Tech Word

  • Subscribe to our RSS feed.
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • Facebook
  • Digg

Friday, 22 October 2010

My Quantum-Mechanical Resume

Posted on 13:38 by Unknown
This article is based on a presentation I gave at the STC Toronto Career Day on September 26, 2010.

Confessions of a Hypo-Professional
There's a special breed of professional that you'll sometimes encounter: the hypo-professional, hypo being short form for hypocritical.

Examples of hypo-professionals include:
  • doctors who smoke or are fat (or both)
  • lawyers who break the law
  • accountants who don't file their taxes
  • plumbers who don't "plumb" in their own homes
These are professionals who don't apply the tenets of their profession to themselves. As technical communicators, we'd like to think we're not included in this sorry group, but let's be honest. Are all of your personal user guides and other documentation organized into nice, neat little piles that you can easily access? Are all your computer files organized into logical folders? Do you back up your files on a regular basis? Have you documented all your important personal information and kept it in a safe place?

Of course, most of our personal docs don't matter very much when job hunting. No one will decide not to hire you because you can't quickly locate your Blu-ray player user manual. However, there is one personal document that is very important, and that is your resume. It is the most important document you will ever work on. You are a technical communicator; your document is a form of technical communication; therefore the resume, being a document, represents you. If it is not the absolute best it can be, you are limiting yourself and your career.

Resume Length - The Debate Rages
There's a long-standing debate about how long and detailed a resume should be. Many experts say that a resume should be as short and simple as possible, because most readers have little time to read it. Others argue a resume should be as detailed as possible to ensure that the reader will not have to guess or assume anything about you or your qualifications.

The Novice
This dilemma stems from the fact that there are different user types for your resume, as there are for all documentation. At one extreme, there is the novice user, typically an HR representative. This person often knows very little about our profession, and will look at your resume and ask:

"What is HTML?....And how do you spell HTML?"

For these simple folk, your resume should be as simple and brief as possible. This means a length of one or two pages, and using simple, plain language that anyone can understand.

The Über Writer
The other extreme type of resume reader is the very experienced technical communicator, whom I call The Über Writer. This is someone who will look at your resume and say:

"I see from your resume that you used FrameMaker. I am currently an ultra-secret beta tester for FrameMaker version gamma-Z-theta. It is able to export multi-dimensional PDFs into hyperbolic space. Your opinion of this please...in 27 words or less."

This type of user demands far more detail than The Simple User. They may require a resume of three or more pages, filled with the technical details they crave.

Doubling Up
These very different users mean that you need to have two versions of your resume: a simple, brief one and a longer, more detailed one.

You send the simple one to the novice user, and the complex one to the experienced user.

Makes sense, right?

Well, not necessarily.

It could be that the person you thought was a simple user actually knows more about technical communication than you realized. Or perhaps they don't know, but they may know someone who does, and they may have forwarded your simple resume to this experienced user.

Conversely, perhaps the experienced user doesn't have time to read your detailed resume. Or maybe they want to forward your resume to someone who is less experienced. Again, there is a mismatch between the user and the document type.

Broken Attachments
One solution would simply be to attach both versions of your resume in an email. However, this method also has problems. Some users may get confused and not realize which document to open or save. They may end up only forwarding one of the documents. Many things can and will go wrong when sending multiple attachments.

What's needed is a different kind of document: one that gives the user a choice of version to read.

Note that what we are doing here is what our profession entails: defining a documentation problem and then solving it.

The Wonderful World of Quantum Mechanics
The solution involves a paradigm shift in how a document is viewed. The science that inspired the solution is quantum mechanics.

Quantum mechanics is a very strange area of physics. It's so obscure that even the scientists working in it have trouble understanding it.

Essentially, it says that we can never really know the exact location of a subatomic particle. The location is all based on probability or random chance.

It's interesting to note that Einstein did not like quantum mechanics; for him, it was just too "random". His famous quote "God does not play dice with the universe" neatly summarized his feelings.

Got random?
The fact is, though, that randomness is everywhere. Think of a light fixture or lamp anywhere in your home; one that you currently are not observing. The light may be on or off: you don't know; all you can do is assign a probability to either state.

Or think of a friend who may be in one of several emotional states: happy, sad, surprised, anxious, and so on. Unless you are observing your friend, you cannot know which state they are in; all you can do is estimate probabilities for each state.

The concept of applying probabilities to various states is ultimately the basis of the resume documentation solution.

The Solution - The Long and Short of It
Instead of having your short and long resume documents stored on your computer, imagine placing them both online and then cross-linking them to each other.

The short resume would include links (at the very bottom and top) to the longer resume. The longer resume, in turn, would have links to the short one. This way, the user has a clear choice of resume to read.

