Savage: The Process and Prospects for Professionalizing Technical Communication

Savage’s discussion of the history and perception of professions in the US compels me to consider my own work within the professional field of teaching. I took a “non-traditional” and thus non-professional path to teaching. When I first stepped into a classroom as a substitute teacher in a Chicago charter school, I had had no training whatsoever. My Bachelor’s Degree was the only prerequisite at this particular school. I was hired for my first full time teaching job as a Latin instructor because I had a BA in Latin and minimal experience as a substitute teacher; the private school at which I worked was not required to hired fully licensed and certified teachers. Somehow, I was able to circumvent all training and certification in the field, but I still consider myself a professional teacher.

My personal experience is somewhat akin to Savage’s observation that “job advertisements for technical writers persist in representing job qualifications in terms that leave the field open to candidates other than those with formal education in technical communication” (p. 144).  Savages cites hiring managers who are over their skies when it comes to hiring for technical writing, and they ironically cannot properly execute a job description for a technical writing position. Both of these strike me as broad strokes observations and quite subjective.

Savage’s observation that many technical writers are hired in-house based on “subject matter knowledge” and a general facility with the written word also strikes me as a broad speculation, but it is logical. This would be a safe, cost-effective practice for an organization. This makes me wonder if corporations who need to employ technical writers are themselves not interested in the continuing professionalization of technical writing. Savage does mention that the road to professionalization is filled with obstacles, and I think this may be one.

I absolutely agree with Savage’s claim that one major difficulty in the professionalization of technical communication is the “difficulty of defining the expertise of technical communicators in order to set the field apart” (p. 159), and I would consider this the biggest roadblock. If employers had a better grasp of what well trained technical communicators can do, the resulting hiring practices would help foster a stronger professional identity which would, in turn, accelerate the breaking through of other roadblocks mentioned by Savage.  

Given what I now know about technical communication, I do think that full "professionalization" (whether as defined by Faber or Savage) is important because it can protect and preserve the security of its practitioners.  

Professional Identities by Brenton Faber...and a personal note

This article provides an excellent orientation to the finer distinctions of professional writing and communication. Also, after slogging through Cornelissen’s panglossian take on the corporate world, I appreciate Faber’s head on confrontation of ethics.

Faber takes great care to define professionalism, which may be tiresome for some readers, but, for me, it was quite helpful. Professional(ism) is term that is thrown around loosely, and Faber’s literature review concerning the development of a strict, scholarly definition serves his purpose well. Subjectively speaking, I favor Friedson’s treatment of professions as “characterized by two general features: a) the acquisition and schooled application of an esoteric and complex body of knowledge and skill, and b) orientation toward serving the public.” I appreciate any nod to public service when considering professional occupations like medicine, law, or even teaching. While these are revered and sometimes well paid fields, they are often not spoken of as services, especially law.

Faber mentions ethics as a “self-conscious discourse about values, conduct, and what is perceived to be proper action.” This idea holds professional to a high standard of responsibility given the relatively high “economic and social status within their local and national cultures” professionals enjoy. Highlighting this as an essential characteristic of professionalism is something I appreciate.

These factors align well with his argument that emerging professionals must be aware of the social and professional contexts in which they will work and the people and communities they will serve. The elite status afforded many professionals does indeed bind them to a responsibility to counter the forces of territorial elitism, and Faber’s discussion of it provides a nice counter balance to Cornelissen.

Personal note....I am so excited that I have to overshare....

My wife, Annie, and I welcomed our second child this week. Calvin Lonergan Grace Mortensen was born Wednesday morning at 1:27 AM. We are thrilled and exhausted.

Industry Report: Composition Studies

Abstract: For my industry report, I chose to examine Composition Studies. Composition Studies involves the research, study and teaching of writing. Professional sin the field generally hold an MA or PhD in English, Rhetoric, or a related field. Professionals also must have a good command of professional and technical writing to thrive in the industry. This report also includes a profile of a professional working in the industry.

Cornelissen Chapter 14: Web 2.0

…..Web 2.0: for when you have to communicate something so horrifically racist and ignorant, and you have to do it now…..then double down on it later.

Cornelissen’s outline of the progression of web technologies and how communicative practices have changed on various web platforms is a vanilla rehashing of the popular narrative.

While I am comfortable with the terms Web 1.0 and Web 2.0 in certain contexts, Cornelissen again paints with too broad of a brush when defining these terms. I think Cornelissen’s decision to define Web 1.0 and Web 2.0 in the manner he does is because the definitions are accurate for organizations and corporations, which makes sense. For individuals, these definitions are lacking. From its nascence, the Web has been a digital space “where content and applications are continuously generated and modified,” but, in its early days, this continuous collaboration was not performed by “all users.” As early as the 1980’s, only small groups of people were networking through platforms like LISTSERV and bulletin board services. Networking has always been present on the web. Also, while there has indeed been an explosion of networking and collaboration on the web, it is absolutely wrong to assert that “all users” are taking advantage of this. There are still users who are in Web 1.0 mode. There are a host of social factors which determine how individuals approach and use the features of the internet. To assert that “all users” are using it any fashion is far too broad.

The Nestle case study illustrates what I find interesting about this shift in web use: how horribly mismanaged corporate social marketing is. Nestle’s Facebook interactions are similar to the misstep many other organizations and corporations make. When engaging in social marketing, it is much more difficult to manage the message. 

