|
|
|
Introduction
Single sourcing is fostered by new electronic structures, and these electronic structures both facilitate and inhibit the single-source writing process. Today's hypertext technology is in many ways uniquely suited to single sourcing. In truth, it has birthed single sourcing. Without the ability to hypertext, single sourcing as we know it – storing content as independent objects and "calling" those objects into various media at the point of need, using a predefined pointer to where the objects are stored – would not exist. Yet, the single-source writing space that resides within the realm of this technology has a nature distinctly different from the traditional writing space and poses challenges for today's technical writer.
This paper describes the unique nature of the single-source writing space and the impact of single-source technology on writing methodology. Through this brief examination of the challenges of writing and editing in a single-source environment, we begin to see the impact of this technology on the technical communicator's job satisfaction. While reflecting on some of the contemporary sources that have touched on this issue, this paper positions the job satisfaction argument within the larger context of the changing technical communication field.
The Writing Space
Every technical writer creates content within an established "writing space." According to Jay David Bolter, "a writing space is characterized by the interplay of writing materials and writing techniques used. The materials define structural units and relationships that are tangible and hard to change" (Bolter, 41). For example, during the decade before the electronic word processor was invented, the writer usually created content using an electric typewriter. Creation of a complete manual or book entailed a lengthy process involving hard copy proofs, retyped pages, and paste-ups. Though an electric tool was used to create text, the writing space was completely paper-based.
The electronic word processor changed the writing space. To the writer, text was developed on an electronic display monitor rather than on paper in a typewriter. The writer could pass content to a peer via electronic disk storage and could produce a paper copy. This electronic process facilitated the sharing of content between writers as it introduced "cut and paste" into the writing space.
Eventually, the word processor evolved into the personal computer and the writing space came to reside in software. Before long, personal computers were networked, expanding the writing space within the writer's environment. Hypertext capability and the introduction of Internet technology evolved the writing space to the point that, as Bolter explains, the skills required for today's technical writing are unique from those of the past.
According to Bolter, "hard structures … are tangible qualities of the materials of writing" (Bolter, 41). What, then, are the hard structures – the tangible qualities – of the materials we write with today? Technology enables us to delete words faster than we can create them. In our electronic reality, content is nothing more than bytes of information, a sequence of ones and zeroes that neither the content author nor the reader comprehends or is even aware of. And yet, through this digital sequence and the technology that conveys it, we communicate.
Today's writing space is a virtual space. Our software tools are metaphors, designed to represent the tangible materials of the past. While we use our virtual desktop and page-layout tools, layers of technology execute commands that enable the electronic writing process. And though the ability to organize thoughts and construct sentences is still a mental process performed by the writer, we have come to rely on sophisticated applications to check the semantics of our work. In sum, there is little hard structure in today's writing space. The writer develops his/her craft within an intangible space made possible by abstract technology (Bolter, 42).
Impact on Writing Methodology
It is this technology's ability to convey information that has fostered the new writing space for the technical communicator. And it is the same technology that has enabled methods like single sourcing to change the process through which the technical communicator creates and deploys content.
Bolter claims that "new technology must find its place in the current economy of writing, and in so doing it may supplement or replace older technologies" (Bolter, 39). Though single sourcing has been more widely discussed than it has been adopted, it remains at the forefront of technological consideration because it promises significant impact to the economy of writing. Yet though many companies are eager to implement single sourcing as a replacement for older technologies, it appears few have accomplished this because, as Robert Kramer suggests, the automated writing methods required by single sourcing are tedious to implement (Kramer, 334).
Single-sourcing technology significantly changes the way the writer creates content. Structured and collaborative writing move the writer from an independent to a co-dependent role. The importance of consistency in style and message developed by multiple authors necessitates additional editing by the individual writers and thorough reviews by a dedicated editor. Table 1 lists some of the methodological changes brought about by single sourcing and explains how specific technology has enabled these changes.
Old Method |
New Method |
Description |
Flexible authoring |
Structured authoring |
Authors no longer have the flexibility of redesigning the order and type of information they include in what they write. As single source authors write, they adhere to strict predefined structures, or content models. These structures define what information is to be included in the content, and the order in which that information must be presented. |
Independent projects |
Collaborative writing |
Authors no longer create and publish content independent of other authors. Instead, multiple authors share responsibility for all content products on a given subject. They work together to develop content that presents the information in an accurate and consistent manner so that the content can be reused in multiple outputs. |
Linear content development |
Non-linear content development |
Since single-source authors reuse content that has already been created, they compile their documentation product from existing content objects, or files, and create new content only where it is needed. Thus the order in which they develop new content no longer mirrors the linear nature of the product or software being documented. |
Independent files |
Shared files |
Sharing files is the very essence of single sourcing. Authors no longer store and manage their content files independently, but instead share their files in a multi-author network to facilitate content reuse. Except for backups, files are stored in one place and are tapped, or referenced, by a content-management system or other single-source technology as needed. |
Focus on output |
Focus on content |
In many single-sourcing environments, the output or publication function has been removed from the authoring function. Authors focus entirely on content development and have little involvement with the actual output of that content in information products. |
Table 1: Single sourcing technology replaces old writing methods with new methods, requiring the writer to learn new skills.
