Home
who we are
projects
consulting
training
white papers
news
resources for writers
books
wiki
store

Table of contents

Abstract

Implications of structure

Costs

Implementation effort

Summary

 

Costs

Establishing a structured environment is expensive. The costs break down into two main categories: the change in the mindset of authors and the actual technical implementation effort.

Changing hearts and minds

Since desktop publishing came along in the 1980s, most content creators have focused on page-based layout. Provided that the look and feel of the final printed document was correct, the underlying document organization was irrelevant. In some environments, a heavy focus on templates requires writers to do more—they had to deliver a document that met certain standards of technical quality. (I believe that Michael Mueller-Hillebrandt of cap-studio.de first coined this term.) Technical quality refers to a document’s internal setup; for example, does it use a template, are styles applied consistently, and are overrides minimized? In a document with high technical quality, the implicit structure of the document is expressed by the formatting tags. That is, main body paragraphs are tagged with a Body style, headings are tagged with the appropriate heading style, and so on.

In a structured environment, technical quality is enforced automatically because authors lose the ability to “tweak” documents. The inability to control the display of information page by page (or line by line) is frustrating to some writers. A select few will spend a lot of time trying to find a way around this limitation. The cost to the organization is a loss of productivity.

Another issue that affects productivity is metadata. Exact requirements vary, but in most structures, authors must provide at least a few metadata items. In some structures, authors are compelled to provide metadata on every element. Excessive metadata interrupts the writing flow, which can make writers less productive.

Staffing considerations

Any change in workflow causes at least a short-term reduction in productivity as staff adjusts to it. The staffing considerations, however, go beyond process changes. You must take into account the possibility of staffing turnover during a structured implementation. Reactions to structure fall along a continuum from delighted enthusiasm to outright hostility. Most of the writing staff will react neutrally or slightly positively.

Scriptorium Publishing has found that the following factors affect initial response:

  • Communication: Good communication about the project alleviates fear, uncertainty, and doubt. Lack of communication does the opposite. The staff needs to understand the reasons for moving to structure and the benefits it provides.
  • Training: Writers need training to understand the new workflow. Without training, they will take longer to learn the new process and may resent the steep learning curve.
  • Quality of implementation: The new structure should closely match the requirements of the content that’s being developed. Imposing a structure that does not accommodate writers’ legitimate requirements will lead to disgruntled writers.
  • Leadership: Within the workgroup, the attitude of leaders—whether positive or negative—will influence reactions of the entire staff. Without support from leaders, you will encounter heightened aversion to change and perhaps even outright hostility. Leaders may or may not be managers—look for the employees to whom others go for advice.

 

Next page:
Implementation effort

 

Copyright © 2008 Scriptorium Publishing Services, Inc. All rights reserved.