On Kathy Sierra's Creating Passionate Users Blog, she wonders why it is that big budgets are spent on marketing to the customer up front, but not much is spent on marketing to existing customers via user manuals. It's a very valid question, and one technical writers have wondered for years.
However, the comments lead me to believe that some of the blame is being placed on technical writers, who just plain don't have the skill to design, write, and edit at the same time. But as I mentioned in my comments there, there certainly are a lot of assumptions flying around about what technical writers can do. It certainly seems like those in marketing communications professions somehow fancy themselves as more professional, and just plain better than a "technical writer with FrameMaker." But let's face facts. Techical Writers should be:
1. Advocates for the user
2. Skilled enough to add useful design elements
3. Able to convey complex user information in an easy to read way
If they're not doing this, you don't have the correct Technical Writer in place.
My educational background is in tech writing, and I currently work in marketing communications. These jobs aren't as different as some are trying to make them.
And check out Darren Barefoot's opposing view on his blog.
1 comment:
Perhaps because I am not in a position to compete with marketing writers, I did not pick up on the technical writer-bashing so much as I appreciated the call to make the end users passionate about "learning" by delivering the content artfully. I like the way it takes the emphasis off self-promotion and challenges the writer, marketing or otherwise, to focus on how to help the customer kick ass. It seems there shouldn't be any hard boundary between marketing, technical writing and training. They need each other badly. If the design inspires customers to become great at using the product, then the electricity of the "learning" experience alone would go deep into the heart of building trust and collaboration with long term customers.
Post a Comment