15 Reasons You’re Technical Documentation Sucks

As part of my day job I produce technical documents, proposals and RFP responses for a (mostly) non-technical audience. I read and review even more of the above from sub-contractors, professional services consultants and technical support. I’m as likely to split an infinitive as the next person, but there is stuff I see on a daily basis which drives me crackers. Here are some of the worse crimes against documentation (in my opinion).

    1. Documentation should always be written in the third person. Bad: “I believe this is the issue.” Better: “It is believed,” or “It is understood.”
    2. Statements should be definitive, prescriptive and confident. Ambiguity over any point does not help anyone. For example, “This change may help, or it may not,” gets you nowhere. Try instead: “To progress the issue, Company Foo recommends that the following actions are taken.”
    3. Don’t ever not use double negatives.
    4. Always show you’re working out – not “This will fix it.” Cite references if you have any. Provide a short rationale behind the recommendation. Make sure you have a rationale.
    5. Be succinct. Ask yourself the question, “Does this sentence contain redundancy?”. Try to avoid sentences that go on and on and on without any punctuation or come to any point and if read aloud would cause the reader to hyperventilate.
    6. Eschew obfuscation.
    7. Do not be afraid to point out the worst case scenario. Documentation is an excellent way to cover your arse if something is not being done properly. If it’s written down, it’s official. Do not cry wolf.
    8. Keep your own copies of documentation revisions; don’t rely on version numbering, “track changes”, or a centralized copy. This will save time and effort when you need to find out how and when it changed from “the ISP manages the routers” to “the ISP doesn’t manage the routers.”
    9. Learn how to use bulleted lists, indexes and section breaks. These are word processing basics.  They can be a PITA, but will save you time in the long run and make for a much more professional end product. Use cross references to refer back to other sections in the document. This makes the whole document flow together much better.
    10. Pick a font and stick with it, as long as it’s not Comic Sans. Reading Arial on an LCD screen feels like my eyes are being scratched with toothpicks. Only use bold and Italics if absolutely necessary. Even then it’s probably not necessary.
    11. When describing an issue or incident:
      • Describe the problem.
      • Discuss the impact.
      • Offer possible courses of action.
      • Make a recommendation and justify it.
      • Don’t make a recommendation which you are not able or prepared to defend in person.
    12. Use the spel checkr. Don’t rely on the spool chocker. Proof, proof and proof again. Then print it out and read it again, aloud if necessary. You would be surprised how many errors still creep into “finalised” documents.
    13. “Track Changes” is your enemy. It will ruin the flow of the document when it is being reviewed or edited. Typos are one thing. Ask for comments on your documentation rather than getting someone to edit it into oblivion. It’s difficult to understand which changes have been made and why, and you don’t learn nuffin if you accept someone else’s changes wholesale.
    14. Make sure your title and contents pages match the actual content of your documentation.  Documentation evolves; this is OK. Just remember to update the scope accordingly.

There is bound to be other stuff I’ve missed or forgotten; I welcome any contributions, additions or abuse. If I have committed any other crimes, please feel free to point them out in the comments below.

[Editor's note - errors you might notice, including the title, are there on purpose to help make the author's point.]

About Glen Kemp

Enterprise Security Architect & Juniper Ambassador. Designing & deploying “keep the bad guys out” technologies. Delivering elephants and not hunting unicorns. You can find me @ssl_boy and at my personal blog http://sslboy.posterous.com/

  • http://twitter.com/northlandboy Lindsay Hill

    OK, that drove me crackers with all those (deliberate) mistakes in it!

    The thing I struggle most with in technical documentation is when you know that no-one is ever going to read the doc. All that care and effort, and it’s never appreciated, or even necessary. But it’s a project “deliverable” therefore it must be delivered.

    • http://blog.ciscoinferno.net/ Anthony Burke

      This. All the time and attention put into it when no one really cares after a first read.

      That being said it does make you a good engineer as you slowly compile documents you’re testing your knowledge and relying on your technical knowledge.

