Whatever your blogging niche, idea generation weighs constantly on your mind as you have to crank out that next blog post. The real problem is that you want the blog post to be great, reach readers,…
Danielle M. Villegas‘s insight:
The more I read Darin Hammond’s blog, the more I love it. It truly speaks to me, especially as a fellow blogger! This is a great blog post about how to get over writer’s block. I know that I get stuck quite often, but when I do have some ideas to approach later, I start drafts of the blog post to finish later–similar to Darin’s one suggestion of when and how to jot down notes for ideas. I have about three or four items lined up for if the current well runs dry, and I can pick up those topics later as they are not time-sensitive.
Bravo on another fantastic, must-read post, Darin!
Besides the panel at the 2013 STC Summit Adobe Day, there were four speakers at the event. I decided to review them in reverse order as to when they appeared on the roster. Why? Because it’s my blog, and that’s what I chose to do. 😉
To continue with the Adobe Day Coachella and rock star analogy, each of the speaker had a different spirit that came through each presentation.
When I thought about this person’s presentation, I thought of quiet impact. Who in the rock world is a fairly big influence on the music scene, does dozens of concerts, and yet is very low-key in the process?
While I will admit that I haven’t met Mark Lewis face-to-face or had any conversations or chats with him, I’ve seen him twice now, and he strikes me as the Chris Martin of Coldplay of the Tech Comm rock stars. He strikes me as a quiet, yet intellectual fellow, who is a rock star of epic proportions, letting his work do most of the talking for him. Like Chris Martin, he’s not afraid of being in front of big crowds to share his findings, but he doesn’t strike me as one who is looking for the limelight. He just is ahead of the curve with his craft, and by sharing it with us, we are all more enlightened.
Mark Lewis The Chris Martin of Tech Comm
In Mark’s case, his craft is finding a better way to find metrics in technical communications by using XML statistics. Mark has recently published a book called, XML Metrics 101, published by The Rockley Group, which outlines his study and methodology to use XML statistics to better show ROI in technical communications in comparison to traditional metrics.  Mark stated that a lot of research went into compiling the information presented in the book, including many spreadsheets, and his book offers information about how to jump-start corporate justification of using these metrics.
His talk began with an explanation of how traditional metrics were measured. In traditional metric measurements, step-by-step procedures, glossary terms and definitions, reference topics, Windows descriptions and other field descriptions were analyzed. All of these factors were measured to determine the cost of a project. The problem with this method was that there was no reuse of content being used. The measure of the author of the team was based on pages per month, by publication, or per output per month. More was seen as better, but again, there was no reuse.
When Mark described that, it reminded me of something I had heard or read somewhere in my travels that author Charles Dickens was paid by the word when he wrote his novels, such as David Copperfield, Oliver Twist, A Tale of Two Cities, or A Christmas Carol. Â Imagine if he tried to write those books based on those terms now!
There’s a need to find a metric method that would demonstrate project success based on XML and content reuse. Â There are several similar products out there that help with writing with the reuse factor, and it’s that reuse that comes into play.
Mark showed us how he came up with his statistical work to make these determinations that show return on investment (ROI) by measuring documentation based on XML and content reuse. He explained that the content components are more granular, so it’s based on component levels. The perceived value of documentation is shown as a percentage of the cost of the product. He warned that one needs to be careful of “metrics in isolation,” by looking at such things as productivity metrics, as they also can play a part in such measurements.
Mark continued to say that in order to defeat the death of content, you need a weapon; metrics can be that weapon, but you have to figure out the right one for you. You need to base your use of that “weapon” on what information you need to get the job done, and the instances where different communications roles intersect well. For example, the metrics from the content development lifecycle for Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) and engineers could also be added into the equation.
Mark provided a handout which showed an example of how to support a business plan using these metrics with the example of using corporate goals. Common corporate goals often entail reducing costs, processing improvement, creating automation, and mitigating risk. Using the XML metrics that he’s suggesting, Mark says there will be a reduced time to market with reuse as compared to using content without reuse.
Mark pointed out that in DITA, you can measure documentation by topic or by topic type.  XML-based metrics can help to determine the cost of a DITA task topic, including the number of occurrences.  An average time frame for a documentation procedure by traditional measuring methods would be about four to five hours. By taking advantage of reuse of content, that time frame is reduced dramatically, but the savings go up. It also helps businesses understand  how pages are being viewed. For example, if there are seven page views, does that mean it was seven tries to get information, or one try plus looking at six more pages to find information?
