Re: Structuring Tech Pubs

[Tom Regner <tom_regner@xxxxxxx>]

"Hutchings, Christa" wrote:

<snip>

> There were good and bad sides to all of them, but like Jim Stauffer, I think
> that the best fit was as part of Tech Support. They were most concerned with
> servicing the customer and understood the value of good, usable docs.

Those are the pros of having technical publications under Tech Support.
The cons include having a layer of interdepartmental beauracracy to
contend with when it comes time to get raw data from Engineering.  This
is no small issue at many companies.  At many mid to large companies,
access to the Engineering network servers to those outside of Engineering
is nearly impossible to get in other than an extremely limited way.

That said, Tech Support (as part of a larger Technical Services organization
that includes Training and Customer Support along with Tech Pubs) would
be my second choice.

> Engineering is so used to looking at the product from the backside that they
> have trouble seeing it from the front (i.e., the user's point of view)...

Precisely the reason that Technical Publications groups exist in the first
place.  I now have 21 years in the field, and for me there is no question
that Tech Pubs / Information Development / Tech Comm should be under
Engineering.  I've seen companies where it was under Finance because
of enterprising empire builders who will pick up any "loose" department
to give themselves a larger budget.

Tech Pubs belongs under Engineering in all but a few cases. Period. Did
someone say Marketing?   I have trouble imagining the type of company
or product where this arrangement would be appropriate.  MarComm is
MarComm, Tech Pubs are Tech Pubs, and the two are rarely related to
one another.

The pluses for putting Tech Pubs under Engineering are many.  Direct
access to Engineering documentation, to the engineers themselves, being
able to participate on a team/peer level so that updates and changes are
communicated directly and immediately -- these are things that don't
usually happen when the tech pubs group is structured elsewhere.

> Corporate Communications seemed more concerned with adherence to standards
> than in producing user-oriented manuals, and Marketing tends to think of
> user docs as just another piece of marketing collateral (i.e., will it help
> sell the product - not will it help the customer use the product after
> they've bought it).

Well said!

Tom Regner
Supervisor, Information Development
Network Equipment Technologies
http://www.net.com


** To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@omsys.com **
** with "unsubscribe framers" (no quotes) in the body.   **