I share my screen and dive into the Flare project in whose topics I will have placed questions. When all else fails, I hold a 30-60min virtual review meeting, typically with no more than three reviewers. (Hmmm, now that I think of it, I should integrate MadCap Central + Slack. The problem here is that reviewers tend to download, edit, and upload their feedback, thwarting my collaborative review goals. Each review draft has its own thread, with the files attached. Sometimes, I’ve used Slack to distribute a shared document for review. Microsoft Teams (for which each review draft has its own channel, with files attached).Instead, I put files in the client’s preferred cloud-based place so that all reviewers can mark up the same files. I also deliver PDFs and Word docs for review, but not via email to avoid having reviewers work in isolation.
I’ve used all the same techniques you list, particularly MadCap Central for topic-by-topic reviews. Nita: Sounds like we share the viewpoint that our jobs are to adapt to reviewers’ preferences while simultaneously leading them to best practices.
Google Docs – This is a great approach when a reviewer wants to proactively provide changes or feedback on existing content or provide a large amount of new content.HTML files posted on an internal file server, with a link to the files emailed to the reviewer – For content posted this way, the reviewer typically returns feedback in either a Word document or just an email.Then, I have the headache of deciphering and resolving all of the conflicting review comments. Reviewers email marked-up documents back and forth, and getting consensus is slow and frustrating. This process is straightforward when there’s only one reviewer, but it degenerates into chaos when there are multiple reviewers.
I’ll typically send both the PDF file and the Word file, and I’ll ask for the comments to be made via Track Changes in the Word file. PDFs are useful because they show the document’s final formatting. Emailed Word files or PDFs – Word files are attractive to corporate reviewers because of familiarity with Word’s Track Changes feature.When all reviews are submitted, I process the feedback right within Flare. All suggested changes are saved automatically, and every reviewer can instantly see the document editing others have made in real time.
Each reviewer logs into Central, locates the topics to review, and reviews them using a lightweight editing tool to add or delete content or to insert comments.
Nita: Same! I’ve touched a broad swath of subject matter: manufacturing including automotive medical device and bioscience legal software and tech utilities transportation and professional standards and accreditation. Consistently, I find that clients want PDF file output, even if the primary output I’m producing for them is HTML5 web help. What kinds of product publications do you produce?Īnn: Over the years, I’ve worked with clients in various industries and departments, such as engineering, software development, manufacturing, and marketing. Whenever practicable, they’ve shifted to the cloud to create and maintain document review processes that work for all members of a review team, resulting in better outputs and improved end user results.
This article offers a conversation between two tech writing business owners and how they’ve promoted and maintained collaborative document review processes among their respective clients.