Mark had given a similar presentation at Adobe Day at Lavacon back in the Fall of 2012, and I can see why Adobe invited him back to give his presentation again. It seems that a big theme that I continually hear about in the tech comm world in the idea of reuse of content to help with the ROI, and in these economic times, that’s understandable, and fairly common. In other words, in many companies, technical communicators have to prove in a substantial way that we can provide “more bang for the buck” with fewer resources. Â Mark’s information is a clear-cut, no-nonsense way of showing–with mathematical proof, no less–how the value of technical communication delivers in business, more than any other departments in a corporation. This is a message that needs to be delivered several times until companies get the message, and Mark has armed us with substantial proof.
I want to thank Rahel Bailie and Maxwell Hoffmann for also taking Twitter notes during this session along with me, as I used some of their Tweets along with mine as reference. This was especially important because in the middle of Mark’s presentation, my Twitter account died and kept kicking me out! I was having a very hard time keeping up while trying to recover my Tweet-ability! So thanks to both of them for helping also taking notes simultaneously, so I didn’t lose too much ground.
And as always–Mark, if you have anything to add or correct, please feel free to comment below!
Stay tuned…I’ll be revisiting John Daigle’s Adobe Day talk about mobile documentation next!
To create the maps, researchers analyzed the 46.7 million tweets posted between October 23 and November 30, 2012, looking specifically at those with a tagged geographic location.
Danielle M. Villegas‘s insight:
My friend Sandy O’Neil found this one and sent it to me via LinkedIn. It’s really cool to see how prolific social media is–even using only this one tool! Of course, I’m a big believer in Twitter (although I wasn’t initially, I will admit). Most of my connections nowadays are through Twitter, and my Twitter followers and those who are followed are always growing!
Here’s the last post that I wrote about the 2013 STC Summit for the STC Notebook blog. Â I hope you’ve enjoyed the ride with me.
Continue to watch my blog for more on Adobe Day at the 2013 STC Summit, and one last blog post about the Summit that will talk about the fun parts–some additional insights from my trip. I’ll also be writing for the STC Notebook on a monthly basis as well, so keep watching for those posts as well.
[WARNING: this is a long post, but jam-packed with information!]
Every industry has its own rock stars. Those are the people who have lived, spoken, and written about topics in a particular field. The information and perspective they provide are considered out of this world.
As technical communicators, we are fortunate that we have lots of tech comm rock stars among us. Â There are several events that happen over the course of a year that allow several of those rock stars to come to one place to dazzle us with their brilliance, and we are the better for it.
Among the ultimate organizers for such events is Adobe. For the 2013 STC Summit’s “Adobe Day,” they put together a lineup that would make any tech comm groupie squeal with joy to be able to hear some of the leading minds and pacesetters in technical communications. The best part is that, as always, the events are not product sales pitches, but truly a compilation of thought leadership.
The speakers included headliner Charles Corfield, the inventor and “father” of Framemaker, content strategist Rahel Anne Baillie, online learning educator John Daigle and content strategist Mark Lewis. I’ll be writing more about each of their talks soon.
For this post, I’m going to start with the panel discussion that was at the end of the event first. The panel discussion wrapped up Adobe Day well, Â and I’m using it first as I think it will to help set the tone for the next blog posts about the event.
Scott Abel, “The Content Wrangler” asks the panel a question.
Scott Abel, “The Content Wrangler,” served as our trusty moderator for the discussion titled, “The Changing Role of Technical Communication Professionals–Looking at the Decade Ahead.” This was a similar theme to the Lavacon Adobe Day, but with a different set of panelists, the attendees were sure to get a different perspective this time around.
L to R: Joe Welinske, Ray Gallon, Sarah O’Keefe, Bernard Aschwanden and Kevin Siegel
Scott started the panel out with the questions, “What do you think will be going on in technical communication in the next 10 years? What are the necessary things for tech comm going forward?”
Kevin Siegel replied first, saying that technical communicators need to learn how to write content so that content can be consumed quickly, as the average attention span of online consumers is about fifteen seconds, and the mobile is the most viable means of getting content out, so think mobile!
Bernard Aschwanden felt that networking was most important going forward. Face-to-face discussions–not social media discussions–with subject matter experts, your audience, and anyone else who is going to consume your content will help you learn what is required for your content. He stressed that ideas and tools are constantly changing, and technical communicators need to be able to adapt. Bernard continued by saying, “No one wants to read what you write.” He emphasized that readers read the output of tech writers because they have to, so tech writers should making information easier to find and easier to read.
Sarah O’Keefe emphasized that the biggest skill gap in technical communication is how content and information is relevant to business. Business needs content because of…why? The most important skills required in Sarah’s eyes bring relevance–like ROI (return on investment)–so technical communicators need to learn how to write business cases for tools and other resources to be able to deliver effective products and outputs.
