Thanks for sharing the User Glue post. I read your tweet first. :-)
I shared some general thoughts about my own enthusiasm for associations at http://www.mardahl.dk/2007/01/26/professional-organization-whats-in-it-for-me/. This is a nice visit to that topic again. I have also experienced a barcamp now and that was amazing. That is an interesting option for geographic groups. It could be done virtually, but its nature is "live".
 

PS I didn't want to be anonymous. I couldn't use normal profile from Safari.
regards, Karen
 

Your Twitter didn't work. So I'm posting here (after seeing the link in LinkedIn).

I've been a member of the STC on and off for the past 26 years -- I joined in 1982. When I first joined STC (and later, the IEEE-Professional Communication Society) as a brand-new "technical writer", I needed help with understanding the profession and practices of the technical communication profession. The STC publications and the members I met at the monthly meetings became trusted and respected mentors for me.

At the time, the STC members were mostly ex-engineers-turned-editorial writers or technical illustrators. The Society was going through major changes. More and more access to and usage of computers and software changed the tools that tech writers worked with as well as the topic of much of our documentation.

Documentation we worked on then was mostly about hardware--aeronautic, military, machinery, equipment, and so on. Software tech writers were rare.

I participated in the local chapters--and for a while was a president and newsletter editor for a chapter. I felt that I was getting a lot from the organization--and I gave a lot back as well.

There were no "Courses", "Certificates", or "Degrees" for Technical Communication (although I *did* take a class called "Scientific and Technical Writing" when I was in Graduate School a few years earlier in preparation for my MS thesis--the class was taught by a PhD Biology Professor whose writing didn't conform to the tenets of the CBE Style Manual).

Academic institutions started to offer "technical communication" courses, certificates, and degrees. These were taught mostly by liberal arts and English literature professors who had attained the "higher degree" to be "qualified" to teach the course at a university-level but who many times had never done industrial-type technical writing--in other words, strong in theory, weak in practice.

There were times in my career when I was going through some changes between jobs and my membership lapsed. After some time, I'd renew, but each time, I found less value in renewing.

So, now that most of the "tech writing" jobs have either been outsourced or offshored, and those that haven't have morphed into the "tech writers" also being required to be Java and C++ programmers and/or technical illustration whizzes as well, many of my colleagues and I don't see the point to the STC any more. It seemingly doesn't recognize the demands of our profession any more. It doesn't seem to want to the competition that's out there for technical writers.

Unlike accountants, who get "accounting" jobs or UNIX system administrators who get IT Department jobs, technical communicators have the same dilemma as "designers". We're in a profession that the HR folks don't know how to categorize. We don't fit well in the HR "box" (online or otherwise).

Until an organization can define us better, or until we can define ourselves better, we won't have any use for organization--whether we join an existing organization or create a new one.

Just some thoughts that surfaced after too many coffees.
 

Hey Mary, that Twitter account name doesn't appear to be working.

Does anyone have ideas on getting the SIG more active? Is there any way that I could help? I am very new to STC (just joined a few months ago) and am interested in contributing, but don't even know how or where to start.

I haven't any idea who the members are, what they might be interested in, or what conversation to drum up that isn't already done on the IxDA list or the IAI list. Help me help you?
 

People will create what they want without an association if they are motivated (there's a task they need to do and they need the info to do it, a need to socialize because they don't have that outlet elsewhere, etc.) and there are limited barriers (time, cost). An association is more likely to be sustainable because its members can draw on its collected resources even if there is a decline in participation, whereas self-grown groups tend to die out when volunteers drop off or people just don't have the time to participate.

I haven't really made use of this group for well over a year because my personal life got really busy. Nice to see the blog!
 

The value of an organization is three-fold: education, networking and you own opportunity to grow through volunteering. You can be a passive member of an organization... soaking up whatever you can through the services that 'they' offer. But I think that the folks who get the most out of the organization are those who put the most into it. I do believe that you really have to learn something to teach it to someone else... and sometimes, something as simple as answering someone else's question may be an important contribution. We might consider a SIG conference - much like a Region conference -- or do something for a day or two before the annual conference. We certainly have reached a critical mass NUMBER of members of the SIG to try something.

emillerstc@google.com