinking about starting? The key to
success is recognising that tech-writers are a necessary
evil.

By Glenn Murray *

Tech-writers are necessary because someone has to write the
user doco. The programmers and managers sure as hell don't
want to. This is actually part of the reason that you're
evil, too. In my experience, most programmers and managers
think that they could write the manuals if they wanted toà
they just don't want to. They might not write all "flowery"
like the tech-writers, but what they write is correct.

Unfortunately, that's quite often all that's important to
programmers and managers.
There is a feeling within the software environment that
accuracy = quality. Audience analysis, doco readability,
consistency, usability, active and passive voice, commas in
a list of three or more itemsà All of these things are
relatively unimportant to everyone but the tech-writer. Ohà
and the user.

In a world where accuracy is all important, a lot goes over
the head of the dummy. I don't know if it's intellectual
snobbery, but programmers and managers seem to think that if
they understand it, so should the user. It doesn't matter
whether or not they doà they SHOULD! Stupid users! Maybe
it's the geek's ultimate revengeà

Your document can be 100% accurate, but if the audience
can't read it, you've wasted your time.

So why doesn't anyone acknowledge this? They do! That's the
weird part. In theory, everyone agrees with you, it's just
in practice that you find yourself out in the cold. I don't
know why this happens. Maybe it's because most of these guys
have never done tech-writing.

So tech-writers spend too long worrying about unimportant
things. And they bother programmers and managers with
unimportant things. But they're necessary things. Otherwise
why would you be employed. Maybe the absence of simple logic
short circuits their brains. Who knows?

What we can get out of this is that there's a feeling that
tech-writers waste time, and as a result, they're pretty
much at the bottom of the heap in the software world. I
think a good analogy is the way some rich see the poor.
Dirty little creaturesà if only we could do without themà

But there is an up-side. I don't want you thinking it's all
bad.

Being at the bottom of the heap has its advantages. You can
go unnoticed for years if you want. If you haven't seen the
movie, Office Space, you should hire it. There's a little
ferrety bloke in that who was "let go" years ago. Problem
is, no one ever told him, and because of a glitch in payroll
he still got paid. No one ever noticed.

Being a tech-writer's a bit like that.

When I was managing doco teams, my favourite saying was "All
we have to do is manage their expectations and our
commitments". Because programmers and managers resign
themselves to the fact that they don't know what's going on
in the doco team, there's sometimes a temptation to slacken
off. Don't give in to this temptation!!! If you ever get
caught, doing it, it'll be like the boy who cried wolf û
they'll never believe your estimates again!

The other risk is that you'll lose your sense of urgency.
And that's a big part of what makes a good worker. You
should be very strict about managing your commitments. This
requires discipline, because sometimes it seems you're the
only one that cares, but you have to do it.

One thing you should be aware of though, is that your
average tech-writer in software spends only about 50% of his
or her time writing. The rest of your time is spent
planning, problem solving, fixing your computer,
researching, interviewing the programmers, writing work
pracsà

I always found it was a good balance, though.

It was when I started managing teams that the bottom really
fell out. Then the percentage dropped to about 10-20%. There
were times when I'd go months without writing any help at
all. That can be very frustrating, especially if you don't
particularly like managing.

Now managing tech-writers in software is an interesting
thing. As with most technology management positions, you
kinda fall into it, because you're the most
senior/experienced person in the company. Unfortunately,
that doesn't qualify you to be a manager. Software companies
are renowned for dumping people into management roles
without any real training or support.

I don't really have any advice for you here. If it's gonna
happen, it'll happen. Just be aware of it, and know that if
you fall into a management role, it's gonna be difficult.
(That's not to say that it can't be rewarding thoughà)

The ironic thing is that the most difficult aspect of it is
that your staff are screaming at you to change the system.
"The programmers don't answer our questions!" "None of my
work has been reviewed for the last 2 months!" "The project
manager just told me to forget about quality!"

Unfortunately, the inexperienced tech-writer is often na´ve
enough to think they can change the system. Once you become
a manager, you know you can't. Hold on a minuteà Maybe
apathy is what qualifies you to be a managerà Hmmmm.

In any case, my advice is not to push too hard. You'll make
life hard for your manager, and give yourself a bad
reputation. Recognise you're a necessary evil, and work
within those constraints.

Tech-writing can be a lot of fun. And don't let anyone tell
you it's not creative. Trying to think of a way to describe
what goes in the Name field without just saying "Enter the
name" is a real mind-boggler!

* Glenn Murray heads copywriting studio Divine Write. He can
be contacted on Sydney +612 4334 6222 or at
glenn@.... Visit www.divinewrite.com for further
details.