Tech Writing in a Flat World



“Flat world”, as defined by pundit Thomas Freidman, refers to a world that has been leveled by ten great flattening forces, where work can just as easily done there (or so the story goes) as here. See my Book Report, The World is Flat, for more on this.

Last year I blew off two jobs (probably wouldn’t do that now) for various good and not-so-good reasons. One thing the jobs had in common (besides the absence of me) was that they both involved tech writing in a flat world.

I thought about that after attending a recent “writer’s lunch” during which the subject of offshoring tech writing came up. The consensus was that offshoring is not practical – that quality and management issues will always kill it. Here are some arguments:

  • Unless a writer has grown up speaking and writing American-style English, he or she will not be able to convey the nuances of American-style content.
  • People who did not have English as their first language will be more likely to make the language-related category mistakes discussed in Writers Who Couldn't Write .
  • The time and distance problems of offshoring are just too great.
  • Writing is impossible to quantify – it is inherently fuzzy.

I want to agree, but those two jobs make me wonder.

One place (Company L) already offshores some tech writing. They have four writers in Jordan (the homeland of a company founder) and four writers in Charlotte. The Jordanian writers document code written by Jordanian developers. This has been going on for years and apparently works.

Of course, you could argue that Company L is a special case. The fact that Jordan is the homeland of a company founder would certainly inspire folks to make the process succeed. Plus, the products being documented are so highly technical and specialized that ordinary writing requirements might not apply.

Maybe.

The other place (Company JD) seems more hopeful. The company does not now offshore writing – although their products are known and sold world wide. They told me that they would never offshore any writing that involves composition, e.g., “real” writing. They say they only offshore mechanical tasks, such as the creation of parts lists.

However, Company JD is pursuing structured authoring with real vigor – has been for years. And they are very keen on keeping the bottom line low. So I wonder.

As more and more content gets turned into manageable chunks in a database, the management of that content will become more and more important. Also, as the chunks get smaller less “real writing” will be required. It takes less composition skill to create a paragraph than a page. The management of content might be viewed as the real creative process. Creation of content might be viewed as a mechanical task. Will a time come when LH (the boss) says, “Oh fudge, let’s send the stuff to Bangalore.”? Will LH be able to resist being able to reduce writing labor costs by a half or more– especially in this economy? I doubt it.

Someone like LH (or Thomas Friedman) might argue, “In a flat world there is no longer any such thing as American-style content. Products that are used all over the world can be documented by writers from all over the world. Further, if the documentation is going to end up being translated into multiple languages, then you don’t really want to start out with English in any particular style, American or otherwise – some neutral English learned as a second language might actually be better for translation.”

Anyway, it does make you wonder.

Note: Obviously, a lot of work can’t be offshored. No disorganized little company in the early stages of entrepreneurship is likely to send its documentation offsite. The same is true for disorganized groups in large companies. In such places, it’s hard enough for writers in the same building as development to figure out what is going on. Writers on the other side of the world would not stand a chance. Friedman includes such physically anchored workers among the “untouchables” – people whose jobs can’t be sent overseas. More on this in another post.

2 comments:

Potterful said...

Loved Friedman's book...based on that, I think Friedman would also say to look for ways that the mechanical tasks can be offshored to lower paid workers and higher paid workers would do the "value-added" tasks. Within TWing, our challenge is to start thinking about projects in those terms.

Robyn said...

I think the "Time and Distance problems are just too great" argument is wrong. I'm currently writing a manual for my company's Chinese office, and it's one of the most pleasant experiences I've had as a techwriter. I send them a draft when I go home in the evening, and when I arrive in the morning usually they've got a markup for me. Except this week, of course. There's a holiday going on... I see no real reason (except wishful thinking) that it couldn't work just as well in the other direction.