Ray Gallon agreed with Sarah’s point of view, and also emphasized Bernard’s point about adaptability.  Ray stressed that technical communicators have a unique view, so using that special view plus being adaptable will help technical communications go forward. He believes that software is driving content and making decisions, so we must create it on how software creates things today.
The second question that Scott posed asked, “What is the global impact with tech comm?”
Ray responded first by declaring that all technical communicators should have an understanding of at least three languages, as knowing three languages lends to their global credibility. Â Since I know that localization is a big emphasis these days in technical communications, Ray’s comment made a lot of sense to me.
Joe felt that in ten years, technical communicators will still be the same people, but traditional tech comm documentation will be less relevant, and QA (quality assurance testing) of documentation will be more prevalent. He emphasized that by testing the documentation, it allows us to truly understand what part of content is not being used, and what part really matters.  He also agreed with Charles Corfield (more on his talk in a future post) that voice and multi-screen publishing will be important going forward. He stressed that access to multiple devices are needed as you write, especially to test usability and “Google-ability.” He felt that a technical publications department needed at least three smart phones and three tablets for testing content on commonly used mobile devices as emulators don’t work as well. Real devices, including the ones you don’t like, are needed to see how well your content works.
The next question posed was, “Have you had an ‘ah-hah’ moment with things going forward?”
Scott chimed in his own response, saying that he thinks looking at internationalized English is important going forward. He felt that having a controlled vocabulary and other English language standardization will allow content to be created in form of English that machines can understand.
Kevin thinks localization is highly important, backing this claim up with the fact that the most popular article in his company’s weekly newsletter is about localization. He felt that soon enough, we’ll be converting books to other languages more quickly and easily.
Bernard’s “ah-hah” moment was when he realized that people are the key, not products or tools. He felt that typing was dying, and that technology is leap-frogging. He talked about how younger people today commonly connect and communicate without face-to-face person contact, not caring about political correctness and preferring to connect with those who are like-minded. He said, “Teens have few barriers with race, gender or sexual orientation. We must get over our own barriers to address needs of future consumers.” He emphasized that people are needed in order to work collectively, we need to be able to connect effectively with people.
Sarah’s “ah-hah” realization involves the “rise of the machine” and the machine integration of content.
Ray concurred with Sarah, pointing to Google Glass as an example, declaring that Google Glass is the “caveman” version of the next generation of machines that technical communicators with encounter.
Joe’s “ah-hah” was understanding that mobile apps are not interested in being help documentation. Instead, mobile apps involve how to have product integrated in everyday use.
At this point, the floor was opened to attendees who had questions. The first audience question asked if technical communicators need to be the drivers of change and adaptability. Ray answered for the entire panel with a resounding, “YES!”
The next question asked if there was any empirical data to back up the statements made in this panel discussion. Sarah answered that that her responses were derived from the anecdotal data from client requests. Joe said he based his responses on the QA testing done  he’s done over time, and stressed knowing one’s audience. Bernard agreed with both these responses.
The last question asked about relevance–is this a PR problem for technical communication, or is this more of a marketing communication issue? Scott piped in that marketing communication is meant to dazzles customers, but technical communication provides the real customer experience, so in essense, tech comm IS marketing!  Customer service is central.
Ray felt that content is permeable and will get more so over time. Various departments will disappear due to unified content strategy; things will get blurred and content will get unified, so tech comm will be an integral part of teams.
Bernard reminded us that, “We must get to know the ‘language’ of our audience in order to stay relevant.” Scott reiterated that idea, stating that globalization is going to be really key going forward, which will affect ROI.
Joe had the last word, stressing that how we present what we do is going to make a difference!
As you can see, it was quite the lively conversation, and the ideas presented here were more concentrated on localization, technology and networking with people going forward. It’s amazing to me to hear a different perspective to the similar questions asked at the Lavacon Adobe Day panel just seven months ago! It does prove to me that adaptability and understanding the bottom line of what content is needed, and how to disseminate content with ever-changing technology is key going forward.
Thanks to all the panel participants for your insights! (Also thanks to Maxwell Hoffman, as I used both my notes and his notes on Twitter to recall this panel discussion.)
To any of the panel participants–if I misquoted or mis-paraphrased you, please feel free to comment below to correct me!
So, this was the closing act of our tech comm “Coachella?” Impressive! Stay tuned to learn more about the main acts of this gig!
[WARNING: this is a long post, but jam-packed with information!]
You must be logged in to post a comment.