Maintaining your resumes this way means that if someone tells you they are reading your resume, you won't know which version, unless they've told you - all you can do estimate a probability. Even then, it doesn't really matter, for you know there is a 100% probability that they will select the version that they want.

This solution therefore allows your resume to exist in a quantum state: it's length randomly fluctuates depending on which version the user is reading.

This solution also borrows directly from one of the main tools in documentation: the hyperlink. An online help topic can include hyperlinks to other topics, allowing the user to explore the information in ever-greater detail. Using the same principle, your simple resume is linked to a more detailed version, allowing the reader to explore your experience in greater detail.

Get WIMPY
It goes without saying that your brief resume should be just that: brief. One way to ensure this is to count the number of words in your brief resume, and see if it exceeds a certain standard. However, this doesn't take into account the numbers of years you've worked in the field. A longer work experience could necessitate a longer resume, so we need a more meaningful measure for length.

The solution is to divide the number of words by the number of years you've worked in the field. For example, my brief resume has about 313 words, and I've worked in tech comm for 12 years. 313 words divided by 12 years = 26 words/year, which is quite brief. I call this number the Words Per Year factor, or WPY. You can remember it using the mnemonic: WimPY; may your brief resume be as "Wimpy" as possible.

Keeping It Simple
Another thing to remember regarding your brief resume is that it should be simple. In fact, all of your documentation should be as simple as possible, but no simpler.

What happens when the principle of simplicity is not followed? To give a graphical example, view the PowerPoint slide developed by General Stanley McChrystal, the US and NATO force commander.

This nightmare of a slide is completely incomprehensible - it is a spaghetti diagram of the worst kind.

Viewing this slide, we can safely say its developer is highly intelligent, incredibly methodical and totally insane. As the good General said: "'When we understand that slide, we'll have won the war," in other words, never, for no-one can comprehend it.

If I'd been asked to develop a PowerPoint slide that would describe how to win the war in Afghanistan, it would have the following text:
Winning the War in Afghanistan
We can win the war in Afghanistan.

To win the war in Afghanistan
  1. Find the enemy.
  2. Kill ‘em alot.

It may not be militarily accurate, but at least it's clear and comprehensible.


Making the Connections
There's another aspect of quantum mechanics that relates to resumes. It is this strange but true fact: if a particle is rotated, another corresponding particle will also rotate. Scientists have no idea why this happens; it's as though the two particles are somehow consciously linked in a wondrous two-way process.

You and your resume are similarly connected. It's obvious that as you change and gain experience, knowledge and skills, your resume will change to reflect this. But is the opposite true? That is, if your resume changes, will you change?

I believe you will. I've seen many people change after their resume has been properly reviewed and updated. People light up when many of their missing skills and accomplishments inadvertently omitted from their resume are finally included. These changes can give the person the confidence to apply for positions that they may previously not have. And if they land that new job, then they really have changed - all as a result of changing their resume.

Therefore, you and your resume are indeed inextricably linked, in the same way as the two particles; if one of these things changes, so does the other.

Here a link, there a link, everywhere a link, link
As demonstrated, linking is a common theme in this discussion. You are linked to your resume, and your resume itself is linked to another resume. As an online document, your resume is written in HTML, however the term HTML is actually a good example of meaningless information.

HTML is an acronym for Hyper Text Markup Language, a phrase that is utterly meaningless to most Internet users. From their perspective, HTML really stands for Helping To Make Links, which is exactly what an effective resume does. It not only links to another resume, it contains links to relevant websites (for example, to the companies you worked for, the schools you attended, and, of course, to the STC).

At a higher level, the resume is a link to you, and a link in the employer's mind from you to the job they're seeking to fill. It is, quite literally, The Missing Link.

Portability
Another advantage of an online resume is its portability; it's ability to be accessed anywhere and anytime.

Ideally, you should have your own website with a URL that is easy to remember, with a prominent link to your resume. No matter where you are, if you encounter someone who could potentially employ you (or who knows someone who could), you can simply give them your website address, and let them do the rest. In fact, if they have smart phone or PDA, they can view your resume immediately.

So if anyone asks me for my resume, I simply say, visit abrooke.net.

And view my portable, quantum-mechanical resume.
Read More
Posted in quantum theory, resumes, science | No comments

Information to die for

Posted on 10:31 by Unknown
Think informational design decisions aren't life and death? Think again.

As reported recently, poorly designed medicine labels are killing and maiming people. Two people died when they were accidentally administered potassium chloride (which is poisonous) instead of sodium chloride (which is not poisonous). This tragedy occurred because the vial labels for both these substances were very similar in design and appearance.

Neil MacKinnon, a pharmacy professor at Dalhousie University said it best: “If you ask any kind of front-line nurse or pharmacist, they would say ‘Gee, this isn’t rocket science, why can’t they make labelling clearer – put things in different size fonts, in different colours?’”