Impact on Job Satisfaction
Ann Rockley explains that the change brought about by single sourcing can lead to resistance if "the change is not well communicated or if the change appears to take away a part of [a person's] job that they value" (Rockley, 350). And, as Locke Carter astutely pointed out in the introduction to the Technical Communication August 2003 special issue on single sourcing, real examples of such resistance do exist. Carter explains that single sourcing "has broad implications for writers and writing that go far beyond software use, content management, or production initiatives involving quality, speed, or efficiency" (Carter, 317).
As technical communicators, we function on behalf of the end user. Our work is most fulfilling when the content we create enables users to succeed in their endeavors. Single-sourcing technology is intended to help us create such enabling content with more speed and efficiency at lower cost to our organizations. But in the pursuit of productivity, how are we affecting the end user? Michael J. Albers has astutely posed this struggle (Albers, 338):
The real questions the project leads must consider should not revolve around technology but around whether the resulting documents effectively address a user's real-world information needs. With the wrong focus, the document can end up providing a high-level collection of text blocks with minimal content stuck into a template that fails to adequately meet the context of the user's situation.
Will single sourcing decrease the effectiveness of our content by diminishing the creative function of our craft? Rockley claims that single sourcing does not eliminate the creative aspect of content development. Instead, she encourages us to redirect that creative talent into designing the content models that are essential to single sourcing. Rockley sees the technical author developing content in a freed context, no longer encumbered with issues of format and layout (Rockley, 352). Yet today's technical communicator has found a creative outlet as both author and designer, crafting words and skillfully developing their presentation to the user. It is certain that the single-source authoring environment means career changes for the technical writer. But does it mean that a writer can no longer impact design? Is it forcing choices the technical communicator would rather not make?
Impact on the Field
Without question, technology has enabled the field of technical communication. The advent of personal desktop computers, network connections, and hypertext technology has equipped our trade with powerful communication tools. But as technology has expanded, so has our awareness that some tasks are best handled by a machine. We have come to discriminate between analytical and repetitive processes and have learned to trust computer systems with some of the tasks we used to do ourselves.
Single sourcing is an attempt to transition repetitive tasks from the writer to the computer. But where do we draw the line between efficiency and commoditization? It is time we examined the trends of our industry through the lens of larger global issues. Yes, single sourcing is good for organizations that are outputting redundant information in multiple deliverables and media. Yet we cannot deny that single sourcing encourages formulaic content development and transforms the author's product to a commodity that can be economized and pushed off-shore.
Where does that leave the highly trained and skilled technical communicator? Responsible for new content? Global organizations seldom separate new from existing content when it comes to publications and information management. Though experts argue that single sourcing creates new avenues for the technical communicator, we would be wise to scrutinize where those avenues may ultimately lead us. At the very least, single sourcing means there is less information to author and more to manipulate and manage. Hence, the technical communicator will either become a master of configuring content objects or will pursue an alternative forum to exercise his or her skills.
We have transferable skills – skills such as process analysis, planning, knowledge capture, and information design – and these skills have considerable value to the businesses we serve. We need only learn to apply these skills toward furthering the goals of the business. Then, if we have the opportunity to continue authoring for the end user, bravo! And if we end up redirecting our skills toward business issues, such as improving user interfaces and product design, then we've served the user after all. With some forethought and planning, we win either way.
References
Albers, Michael J. 2003. "Single Source and the Technical Communication Career Path." Technical Communication 50, no. 3:335–343.
Bolter, Jay David. 2001. Writing Space, 2nd edition. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 33–43.
Carter, Locke. 2003. "The Implications of Single Sourcing for Writers and Writing." Technical Communication 50, no. 3:317–320.
Kramer, Robert. 2003. "Single Source in Practice: IBM's SGML Toolset and the Writer as Technologist, Problem Solver, and Editor." Technical Communication 50, no. 3:328–334.
Rockley, Ann. 2003. "Single Sourcing: It's About People, Not Just Technology." Technical Communication 50, no. 3:350–354.
Additional Reading
Rockley, Ann, Pamela Kostur, and Steve Manning. 2003. Managing Enterprise Content: A Unified Content Strategy. Indianapolis, IN: New Riders Publishing.