Cornelissen Chapters 12 and 13

Inspired by the naming conventions of “the management scholar Clempitt,” it is time for my weekly type and gripe. Please feel free to analyze and criticize as you see fit. 

Chapter 12

The strength of the models presented in Chapter 12 is that the step of communicating the message of organizational change is in the middle of the model. Before any communication regarding change is rolled out, it is important for leaders to set a context. Whether termed as developing a sense of urgency or as underscoring organizational needs, if employees and other stakeholders are not oriented to the changes by the presentation of the context from which the changes are coming, disaster ensues.  

Working in education, I have witnessed how difficult it is to communicate organizational change and how easy it is to mismanage it. If only my principals and deans of jobs past had employed any of the communicative models presented by Cornelissen in Chapter 12. The difficulty in education might be because of the diverse interests of a wide range of stakeholder groups, but, sometimes, it is made difficult by poor strategy.

When I worked at a local high school a few years back, the principal called an all-faculty meeting to announce the school’s plan to implement a one-to-one technology program in which every student would be required to own and use an iPad. The backlash from faculty was swift and intense, but it was not unified. Those members of the faculty who would be excited about such an initiative were upset that they had no say in how this would happen and which devices would be used as a part of the program. Others, whom I might call “old-school” in their pedagogical approach, were upset because they did not feel like they could adapt their styles to suit the iPad revolution. Others just hated Apple and all iProducts. The resulting backlash led to a one year delay in the roll out of the one-to-one program, but the iPad remained as the mandated device.

Had the school’s leadership better created a sense of urgency to update and improve instruction through implementing new technology, it is likely that the roll out would have happened one year sooner.

Chapter 13

I am pleased that Cornelissen devotes an entire chapter to corporate social responsibility and community relations. I am not surprised that how he frames the discussion is a disappointment, and I am left feeling the same way I did after reading his discussion of issue and crisis management. That is, CSR and community relations are presented as marketing and image management rather than as the sound practices of a responsible organization.

This chapter strengthens the argument (one advanced by Dr. Bridgeford and others) that Cornelissen presents a biased, free-market/laissez-faire perspective cloaked in the “neutral” tone of scholarly distance. Even when he writes of a "moral contract" (p. 243), "economic development" is given primacy over improving the lives of employees and the community at large. 

From my perspective, CSR and corporations driven solely (Britich Airways, Kraftby desire for profit are incompatible. If Cornelissen were not writing from such a biased perspective, he would address this idea, and perhaps, mention the success of public-private partnerships like the Tennessee Valley Authority (a New Deal initiative which still operates today!) that made CSR its guiding principle by taking a holistic, broad view of the consequences of its actions in carrying out its corporate mission. 

Cornelissen Chapters 10 & 11

I read and digested chapters 10 and 11, but I am following my anger with this post. I know I am not directly discussing the models and case studies outlined by Cornelissen, but I need to vent. When I read the chapters, my continual thoughts were that this is a guidebook for the powerful to obfuscate, evade, and even lie to the less powerful.  

I am a fan of team sports: baseball, basketball, football, soccer, hockey. At the professional level these sports generate tremendous amounts of attention and with that attention comes tremendous revenue. Because of all that attention and revenue, along with other cultural factors, issue and crisis management are especially compelling to me through the lens of major professional sports.  Essentially, most organizations in the world of sports favor a tone-deaf approach to both issues and crises to the detriment of society. (Yes, I see the hypocrisy of my anger and concern because I keep watching and supporting these sports.)

For example, the professional football team in Washington D.C. has a nickname that is a racial slur. Many media outlets have already taken to only referring to the team as “Washington,” and a federal court has struck down the team’s trademark registration rights because of the offensive nickname. The owner, Daniel Snyder, does nothing but double down on his aggressive stance that the name is not offensive and it will not change as long as he is the team’s owner.

This example is interesting because Snyder views this as an issue as defined by Cornelissen. It is simply something that is negatively affecting the reputation of the organization (p. 181). To outside activists and many football fans, this issue is a crisis. The name needs to change immediately.

The sheer power of certain organizations affords them opportunities to keep the perception of issues from becoming crises by force. Because of this, I question how Cornelissen decides to differentiate the two terms.

Another example of the fuzzy dividing line between issue and crisis and how it is exploited by powerful organizations also comes from the sordid world of professional sports. Chicago Blackhawks star Patrick Kane was recently under investigation for rape in Buffalo, NY. In this example, we have a crisis being treated as an issue again, but the crisis is far larger than and more important than the reputation of a hockey team.

Our country continually refuses to confront how prevalent sexual assault is, how few victims actually report the crimes, and how victims are shamed and degraded. The Patrick Kane case reinforces these ideas. The Chicago Blackhawks recently gave him a platform to claim his innocence and call the victim a liar when he spoke at a press conference to open the team’s training camp last week. This action of crisis management enables the type of people who make death threats at journalists covering the story, which is exactly what Julie DiCaro experienced.

Am I overreacting and again allowing my politics and proclivities to guide my reading and resulting criticism of the chapters? The case studies in these two chapters are not as ugly as my examples, but they do nothing to move me from my original assertion that these chapters are a handbook for denial and cover-up.