ALL REVIEWS
Many organizations produce internal tools or modify available tools for use. These tools should be written down for the benefit of others in the organization.
If these texts are not created or written incorrectly, it costs you twice:
* Initial costs (specified in any poor user document) costs to answer user queries (technical support).
* The second cost, comes from the time lost by your employees trying to understand a poor User Document.
Psychological costs also affect both the External and Internal Users.
EARLY WAYS: TECHNICAL SUPPORT
These are the costs you incur whenever you produce poor (or no) user documentation. It comes from any User when they need technical support. For external users, costs your technical support staff, free telephone wires, etc.
For internal users the cost of time spent by an engineer or tool repair to answer questions of a co-worker. This is a very high cost of technical assistance ... these people are often paid more than your technical support staff. These initial costs are therefore much higher for indoor writing than for public documents.
SECOND COSTS: USE TIME AND RESOURCES
For users outside of your company, secondary costs are incurred by the Users themselves or their employers. These confused Users waste their company time: lost time trying to make the product work, and time wasted dealing with your technical support.
For your internal users, these costs are borne by your company. Your employee - on your own time-wasting your company's resources by trying to use an arcane product or document. This is where your missing home documents cost you twice.
MENTAL COSTS AFFECT ALL STUDENTS
In addition to these time and financial costs, there are psychological costs incurred by users' registration.
To frustrated users outside your company, your negative writing leads to a negative perception of your company and its products. This can result in business losses.
For users within your company, the cost of mental performance reduces employee morale, as evidenced by these potential statements:
* Does our company produce this junk?
* These people are not as sharp as I thought.
* If other employees can produce this confusing thing, I can also work at that level.
So a bad intention outside of your company can cost you a sale in the future; bad intentions within your company can call for a decline in the morale of employees.
SOLUTION: INFORMAL REVIEWS
If someone writes a User Tool User Document, that document should be updated informally.
RETURN
The author can do the first review on his own.
Use your word processor spelling checker to correct common errors. You can use the word processor grammar checker, but most of them are incorrect.
Before performing this review, allow the document to last a day or two. This will help you to forget what you meant in your vague writing. If you make a review and find yourself asking “what did I mean here?” you will have found a place in the document that needs to be updated.
When you do a review, imagine that you are a tool user and a text reader. Think about the tasks the tool user wants to perform. Does the document enable the Student to obtain what he or she needs? Is the writing accurate (accurately describes the tool), clear, and complete? Make changes that can improve the document.
EXTERNAL REVIEW
Then, if possible, use an external update (within your company). To do this, the author must:
1. Find Someone Who Can Use the Tool. This should be someone who is unfamiliar with the tool, and who is reasonably like the target audience of the tool.
2. Ask the analyst to use the document to guide him in using the tool. Request comment on the document. Note the suggested changes, additions, deletions, descriptions requested by the reviewer. Some questions to ask yourself might include:
* Does the document tell you what you need to know?
* Is it easy to find what you need in a document?
* Does the text answer your questions? If not, what are some unanswered questions?
* Is the document easy to follow? If not, where are the problem areas?
3. The author must make changes as needed.
If you are unable to do this "formal" review, get anyone besides you to read the document, and make suggestions for improvement.
Make sure the review process is not a hindrance to those who write Internal User Documents. Emphasize a collaborative approach - not a contradictory one - the result of which is quality work. Do not attempt to create a valid User Document.
You must be logged in to post a comment.