(Late) Chapter 2 Summary
Rebecca Guadagnoli and Jaya Narayana
Chapter two of Inaba, Parsons and Smillie discusses the 3 factors that greatly influence the ground rules for writing usable and useful instructions. They are the expected mode of use for the instructions, the basic units of instruction and the different components of information. The chapter walks us through the difference between actions, steps and tasks and how they are written affects the success or failure of the individual using those instructions. The chapter discusses that the expected mode of use for the novice verses the experienced user is quite different. For example the inexperienced user will follow the step-by-step instructions in the beginning and then less after the first couple of times, whereas the experienced user will tend to use the instructions only if they cannot figure out what to do based on their knowledge and experience with the product. When coming across unfamiliar information, both the inexperienced and experienced need the following information: what and when to perform the actions, the order of the actions, where the action is to take place and what the object of the actions looks like. The breakdown of actions, steps and tasks was interesting. The importance was stressed on the use of consistent actions verbs throughout the documentation so as not to confuse the user. Remembering when to go into more detail is key as you can say "remove the faceplate" but when talking about something more complex such as a car engine, you can't simply state "remove the engine" as there are many detailed actions and steps required for the engine to be removed. The authors mention that extensive cross-referencing can confuse the user. It is important that the step-by-step instructions convey what has to be done, how it must be accomplished as well as where, when, order and identity so the user can find it. There are other types of information needed to support instructions such as information to plan the work and description information which assists the user in understanding the equipment or system well enough to make diagnostic decisions. Finally, there is a need for flexibility in writing instructions. This is key in developing simple and effective instructions. Generally the instructions are written to meet the needs of the user, but some of the needs are individualistic.
Chapter two of Inaba, Parsons and Smillie discusses the 3 factors that greatly influence the ground rules for writing usable and useful instructions. They are the expected mode of use for the instructions, the basic units of instruction and the different components of information. The chapter walks us through the difference between actions, steps and tasks and how they are written affects the success or failure of the individual using those instructions. The chapter discusses that the expected mode of use for the novice verses the experienced user is quite different. For example the inexperienced user will follow the step-by-step instructions in the beginning and then less after the first couple of times, whereas the experienced user will tend to use the instructions only if they cannot figure out what to do based on their knowledge and experience with the product. When coming across unfamiliar information, both the inexperienced and experienced need the following information: what and when to perform the actions, the order of the actions, where the action is to take place and what the object of the actions looks like. The breakdown of actions, steps and tasks was interesting. The importance was stressed on the use of consistent actions verbs throughout the documentation so as not to confuse the user. Remembering when to go into more detail is key as you can say "remove the faceplate" but when talking about something more complex such as a car engine, you can't simply state "remove the engine" as there are many detailed actions and steps required for the engine to be removed. The authors mention that extensive cross-referencing can confuse the user. It is important that the step-by-step instructions convey what has to be done, how it must be accomplished as well as where, when, order and identity so the user can find it. There are other types of information needed to support instructions such as information to plan the work and description information which assists the user in understanding the equipment or system well enough to make diagnostic decisions. Finally, there is a need for flexibility in writing instructions. This is key in developing simple and effective instructions. Generally the instructions are written to meet the needs of the user, but some of the needs are individualistic.
posted by Jaya Narayana | 7:31 AM
8 Comments:
Many years ago, in journalism school, I was taught to write at an 8th-grade level so that my articles could be comprehended by all (or almost all) of the readers. I find myself facing the same problem as a technical writer. How do I write a manual that meets the needs of both a novice user and a highly-technical and proficient engineer or scientist? I think using the techniques described in this chapter helps solve the problem but not totally. Perhaps the solution is just to refer the technical reader to another document that examines the technology in detail. That way the user's guide can be limited to describing user actions. More technically savvy users can refer to a systems management manual for an exhaustive treatment of the subject.
I found this chapter particularly interesting because of how it talked about the different levels of instructions required for certain audiences. I liked the part when they compared removing a faceplate to removing an engine. I guess that I never thought about it the way they describe it. Obviously if you're talking to a mechanic you can just say remove the engine however that is often not the case. It becomes prevalent in this chapter just how important that it is for the writer to know the audience so that something doesn't go under detailed and therefore is ineffective to the user of the manual.
I’ve always been a bit interested and scared how a writer can be able to reach both experienced and novice users at the same time. I’m interested because I would like to know how to do it, and scared because I’m not sure how. What the novice finds interesting, the user would probably find boring. In class meeting last week I brought up if companies would make more that one guide for users to suit their preference. Although the odds of this are probably slim to nil, I can’t help but wonder how many companies make instructions for various levels of users. Again, I’m probably just dreaming, but it would seem to make sense.
The key word there being “seem”.
No Inaba book.
I am growing to like this book. It's very concise and well thought out.
I don't really think this chapter was trying to turn us away from cross-referencing, but simply trying to warn us to not overuse it (speaking of cross-referencing, couldn't you conider cross-referencing to be method of content management, since you are preventing sections from being needlessly repeated?). Keep it simple, ergonomical, and logical.
The pyramid diagram confused me for a moment, until I processed the rest of the chapter. As I understand it, tasks, steps, and actions are all hierarchically related. The task is the general process to be completed, the step(s) are the broken-down sections of a task, and the action(s) are the broken-down sections of a step.
*Note: this comment also appears in Haupt's summary of chapter 2. I put it here, too, to make sure my posts appear where they should be.
This book reflects my style of writing, to the point with little straying from the subject, I like it.
I think the main point in this chapter is to know who your audience is. I do not believe in the concept one-size-fits-all. I believe that if a person needs to be trained how to use what ever the procedures are instructing then they need to be written at a more advanced level than that of something that need no formal training.
I think an interesting example of this occurs in historical documents. I can imagine researchers trying to figure out the activities of ancient cultures by reading diaries become agitated when the item simply states "we did this." Yes, that's great, but HOW did you do this? Feeling that same manner of frustration while trying to do something complicated is something to be avoided at all costs.
Post a Comment
<< Home