It isn't often that technical publications make headlines - and when they do, it is far rarer that the headlines spell good news. The most recent headlines from Canadian Press are no exception.
Airline group SAS AB is seeking US$77 million in compensation from Montreal-based Bombardier after its entire fleet of Q-400 turboprop planes had to be grounded in September 2007. This follows two separate accidents in Denmark and Lithuania involving landing gear malfunctions. No one was seriously injured in either accident.
"The incidents were caused by flaws in components not included in the maintenance manual. This is why we feel the responsibility lies with Bombardier,'' SAS spokesman Hans Ollongren said.
In total, about 60 of the 160 turboprops in use by airlines worldwide were affected. He said SAS has lost about US$62 million since the groundings. "There are other costs involved, too, related to credibility and other things,'' said Ollongren.
See the full article, Airline group seeks compensation from Bombardier.
Could it happen to you? These types of errors are rarely the fault of a single technical writer and usually point to more serious problems in the documentation process. Where is the accountability for information? Where is the traceability between the product development lifecycle and the documentation lifecycle? How do you ensure completeness and accuracy of your information? The technology and best practices exist that should catch these types of errors - either the process was circumvented or it was not implemented correctly.
As technical communicators, we need to pull our noses out of our books and get a broader perspective on what it is we are writing. Where does this information come from? How do I know that it is correct? How do I know that it is complete? How am I going to meet my deadlines while worrying about the accuracy of my source? Have a hard look at your processes and methods to ensure that the proper checks and balances are in place. Leverage technology to keep the process moving swiftly and develop repeatable best practices to correctly use that technology.
Try building some scenarios where faulty or incomplete documentation may result in risk to life or limb. How much does it cost to do the job right versus how much it costs to allow these types of mistakes to occur?
As technical communicators, we often belabor the lack of importance placed on value of our work. This is where the rubber hits the road for technical communicators. If we cannot keep our companies out of harms way, how can we truly justify the need for our work?
Rob Hanna - rob.hanna@ascan.ca
STC Region 1 Director
