Why do product manuals sound formal and stiff-upper-lipped? Why don\u2019t users read manuals? These questions have haunted the hallowed precincts of Technical Writing for quite some time now. From what I have seen in Indian writers, I am forced to conclude that English Composition, as we were taught in school, is the culprit. Our merit was based on how verbose we were. They judged our style based on how \u2018formal\u2019 we were. <\/p>\n
Take for example, the leave letter. I am sure you have written a few in school or college. Rewind and replay one of those leave letters. Right from the salutation (\u2018Respected sir\/madam\u2019) to the signature (\u2018Faithfully\/Obediently yours\u2019) it reeks of colonialism. And, we have yet to learn our lessons. In this age of globalization (or globalisation, to my stiff-upper-lip comrades), it is important to pay attention to the three Cs: Consistency, Context, and Culture. <\/p>\n
The You
I have read manuals that say \u2018you can perform this task\u2026\u2019 and in the next chapter add, \u2018Users should back up data regularly\u2019. Who is the \u2018you\u2019 and who is the \u2018user\u2019? Quite a few of my esteemed friends that are Technical Writers shy away from using \u2018you\u2019 in their manuals. Again, it is that skeleton in our cupboards (or closets, if you will, my American friend) called Colonial Composition that proves to be the stumbling block. I do not wish to debate on the aesthetic merit of using (or not using) \u2018you\u2019 in our manuals. The goal of your manual is to help users be productive. So let us stick to that story for now. <\/p>\n
Let us look at an example: Let us not discuss active and passive voice. Let us focus on the word \u2018your<\/span>\u2019 that replaces \u2018the<\/span>\u2019. Both statements offer the same instruction. If you took a poll with your users on which one they liked. I am quite sure they\u2019d pick the one with \u2018your\u2019. Why? Because it is personable. The statement is talking to the user and thus telling the user \u2018there\u2019s something in it for you\u2019 and urges action. There is no ambiguity (\u2018OS should be installed? By who?\u2019). And, the \u2018your<\/span>\u2019 statement costs less to Localize. <\/p>\n Also, it is important that your product offers a favorable emotional experience to your users. That is where the Colonial Composition fails. Ask any Interaction Designer and she\u2019ll tell you how important Subjective Satisfaction is to the success of any design.<\/p>\n Personable Manual<\/span> “It is recommended that you upgrade your software.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Or <\/p>\n “We recommend that you upgrade your software.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n The latter engages you. It makes a convincing statement. It doesn\u2019t hide behind the facade of passive voice, and it puts an arm around you and requests, like a friend, to do the needful. <\/p>\n There again, some of you might say \u2018well, if we screw up, then because we used \u2018we\u2019 we may get into a soup.<\/span>\u2019<\/p>\n Let me reassure you here: 1) you don\u2019t write for a contingency called screw-up. 2) You write to ensure your user increases her productivity. And 3) Whether you write in passive voice or active voice, if it is in the manual, you are liable. <\/p>\n Finally, being formal is overrated. Just because you are in business does not meant you have to be business-like in your manual. That is a sad misconception. You got to connect. You have to converse with your user. You need to engage and offer a positive emotional experience to your user. Else, the user will pick that phone and call Support. Now, that, in my book, Write to me: Sumank[at]gmail[dot]com<\/p>\n
1) If the system displays a blue screen, the OS should re-installed.<\/span>
2) If your system displays a blue screen, re-install the OS.<\/span> <\/p>\n
Personable writing pays. What would you prefer to read? <\/p>\ncompletely<\/strike> obviates the need for publishing a manual. And, having a writer on board. <\/p>\n