    • http://einaraleksejev.eu/ Einar Aleksejev

      How often you read your passport, but how necessary it is sometimes ;)

      • http://twitter.com/northlandboy Lindsay Hill

        Being me, I look at my passport quite often actually…but I’m not normal in that regard. Crossed more borders than most.

    • David Sudjiman

      @twitter-325292464:disqus Well, the chances are that I have to go back to that customer and for another project, after 5 years. Or someone will come to me, after 5 years and ask what did I do (even if I provided with Design doco).

    • http://twitter.com/Vegaskid1973 Matt Thompson

      I find the opposite to be the case more often than not. Poor documentation or even worse, no documentation because when the project was shoe horned in, the first thing to get dropped was the testing phase and the documentation. Oh the irony. Nobody knows if the infrastructure is fit for purpose and when it inevitably breaks, nobody is sure how it is put together.

  • Tom Howarth

    Words to live and die by, excellent article, I could not put it better myself.

    Tracked Changes are the bain of my life, double negative, spooling Mischucks, Grammar crimes and documents written as first person are high on the list.

    I once received a document completely written in first person except the parts that were obviously lifted from other locations, it made for a very complicated read.

  • ijdod

    Many gigs of documentation, and no chance in hell to find that one item you’re looking for. The easy solution is Sharepoint. That’s what the vendor promised management, so it must be right :D

    You can often prevent the track changes nightmare by sending out documents in some hard-to-edit document like PDF.

  • Will Hogan

    “Track Changes” is your enemy.

    I’m glad someone’s finally said that! I hate getting a doc with track enabled.

  • http://einaraleksejev.eu/ Einar Aleksejev

    Beware of document metadata such as document and document author properties!

  • Sergey

    It’s “your”, not “you’re”.

  • Christopher Church

    Proof read, print, proof read, put aside, come back later, proof read again.

  • osbjmg

    [Editor's note - errors you might notice, including the title, are there on purpose to help make the author's point.] <- The #1 reason I was drawn to read this article!

  • http://twitter.com/Iamjeffvader Keith Humphreys

    I’ve taken to using the terms described in RFC2119, there can be no doubt!

  • http://twitter.com/SDNToad Derick Winkworth

    In spite of your errors, I understood the intent of what you wrote. I’ll take chicken scratch on a napkin over nothing anyday. ;-)

  • http://brooksconsulting-llc.com/ Jeff Loughridge

    I agree with the author’s point about maintaining local copies of the revisions for back-up. I don’t understand the animosity in the comments about track changes. The feature is very useful when a small number of people are collaborating on network documentation. You can quickly find the changes and then change from “Final: Show Markup” to “Final” in the track changes settings. There’s no reason to proofread with the markup visible.

    • http://einaraleksejev.eu/ Einar Aleksejev

      Most of knowledge workers use track changes in Microsoft Word when working on a document. This feature is too useful to want to be missed like this. If you are concerned about track changes metadata, use a metadata removal tool or save the Word document as a PDF.

  • http://twitter.com/mountainrescuer Graham Brown

    I absolutely agree with the points made in this article, thanks for the post. Although I also agree with the comment made by Derick, in that bad documentation is better than none! So many companies allow projects to go live with poor, incomplete or in most cases no documentation altogether then expect the ops teams to ‘manage’.

  • http://twitter.com/digital_dave_ David Rutledge

    Good points. Mistakes gave me a good chuckle.

  • TomArbuthnot

    Great points, though I’d say Track changes is more useful than separate review notes

  • http://twitter.com/ssl_boy Glen Kemp

    Thanks for the great feedback guys, glad you like. I realise there are arguments for and against track changes, and it’s something which has stitched me up more often than it has saved me, but YMMV. I also appreciate that *Some* documentation is better than *none*, but in my commercial project world (i.e. non-ops) reams of detailed plans are expected before the order is signed. It’s a big failure when the momentum is not carried through to production and the documentation is not updated. Also a confession; despite my best efforts and trying to heed my own advice, a REAL typo did crop up, so if you spotted “insteady” in the original post, 10 points to you! Everything else is deliberate!