To which I would respond: Duh!

The current label for the potassium chloride looks like this:

Potassium Cholride
Concentrate USP

To avoid confusion, I would slightly redesign this label to read:

HEY YOU!!!
DON'T YOU KNOW THIS S--T IS POTASSIUM F---ING CHLORIDE!!?!!
IT WILL KILL WHOEVER YOU GIVE IT TO!!!
STOP NOW, YOU CRAZY MOTHERF----R!

Yes, it's crude, but so what?

If the bottle had had this label, there would be fewer dead people.
Read More
Posted in bad communication, medicine | No comments

Thursday, 14 October 2010

33

Posted on 07:53 by Unknown
It's a great day to be Chilean.

It's certainly true that the 33 miners rescued from the depths of the earth are heroes. Anyone who can survive over two months trapped in that pit of hell must be considered nothing less.

But as CBC's National Science Commentator Bob McDonald pointed out, the other heroes are the engineers who designed the miraculous escape capsule which pulled all the trapped men to safety, with no major problems, and ahead of schedule.

We are all engineers; engineers of communication.

May all your engineering projects end as beautifully as the one in Chile.
Read More
Posted in news | No comments

Monday, 11 October 2010

Information and Other Risky Business

Posted on 10:23 by Unknown
Those of you who perceive information management as a rather dry affair should examine the strange case of Gabriella Nagy.

Ms. Nagy had a cellphone plan with Rogers. Her husband subscribed to Rogers TV cable service, and decided to add Internet and home phone services. "No problem," said Rogers, who were only too happy to oblige. "In fact, we see that your wife already has a cellphone plan, so to save you money (and make things more efficient), we're going to bundle your cellphone, TV and cable services under one account, and send you one big, juicy consolidated bill!"

Some time later, the husband received the first invoice, which included a detailed listing of all his wife's calls. "That's strange," he noticed while perusing the listing, "there seems to be several rather long phone calls to one number." He called the number, and discovered, much to his dismay, that it belonged to a man who was having an affair with the husband's wife. (The man having the affair was also married.)

After discovering the affair, the husband promptly left his wife, who became so depressed that she lost her job. In May of 2010, she sued Rogers for $600,00 for breach of privacy, claiming that their invoicing process ruined her marriage and destroyed her life.

In informational design and management terms, this occurrence is sometimes referred to as an "oops".

It's hard to know where to begin with all this. On the one hand, Rogers could have taken more care to advise Nagy that her account was about to be consolidated with another, resulting in a shared bill. On the other hand, to blame a communications company for a failed marriage is quite a stretch. Where would the lawsuits end? What about someone who simply uses a cellphone to yell obscenities at another person? Is the cellphone company liable for providing the medium for the message?

This case is similar to one faced by an airline years ago. To promote business, the airline offered a "fly your spouse for free" program. Loving husbands could take their wives on dream vacations, at no extra cost for the second ticket.

The program was quite successful, and being good corporate citizens, the airlines sent thank you letters to all the couples who participated: letters that many of the wives would open (since it was addressed to them and their husband) and read, and who would then wonder aloud: "Gee, I don't remember flying recently with my husband." For it turns out that many husbands did not travel with their wives, but with other assorted female companions.

Oops.

Information development and delivery, much like life, is a balance between security and convenience. The moment you create information, you are also creating risk:
  • risk that the information is incorrect
  • risk that the user will not interpret the information correctly
  • risk that you are exposing the user to information that they should not be exposed to

However, should you decide not to include the information, you are taking another risk: that you have withheld information that the user really did require.

There is no school, no program, and no teacher who can instruct you on how to always strike the right balance. Each instance has to be judged on its merits. Whether Rogers or the wife acted immorally is irrelevant. The fact is they are now both embroiled in a costly and very public legal battle. Many other philandering cellphone users are now quite worried that they will be exposed.

When her family's accounts were bundled, a simple automated email sent to Ms. Nagy could have saved her (and Rogers) much grief:

Dear Ms. Nagy:

Please be advised that your household has requested additional services. These will be bundled under one invoice, which will include a detailed list of your calls. However, if you would like this list to be mailed separately to you, please call us within the next 7 business days so that we can update our mailing records.

(This should keep you out of trouble with your husband as you pursue your illicit affair with your hot lover, whom we have been tracking in real time. However, for a nominal "filtering fee" of only $499, we with withhold this information from your husband.)

Better still, there should have been an opt-in option to have her call details included in the master bill. If no action was taken, the call details list would continue to be sent to her directly.

