These, and other factors, are driving public utilities to deliver more services at a ever more demanding levels of quality and accountability, while contending with limited budgets and an aging and increasingly mobile workforce. Utilities grappling with these challenges are looking for ways to remove inconsistencies and risk from their operations and processes. One of the solutions is to capture and retain the knowledge, skills and best practices, and use them to standardize and train personnel to as high a level of consistency as possible.

Standard operating procedures, or SOPs, are a key tool in these efforts. Utilities, institutions, corporations and organizations of all types see the value in capturing, standardizing and documenting the activities and tasks performed by their personnel. However, that process presents its own set of unique challenges. Most organizations do not have the necessary in-house expertise to design, research, write and produce documentation. Nor do they have expertise in managing documentation processes. And most organizations have not factored the time needed for developing documentation into their staffing strategies.

If you are already signed up for the conference you may know that we will be presenting twice. On Wednesday morning at 10:40 am we’ll be presenting “Developing Plant Documentation”, a 45 minute technical session that will provide an overview of the considerations and processes involved in creating operations manuals, SOPs and other documents. We’ll approach the subject from the perspective of lessons we have learned in real life project situations.

On Thursday, Nov 5 at 1:00 pm we will be presenting Introduction to Building Procedures with the SOP Toolkit. This 3 hour workshop picks up from the technical session and explores how to use our SOP Toolkit to get you started in creating standard operating procedures.

Hope to see you there!

An interior view of the Concourse Building, near RCJC offices

Innovation Place was recently named the 2009 Outstanding Research Park by the Association of University Research Parks (AURP) in recognition of their role in supporting the growth of science and technology related economic development.

Our new location will support several new initiatives that we are currently implementing. As we incorporate new clients and additional staff, and embark on our new marketing plan, we expect the move to enhance the services we can offer.

What can I say to that? You shouldn’t! You should let me do it! I’m a professional! I also can’t really tell them their writing isn’t good enough. At that point for all I know they may be very effective communicators. Obviously these wouldn’t be the most effective marketing techniques.

But experience has shown me that most small to medium sized companies who do their own technical writing are not entirely happy with their results. Usually they know their documentation needs improvement but several factors are holding them back from getting what they need. First, they don’t know where to find someone who they are confident can help. Second, they are not sure whether the price they will pay will be worth the benefits of better documentation.

So I have realized that often what the client needs is not a technical writer, but a technical re-writer. Other ways to describe it is editor or documentation consultant–someone who can meet them at the point where they need help, and can provide cost-effective recommendations and assistance. The client knows the content they want in the documents, and they often have good ideas about how it can be best organized for their customers. I know how to organize, present and clarify information so it has the effect the client wants.

As for the cost of my services? Usually, the savings realized from reduced product support (telephone, in-house and field service) and decreased product returns pays for my fees in the first few months after completion of the document upgrades.

I’ve lost count of the number of people to whom I have offered my technical writing services, who look at me like I must be crazy. After all, they have smart people working for them…people who understand the content that needs to be written, who have great computer skills, who know how to write a sentence. Why would they pay someone from the outside to do what they could do themselves?

The only honest response I have come up with is: “Great! Enjoy the experience.” The truth is, these organizations probably do have people with skills, and with some effort they could probably turn out a  manual, procedure, or other document. However, further down the road they may wish they had brought in an expert.

Writing a manual or procedure is not simply the process of putting a series of steps into words. And a tech writer is not simply a person who writes sentences. Typically, a capable and experienced “technical communicator” (the correct description of the role) performs most of the following tasks in the process of producing documentation:  assesses the clients documentation needs, analyzes the content/tasks/etc to be documented, determines the scope of the project (especially if multiple documents are involved), gathers resources, identifies subject matter experts (SME), designs the document format and style, does research, writes the content, works with SMEs to verify and edit one or more drafts, publishes a final draft, maintains records, files, style guides, document plans, and many more aspects of the project. Throughout this process the technical communicator often assumes the role of project manager/leader and, if the project is large, may manage several personnel with specialized skills (illustrators, photographers, IT support, etc). If the project is smaller, most of these tasks still have to be handled at some level, and the person handling them needs to know how not to get bogged down in them.

So if you have someone who can handle these tasks, and you are willing to free the person up to become your in-house technical writer…good for you. But don’t expect that person to manage a documentation project AND do the job they were doing before. Something will break, and chances are you won’t end up with documentation at the level of quality that you had hoped for.

Ideally, the documentation team is able to spend adequate time on-site, working directly with the SMEs. Several factors must be in place to make sure on-site time is used effectively. The SMEs must be available, and know they are expected to cooperate. From the tech writer’s perspective, having full-time access to an SME who has a wide range of knowledge and experience would be ideal. Sometimes that is possible. For example, I have worked closely with an experienced plant operator who was on a work accommodation. Unfortunately, he was often pulled away from working with me to assist with other projects and situations as they arose.

It’s important to remember that one SME does not have all the answers. SMEs participate in several phases of the project. In the data gathering phase the doc team brings together information about the plant and how it is operated. This includes facts, specifications, how equipment and systems work, tasks and procedures. The next phase includes fact verification, but also verification of policies. A third phase–validation–involves confirmation that the document is acceptable. A plant operator may be able to answer questions about facts and procedures, but he or she probably cannot provide definitive rulings on operating policies. Those answers may have to come from supervisory or management staff. Sometimes there can be differences of opinion on best practices. Who makes the final ruling on what is the best practice for a given procedure? Who validates a procedure as complying with company policy? Without access to the appropriate SME the technical writer’s hands are tied.

I fall into that second camp–probably because of my training background. I see the value to making sure the document targets the lowest common denominator, and can be used to train (or retrain) anyone at any level of competence. That said, I like to include a simple checklist that the more experienced personnel can take with them into the field and use as necessary to make sure everything is covered.

Now that I am primarily concerned with creating training materials, rather than delivering them, I can see the value in producing materials that help students maintain that focus, ensuring a successful learning experience.