7.7: Scenarios for Consideration

Scenario #1

You work as a technical communicator for Apple, Inc. You have been charged with pulling together a team of writers, graphic artists, and subject matter experts (SME) to produce instructions for the latest Mac Book. The instructions must be produced in 30 days, a shorter time period than the three months typically given for such a project.

After assembling the team, assigning tasks and setting a schedule, you find that two of the team members, a subject matter expert and technical writer, have had past conflicts and have since found it difficult to work together. You pull the two team members aside, listen to each of their positions and insist that they leave the past behind them for the good of the project.

Two weeks pass, and you find that the two have not met to discuss their tasks. The problem with this is that other tasks given to other members of the team heavily rely on the SME and writer meeting to get the ball rolling.

As the project lead, you call the two together again to help them work through their differences. During the meeting you inform the SME that she must acknowledge her past fault for the good of the project. You say nothing to the writer about her contribution to the past conflict.

Consequently, the work on the project begins, but the spirit of the group is at an all time low at every group meeting. The project is finished, albeit two weeks late.

While presenting the finished product to the executive team, the response is negative, and you, the team lead find that the blame has been placed on you for not producing a superior product.

Questions for consideration:

1. What, if anything, went wrong?
2. What, if anything, could have been done differently to produce different results?
3. Considering the suggestions above for successful collaboration, which guidelines were or were not followed?
4. As a mentor to the team lead, what specific suggestions would you give her for her next project?

Scenario #2

Sherry, an environmental engineer working for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), was chosen as the team lead on a project designed to provide a clearer understanding for the community of the EPA's role in the new water project being instituted for the Clean River Initiative in the Greenspane Chattahoochhee Community. In order to fulfill her responsibility to her employer and the community, she recognized the need to produce documents – pamphlets, posters, blogs, radio advertisements, etc. in preparation for the upcoming festival a year away to unveil the project to the community.

Sherry enlisted the help of several members from various departments of the EPA, including Valarie, a production design assistant; Ricky, a systems engineer; Gabriella, community outreach coordinator; Myron, a health educator; and Erin, technical writer.

Once assembled, Sherry explained the project and the need for the group to understand the "," approach – the need to focus on the heart of the project followed by their intellect followed by the use of their hands. In other words, Sherry explained that the end result was contingent upon the entire team to see the project as something they all owned and were doing for the good of the organization and the community. "In the end," Sherry explained, "the community will benefit and have access to clean drinking water, which in turn will impact the cleanliness of all rivers."

The team came together to create a strategy for how best to communicate the message that clean rivers produce better health, which creates a stronger community. Working over a period of 12-14 months, the project came together as Sherry and her team created events that involved the community and that explained the connection of health to clean water vs. dirty water. The events included documents created by Valarie based on research produced by Diana and written by Sam. Ricky, in turn, saw to it that the documents created could be used across technological mediums such as social media, television, radio, and the internet.

The outcome was an event that the entire team and the organization could claim as their own, for they all played integral parts in making the project a success.

Questions for consideration:

1. What, if anything, went wrong?
2. What, if anything, could have been done differently to produce different results?
3. Considering the suggestions above for successful collaboration, which guidelines were or were not followed?
4. As a mentor to the team lead, what specific suggestions would you give her for her next project?