Yes, Ms. Nagy is ultimately responsible for her downfall. However, Rogers and all those who create and disseminate information also have a responsibility to avoid informational disasters such as these by striking the right balance between disclosing and screening out sensitive information.
Read More
Posted in bad communication, business | No comments
Newer Posts Older Posts Home
Subscribe to: Comments (Atom)

Popular Posts

  • Six Things That Should Be Single Sourced
    Single-sourcing, as we all know, is the art and science of using a single repository of information to produce multiple outputs. Typical ex...
  • Interviewing and Dating: A Single Source Solution
    Last month, people celebrated "Valentine's Day", a day to celebrate romance and love, a day to be extra-nice to your partner, ...
  • The Power of Words
    There's nothing like an election to illustrate how powerful words are. Politicians, pundits, and the media use words to advance their ca...
  • The Governing Dynamics of Documentation
    Game theory is a specialized field of mathematics that analyzes choices and results in strategic situations, or games , as the players try t...
  • Why info systems fail
    If you only have time to read one news article today, read this one from the Financial Post. Don't leave IT to the techies - Three probl...
  • How to update a document - NOT!
    Canadian International Co-operation Minister Bev Oda needs to work on her document management skills. She hand wrote the word 'NOT'...
  • Publishing for Pollard
    Most of you probably have never heard of Jonathan Pollard, the American who has been languishing in prison since November 21, 1985, almost 2...
  • The Dynamic Blogger
    Some of you may have noticed the new look of this blog. It's a new Blogger feature called dynamic views . You can now choose how this bl...
  • Dude, where's my document?
    Try this experiment: Think of a printed guide you worked on. Find the source document from your current location. Make a minor change to the...
  • Security breach!
    It's always entertaining to read about non-lethal lapses in security at a major event. Remember the debacle at the 2010 Winter Olympics?...

Categories

  • art
  • autism
  • bad communication
  • business
  • career
  • cloud computing
  • computers
  • creativity
  • entertainment
  • finance
  • food
  • Google
  • history
  • interviewing
  • math
  • media
  • medicine
  • misc.
  • music
  • nature
  • news
  • philosophy
  • politics
  • quantum theory
  • religion
  • resume
  • resumes
  • science
  • security
  • simplicity
  • sport
  • technology
  • usability

Blog Archive

  • ►  2012 (9)
    • ►  September (1)
    • ►  August (1)
    • ►  July (1)
    • ►  April (2)
    • ►  March (2)
    • ►  February (2)
  • ►  2011 (36)
    • ►  December (2)
    • ►  November (2)
    • ►  October (6)
    • ►  September (2)
    • ►  August (4)
    • ►  July (5)
    • ►  June (3)
    • ►  May (6)
    • ►  April (2)
    • ►  February (3)
    • ►  January (1)
  • ▼  2010 (47)
    • ►  December (3)
    • ►  November (6)
    • ▼  October (4)
      • My Quantum-Mechanical Resume
      • Information to die for
      • 33
      • Information and Other Risky Business
    • ►  September (2)
    • ►  August (1)
    • ►  July (2)
    • ►  June (2)
    • ►  May (3)
    • ►  April (5)
    • ►  March (11)
    • ►  February (7)
    • ►  January (1)
  • ►  2009 (36)
    • ►  December (11)
    • ►  November (5)
    • ►  October (4)
    • ►  September (2)
    • ►  August (2)
    • ►  July (3)
    • ►  May (1)
    • ►  April (3)
    • ►  March (2)
    • ►  January (3)
  • ►  2008 (24)
    • ►  December (9)
    • ►  November (1)
    • ►  October (7)
    • ►  July (1)
    • ►  June (1)
    • ►  May (1)
    • ►  April (1)
    • ►  March (1)
    • ►  February (1)
    • ►  January (1)
  • ►  2007 (10)
    • ►  December (1)
    • ►  November (2)
    • ►  October (4)
    • ►  August (1)
    • ►  March (1)
    • ►  January (1)
  • ►  2006 (4)
    • ►  September (1)
    • ►  June (1)
    • ►  April (1)
    • ►  February (1)
  • ►  2005 (10)
    • ►  December (1)
    • ►  November (1)
    • ►  October (1)
    • ►  September (1)
    • ►  June (1)
    • ►  May (1)
    • ►  April (1)
    • ►  March (1)
    • ►  February (1)
    • ►  January (1)
  • ►  2004 (9)
    • ►  December (1)
    • ►  November (1)
    • ►  September (1)
    • ►  June (1)
    • ►  May (1)
    • ►  April (1)
    • ►  March (1)
    • ►  February (1)
    • ►  January (1)
  • ►  2003 (9)
    • ►  December (1)
    • ►  November (1)
    • ►  September (1)
    • ►  June (1)
    • ►  May (1)
    • ►  March (1)
    • ►  February (1)
    • ►  January (2)
  • ►  2002 (3)
    • ►  December (1)
    • ►  November (1)
    • ►  October (1)
Powered by Blogger.

About Me

Unknown
View my complete profile