Tag Archives: Technical writing

Do we understand ourselves?

People don’t understand us. From the first time I met a technical writer, I’ve heard them — I’ve heard us — say that.

Our bosses don’t understand us. Subject-matter experts don’t understand us. Our audiences don’t understand us.

So, at long last, we have a chance to change that. A few days ago on Twitter, an app designer named Louie Mantia put this out to the world:

As Louie’s tweet kept popping up in my timeline — with answers from journalists, lexicographers, and historians — I pondered how a technical writer might answer.

It was harder than I expected.

First take

First I thought of answering Louie’s question like this: Our top priority is writing directly to the people who use the instructions.

Then, in my imaginary dialog, I heard a resounding yawn from the general public: Of course you write for the people who use the instructions. For us. Who else would you write for?

Writing for the audience. While we technical writers trumpet it as a big deal, to our audience it’s so blindingly obvious that it goes without saying.

Second take

So I tried a different approach. Technical writers think in terms of how to use a product, not how the product works.

General public: We know that! It’s common sense, right? I don’t need to know how an internal-combustion engine works. I just want to change the oil.

Third take

crowd of people

Might the people understand us better than we think?

My third try: We work hard to tailor our information to our audience — in terms of both content and media.

GP: Hmm. The tailoring part, again, should go without saying. Maybe we don’t understand why you have to work so hard.

After all, when we get it right, it looks effortless. And when we get it wrong, it looks like we haven’t tried at all.

I began to realize that the skills we technical writers prize the most and discuss the most among ourselves, like audience analysis and media expertise, are things that — in the minds of our customers — ought to be second nature.

When we say that people don’t understand us, it’s not because they don’t grasp our skill set. It’s because they don’t realize how much energy we devote to honing those skills and to reminding each other how important they are.

Why do we need to remind each other of things that are so fundamental? Is it because our perspective is skewed from spending too much time with our work colleagues (especially Development) and not enough time with our customers?

Maybe it’s not that people understand us. Maybe we don’t understand ourselves.

Epilog

I finally did answer Louie’s question about what seems obvious to us but is misunderstood by the general public.

What do you think of my answer? How would you have answered?

Do you think our customers would be surprised to learn how much time we spend talking about things that, to them, ought to be second nature?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

You might’ve heard…

I’m taking a few days off. But please check out my guest post on Amruta Ranade’s blog, in which I describe a few things you might’ve heard about technical writing.

Thanks, Amruta, for giving me the opportunity to contribute to your blog!

Launching your technical communication career

Last time I wrote about the places you can go, or the different trajectories your career can take, when you work in technical communication.

But how do you get that first job? What qualifications do you need, and what are employers looking for?

Prompted by interview questions from a Tech Comm graduate student, and based on my experience working in the field and interviewing candidates, here are some thoughts.

montage of album covers from 1979

We listened to different music in 1979, and breaking into the field was different too.

I got my first technical writing job a long time ago — in 1979. One thing I know for sure is that your breaking-in story won’t be the same as mine. Things were a lot different then, and I’m not just thinking about the music we listened to. Companies, having realized that technical people didn’t necessarily make good technical writers, went looking for young writers who weren’t necessarily versed in the technology but who could learn it.

Armed with a double-major in English and philosophy, and having a tiny bit of experience with computers, I landed that first job with IBM.

You won’t have the same experience. Your résumé will need to look a little shinier than mine did.

What are the educational requirements for working in Technical Communication?

Follow-up question: Are certain degrees or backgrounds more sought after by employers? Continue reading

Technical Communication: Oh, the places you’ll go!

A Technical Communication graduate student recently interviewed me for a project she’s doing. She asked great questions, and (with her permission) I thought I’d share some of my answers with you.

What does a career trajectory look like in technical communication?

Places_you_go_Seuss

Your career in Tech Comm, and possibly after Tech Comm, will be uniquely yours — shaped by your interests and talents.

Follow-on question: Is there lots of room for growth, or do people need to transition to management after a certain point?

There is lots of room for growth. Just as people follow many paths into Tech Comm, they find a lot of paths to follow once they’re here.

It’s like Dr. Seuss said: you can go almost anywhere.

Where you go in Tech Comm — or where you go from Tech Comm — depends on what you’re especially good at and what you’re most interested in. Continue reading

Is your child texting about technical communication?

Here’s a quick guide to find out:

stack of dictionariesBRB
Big reference books

TMI
Tagging my index

LOL
Learn other languages

NGH
Need graphic here

TTFN
Try this font now

Quill penIDK
Insert DITA keyword

WTF
Write the facts

ICYMI
I corrected your mistakes, incidentally

TTYL
The things you learn

TL;DR
Technical literacy definitely rocks

FTW
Fantastic technical writing

Don’t twist the prose

It’s never too early to plan for next year’s gardening. I just got a new pair of pruning shears, and on the back of the package I found these illustrations:

garden_shears

….accompanied by these instructions:

Don’t twist the scissors in use. If the scissors are in the city Figure C in the way the clock pointer, the two shear bodies will squeeze each otherDamage: if it is twisted to the look of the clock in the opposite of the A, the time of the clockWill produce a gap between the two sides of the plane, and can not ensure smooth trim. Correct useShould be shown in figure B.

Yeah. Wow.

I was tempted to laugh and roll my eyes, and I confess that maybe I did. A little.

But it’s also worth pausing to make a few points — because someone wrote this, honestly thinking they were conveying useful information. Nobody sets out to make their readers’ eyes roll. So what happened here? Let’s think about it.

Don’t overthink

First, I’m pretty certain that the writer, despite the best of intentions, overthought the whole thing. Here’s what they wanted to say: For a smooth cut, always cut straight on. Don’t rotate the shears to the right or left.

But, anxious to make sure no one would misunderstand, the writer inserted cross-references to the pictures and added the convoluted text about what happens if you turn (twist) the shears clockwise or counterclockwise. The added detail, rather than clarifying, only muddled things.

My copy often goes from simple to complex, just like this writer’s. Then, after setting it aside for a little while, I can come back and make it simple again.

Translation matters

Then, when you’re writing content for translation, be sure it’s translated by people who know both the source and target languages. It sure looks like this company cut corners when it came to translation. (Maybe they twisted their shears counterclockwise while cutting. Who knows?)

I’m certain that this copy looked a lot better in the source language than it does in English.

Also, when writing for translation, be sure the writer and the translator are working with the same authoring tool. It’s likely that those crashed-together words, like otherDamage and clockWill, resulted from a writer saving the copy in one tool and a translator opening it in another.

Verify, verify, verify

The manufacturer knew they’d be selling their product in a large English-speaking market. Wouldn’t it be nice if they’d usability-tested their instructions — or even if they’d simply verified them with one English speaker?

Perhaps it seemed like an unnecessary expense, or too much of an inconvenience, to verify the instructions. Or perhaps someone simply said We don’t care — just ship it.  Whether that decision will have negative consequences, in the form of damaged customer loyalty or decreased sales, I don’t know. (Very possibly it won’t, which is why someone said We don’t care.)

The decision certainly has resulted in embarrassment for the manufacturer. Can you put a cash value on that?