“Nobody reads these things anyway.”

If you’ve spent any time thinking about, developing or using technical documentation, it is likely you’re familiar with this old chestnut. The reasons behind this dismissive utterance may vary: too much information, not enough information,  problems with accessibility and navigation, language translation issues, etc. but any or all of these reasons are assuredly more than enough to relegate “the manual” to dust-collecting duty on a shelf somewhere.

Those responsible for creating technical documentation bristle at this sentiment, even as a generality. We are very quick to counter and extol at great length ( just ask next time you’ve got a few hours to spare…) the absolute critical necessity of quality technical documentation and the positive business benefits it can bring.  Yet somehow and despite this fact, there is no shortage whatsoever of product support documentation that yet again, will elicit from the user a resounding “huh?” at best.

It’s the “why” of this that remains of great interest to me. If the people who write the documentation know that there are ways to create something that would be more well-received, why aren’t they doing it?

It is because at the end of the day, the organization creates technical documentation through its business processes and policies, not the technical writers. Technical writers learn from day one that “above all else, consider your audience.”  However,  the vast majority of technical documentation we encounter on a daily basis would never lead you to believe that the user was of much concern at all.

By and large we accept this. Poor or unusable documentation perpetuates the notion that most of it is terrible, and therefore it’s not news nor a surprise to anyone. It’s just the way it is. The attitude that “nobody reads these things anyway” persists.

Why does this happen? What’s going on inside the organization which clearly places some measure of value on the importance of technical documentation, yet continues to put out materials that their customers aren’t using?

Well, here are some of the more common symptoms and causes that we’ve observed:

• TMI (Too Much Information).  Apparently, if it has been written down and has to do with the product, then it must be included. All of it. Not only does this super-level of content make it extremely hard on the user, it makes the documentation development process extremely time consuming. The focus shifts away from usability to making sure there’s enough time to pack everything possible in, regardless if its quality or usefulness. “Better to have it in there than not!” is the default decision on questions of content and all too often this just makes things worse.

• Writing style “of the engineer, for the engineer”. Often times when dealing with documentation that covers a particularly complex product, the end result can end up looking like a mildly breathed-on series of engineering white papers. However, if the user of the product is not a design engineer, but perhaps a technician or operator, this documentation will be of little use. It is the job of the technical writer, as the advocate for the audience, to make this information as accessible as possible. However, not all documentation is created by professional technical writers, and sometimes there’s just not time to properly re-work the content to a level that is sufficiently palatable for users. If the former is the case, perhaps those responsible for the development of the technical documentation should be trained on how to interview technical subject matter experts.

• Failure to focus on the audience.  This dovetails in with the above, but much of the technical documentation we see regularly would benefit greatly simply by assessing it through the eyes of the user. If I am told that it is my responsibility to maintain a piece of equipment, then I, as the user of the manual that came with the equipment  want to be instructed on how to troubleshoot and repair. Chapter and verse regarding theory of operation will mean very little to me. Tell what to expect from the moment I open the box through installation, configuration and maintenance. Any information beyond that may be of little concern to me right now, so simply tell me where to find the rest and if I need it I’ll go looking for it. Most often, this lack of focus on the audience happens because it gets squeezed out in favor of trying to get every possible piece of information included as a priority. It is absolutely worth questioning and re-evaluating who the users of your technical documentation really are.

• Deadlines and Industry Specification Requirements. For those companies that manufacturer many and diverse products, there’s simply not enough time to pay too much attention to usability. It’s hard enough to keep up with getting out any sort of documentation much less pieces that really focus in on and work for the users in a meaningful way. If you manufacturer certain products that are subject to regulation, it’s easy to fall into the routine of just meeting the minimum requirements for the documentation; requirements that do not necessarily account for what might work best for your users.

All of the above are symptomatic of the widely-held opinion that technical documentation is regarded as a “necessary evil” .

The realities of business processes and policies often limit the potential advantages that technical documentation can offer both the manufacturer and their customers. However, this can only be properly addressed when the organization chooses to make a proactive change. Otherwise the cycle of “it’s no good but no one reads these anyway/no one reads these anyway so it’s ok if it’s not that good” will continue to persist.