 |
Musing on Metrics column |
|
If you knew exactly how to do something, how would you pass that knowledge on? More importantly, how would you ensure that the knowledge was actually transmitted? Finally, how would you measure adherence to the procedure? The solution to each of these dilemmas is the checklist, one of the simplest, yet most powerful, tools in your collection of quality assurance techniques. The American Society for Quality defines a checklist as “a tool used to ensure all important steps or actions in an operation have been taken. Checklists contain items important or relevant to an issue or situation.” For example, consider the production process. Imagine a group of twenty writers generating between 80 and 100 PDF files annually. A webmaster, or the person cutting documentation CDs, receives a couple of files each week. It might be important for each file to follow a naming convention, have bookmarks, and be password-protected and screen-optimized. However, here’s the problem. Each individual writer produces only one PDF file every few months, and might forget about the desired features. An effective checklist for writers can be assembled quickly and referred to as needed – even by the person who created the checklist in the first place! What makes the checklist so powerful? Its power comes from the years of experience that it distills into a set of best practices that includes not only what's been proved to work well, but also what commonly goes wrong and how to avoid it. In contrast to information communicated by word of mouth, which degrades with each retelling, a checklist is centrally controlled. Unlike procedures, which dictate how to do something, a checklist is results-oriented. The checklist is also flexible. Whenever anyone comes up with another way to complete the steps faster, easier, or more cheaply, you can update the checklist. A good checklist is short (7-10 main items) and has space to check off each item as it's completed. The checklist can also serve as a transmittal sheet for handing off the next step in the process. Checklists can be highly specific. For instance, based on my experience, written print-production checklists, I recommend two checklists: one for writers preparing books to go to print, and one for whoever examines the proofs as they come back. The pre-print list concentrates on eliminating “author's alteration” errors; the proof checklist concentrates on eliminating printer errors. What's that? You'd like to borrow my checklists? Sorry, but checklists reflect the local environment, tools, and user population. A print-production checklist for a group of experienced FrameMaker users will differ from a PDF checklist for a group of new Frame users, and both will differ from a Help checklist for Word users. Thus, I cannot recommend specific checklists. But it's not hard to compile your own. |
|
Next time |
Beyond quality |
|
About the Author: Steven Jong, a Senior Member of the STC Boston Chapter, is a technical writer and writing manager. |