Tamara Chapman
Those who work in a high-tech development environment, whether in product development, marketing, customer support, or testing, have to constantly adjust their work methodologies to cope with new technology, time-to-market pressures, and conflicting demands from internal and external stakeholders. Technical editors are not immune to these challenges.
High-tech environments aren’t comfortable for the introverted. Individuals are likely to be overlooked or dismissed if they are not actively advocating their roles. Such environments are equally uncomfortable for those who don’t like change. Projects can change radically during their cycle, or be canceled without notice. And, these environments are not comfortable for the perfectionist. One distinguishing mark of technical documentation is that it never really seems done.
So how can an editor thrive in this type of environment, not be stressed, extremely irked, or just plain overwhelmed? I’ve worked as a writer and editor in high-tech for a number of years and, in an effort to keep my sanity, have found some relief in the following.
Learn and Advocate
I work for a company that describes itself as developing (to use some jargon) “bleeding-edge technology.” Being on the edge of such newness makes continuous learning critical albeit challenging. For example, it’s not unusual that I open a Microsoft Word document and get the error message: There are too many spelling or grammatical errors in ***.doc to continue displaying them… It’s not that there really are too many errors, but rather the document has more unrecognized terms than the software can handle.
In the quest to explain and promote new technologies, editors need to grapple with new and evolving terminology and concepts. In many cases, there are no standards or precedents. Sources such as SMEs, whatis.com, IEEE, and Newton’s Telecom (applicable to my industry) are good, but not comprehensive.
Much is simply undefined. Often, terms are created without much thought to consistency or how relevant they will be in the future. Writers and editors are left to sort out what is jargon and what is informative. It’s not so much figuring out what the terms themselves mean and their usefulness, but trying to educate about and be consistent in their usage.
This is an example where continuous learning must be an intrinsic characteristic of any technical editor. It is not sufficient to solely rely on SMEs and technical references for guidance. Editors need to actively update their core knowledge to help define and authoritatively advocate standards. This means proactively keeping up with industry news, using technology associations and other learning resources, and making friends at the “water cooler.”
Prioritize and Balance
I’m sure that there are editors who can’t imagine releasing a less-than-perfect piece. But how do you define perfection or rather, quality, in the business world? I find that my priorities, in terms of what and how I edit, seem to change daily.
Generally, I have found that my definition of quality is molded by three basic questions:
How far away is the release?
How important will this document be to the (potential) customer?
How important is this project for my company’s financial bottom line?
I have come to ask these questions for each document that comes across my desk. Note, the weight assigned to each question varies from one document to another. An editor needs to think with as much business savvy as editorial prowess.
Be Willing to Adapt and Change
I recently talked with an editor who was being challenged to adopt new style standards after moving from journalism to a corporate business environment and who was looking for the “right way.” This is a universal quandary for most editors who, over time, understand that style guidelines are just that, guidelines and not rules.
In a development environment, even establishing guidelines is quite challenging because so much is undefined and in flux. I intentionally added “be willing” to this section’s heading. A positive attitude towards change is essential. I’m not saying that editors should change their standards by whim or not stand up for them. Rather, I find that effective editors are those who look at the bigger picture and strive to achieve balance between what makes sense for their audience and their market, neither of which is static.
In many respects, what I really enjoy about my role as a technical editor is the pioneering aspect of it. I think you’ll agree that despite the frustrations that come with an environment marked by change and ruled by profit, it is an exciting place to be.
Tamara is a technical writer for PMC-Sierra, Inc., and an assistant editor for Coast lines, the newsletter for the Canada West Coast Chapter of the STC.