|
Outsource Documentation? by Jeffrey Shoap, Ph.D. Originally published in TechLinks A recurrent question I'm asked when I approach companies about outsourcing their documentation / training needs is: "Why outsource? It's cheaper and more efficient to do it in-house." Aside from the fact that it is rarely cheaper and probably never more efficient to do these functions in-house, there are more compelling reasons to outsource. Foremost is the problem of managing these functions. Since documentation finds its home in many different departments - IT development, marketing, Q/A - the person responsible for managing the content, look and accuracy of the work is often unqualified to perform these tasks. For example, while a developer can (and must) certify the accuracy of a document, few developers are qualified to proof a document for grammar, style and readability. In the same vein, rare is the marketing director who can peruse a manual for its technical accuracy. One solution to this problem is to hire a full-time documentation manager. So now, the company has both a manager and a writer on staff. The cost of this approach - for many companies - is prohibitive. With an outsource company with several writers on staff, there is always a member of the team who has not worked on the document to review the work, someone with a fresh perspective. With software cycles the way they are, many companies have problems keeping their writing staff busy. Peaks and valleys in software work flow are handled easily in the outsource model because no one is getting paid to do nothing when there's nothing to do. Often times, in-house writers have to find (or worse, invent) work to make themselves look busy when there's no documentation to write. For the documentation company, this problem doesn't exist: When we stop working on a project, we stop billing and move on to the next project. When work on the project restarts or a new version of the software is ready, we start again. Another problem many companies have with in-house writers can best be described as the "tunnel-vision" approach. The writer is familiar with a particular tool that s/he has used in the past and therefore this tool becomes the de-facto company standard, regardless of its inefficiencies and problems. Sometimes this problem is so pronounced that the in-house writer refuses even to entertain the possibility of using a better tool because s/he doesn't "know it." We've found companies trying to turn Word into a desktop publishing tool - unsuccessfully, I'm afraid - or relying on antiquated graphics programs for a particular task that is accomplished better and more quickly with something new. Then there are the problems that continually arise in the documentation process. Whether the issue is getting information from subject matter experts (SMEs), figuring out how best to organize and present the material, or creating a "work-around" for a limitation with a tool, roadblocks abound. Recently one of our writers encountered a problem at a client site that he solved by restructuring an on-line help project within a matter of hours; a task that, had the in-house person done the job, would have taken several weeks. Using experience gained through working on other projects as well as using other writers as a sounding board and resource for finding solutions, our writer was able to combine two advanced Word features to save our client valuable time and money. Of course, there are some instances when an in-house writing staff is justified. A large organization with a constant demand for documentation can probably work the numbers to justify the existence of this in-house staff. Often, however, the same problems that arise in smaller companies become visible in these larger organizations with inefficiencies, resource allocation, and higher-than-average costs - all problems that could be easily avoided by outsourcing. That is not to suggest that outsourcing is the panacea for every problem that confronts a company trying to produce accurate, clear and usable documentation. Software changes daily (unbeknownst to the poor documentation person), SMEs guardedly protect their knowledge, and there are always unforeseen problems that arise at the last minute. In terms of cost, efficiency and a quality deliverable, however, outsourcing is an extremely attractive alternative to traditional documentation preparation. |