The Occupy Movement hurtles towards its expected demise. With the Occupiers (a.k.a. urban campers) now evicted from their various parks, this movement is headed the way of the hippies. As New York City mayor Bloomberg eloquently stated: “Protesters have had two months to occupy the park with tents and sleeping bags. Now they will have to occupy the space with the power of their arguments.” What they shall they do to occupy their time?
Has the Occupy movement had any effect? As the Premier of China said when asked in the 1970s about the effect of the French Revolution 100 years prior: “It is too soon to tell.”
Still, there’s lessons to be learned from this movement for technical communicators:
Lesson #1: No leader, no way
Without a leader, a group cannot succeed. The Occupy movement prided itself on having no leader, thereby laboriously deciding everything by committee. Everyone was a leader, so no one was leading. A group with no leader has no future, because there is no one with the vision, authority and responsibility to move the group toward its goals.
That is why every documentation team must have a leader, someone who can guide, enhance and develop the group. With no leader, there is no place for the group to go but off into the various directions each communicator wants to take it. With no leader, there is no way.
Lesson #2: Pursue clarity
The Occupiers had too many demands, and the ones they had were vague, among others: a redistribution of wealth, the restructuring or elimination of capitalism, world peace, a change in the system of government, and protecting the environment. Exactly what the protestors thought each of these entailed and exactly how they were to be implemented is not clear.
Clarity is the essence of effective technical communication. If your documentation is not clear, then you are not clear. If you cannot explain to a stranger a topic you have written, then you are a stranger to clarity.
Go clear, or, like the occupiers, go home.
Lesson #3: Ask Hard Questions
When evaluating news stories such as this, we must do what technical communicators do best: ask what the real, practical effects are.
Regarding the recent evictions, there were only two possibilities before they occurred:
- The occupiers would all be evicted, destroying or least severely weakening the movement. Without a physical presence, there is no mental presence. This is exactly what is happening.
- The occupiers would be allowed to stay. If this had happened, then the worst thing that could have happened to the movement would have happened: the public would have become used to it. When people get use to something, they forget it, until the NBT (Next Big Thing) comes along.
Now, when evaluating the contents of the document and the document management process, we must ask the same hard questions:
- Does this make sense?
- What is the practical value here?
- What are the logical outcomes of the various choices we can make?
When evaluating the contents of a document, we ask:
- What does this contribute to others?
- Is there a better way to express this?
- What is missing here?
- Is anyone really going to care about this?
Similar tough questions need to be asked when looking at the process by which the documentation is created, reviewed, updated and managed:
- Is there a better way?
- How can we manage this document more effectively?
- What are our options, and what is the potential outcome of each?
Companies often fall into a trap of producing poor documents or having poor documentation processes. Their response is often: “That’s how we’ve always done it,” to which our response should be: “Well then, you have always done it wrong.” Another excuse is: “That’s how other groups do it,” to which we respond: “Those other groups are also wrong.”
To effect change, you need to have COP: Creativity, Objectivity, and Perseverance. Specifically, the only way to bring about change in a document or the documentation development process is to be (in this order):
- ruthlessly objective of the current state
- incredibly creative when offering the solution
- mercilessly persistent in actually fixing it
About one in a hundred technical communicators have these three traits.
Are you one of the 1%?