13 – Collaborative Writing
Collaborative Writing Processes
Suzan Last; Candice Neveu; Kalani Pattison; Nicole Hagstrom-Schmidt; and Matt McKinney
Collaborative projects are common in many fields and disciplines, as individuals with various realms of expertise work together to accomplish goals and create projects. Writing is a key part of communication that enables these projects to happen, but it also is often the deliverable—the final product that a team can pass on to another team, to executives and administrators, to consumers, or to the public. Working as a team to write a document usually means that each individual writes less content. However, to create a coherent document written in one voice, teams must plan carefully and revise thoughtfully.
The following section examines in more depth how writing in general, and collaborative writing specifically, is crucial to engineering. Engineering is a field that is often perceived as entailing a relatively small amount of writing. However, as you will see in this following section, such perceptions are often misinformed. The same misperceptions may also take place regarding other fields, so you should think about how this engineering-specific information might apply more widely to your discipline.
The engineering design process, at least in part, entails working collaboratively to gather, organize, manage, and distribute information.[1] This information is often carefully analyzed and used to make important decisions, so it is critical that team members collaborate effectively in managing these communications tasks.
Engineers report spending a considerable amount of their time writing, and they frequently engage in collaborative writing. A recent survey asked various professionals what portion of their work week was devoted to writing, collaborative writing, and international communications.[2] The results shown in Table 13.5 indicate that collaborative writing makes up a significant portion of overall writing tasks.
Table 13.5. Percentage of total work week that engineers and programmers report spending on communications tasks.
| Activity | % of Work Week for Engineers | % of Work Week for Programmers |
|---|---|---|
| Time spent writing | 35 | 25 |
| Time spent planning and writing documents collaboratively | 19 | 12 |
| Time spent communicating internationally (across national borders) | 14 | 18 |
Research has also shown that “writing in general and [collaborative writing] in particular have been recognized to be fundamental to most professional and academic practices in engineering.”[3] Figure 13.4[4] shows that engineers rate writing skills as extremely important to career advancement.[5]
Like any kind of teamwork, collaborative writing requires the entire team to be focused on a common objective. According to Lowry et al., an effective team “negotiates, coordinates, and communicates during the creation of a common document.”[6] The collaborative writing process is iterative and social, meaning the team works together and moves back and forth throughout the process.
Collaborative Writing Stages and Strategies
Successful collaborative writing is made easier when you understand the collaborative writing strategies you can apply, the best ways to manage a document undergoing revisions, and the different roles people can assume. Figure 13.5[7] outlines the various activities involved at various stages of the collaborative writing process.
Collaborative writing strategies are methods a team uses to coordinate the writing of a collaborative document. There are five main strategies: single-author, sequential, parallel writing: horizontal division, parallel writing: stratified division, and reactive writing. Each strategy has its advantages and disadvantages. Effective teams working on longer term projects tend to use a combination of collaborative writing strategies for different points of the project. When planning to switch between writing strategies, it is important to make sure the team is communicating clearly regarding which strategy will be used for which task. See Table 13.6[8] for a detailed breakdown of these strategies, their advantages, and disadvantages. Can you think of any other benefits or limitations?
Table 13.6. Collaborative writing strategies.
| Writing Strategy | When to Use | Pros | Cons |
|---|---|---|---|
| Single Author
One member writes for the entire group. |
For simple tasks; when little buy-in is needed; for small groups | Efficient; consistent style | May not clearly represent group’s intentions; less consensus produced |
| Sequential
Each member is in charge of writing a specific part and write in sequence. |
For asynchronous work with poor coordination; when it’s hard to meet often; for straightforward writing tasks; small groups | Easy to organize; simplifies planning | Can lose sense of group; subsequent writers may invalidate previous work; lack of consensus; version control issues |
| Parallel Writing: Horizontal Division
Members are in charge of writing a specific part but write in parallel. Segments are distributed randomly. |
When high volume of rapid output is needed; when software can support this strategy; for easily segmented, mildly complex writing tasks; for groups with good structure and coordination; small to large groups | Efficient; high volume of output | Redundant work can be produced; writers can be blind to each other’s work; stylistic differences; doesn’t recognize individual talents well |
| Parallel Writing: Stratified Division
Members are in charge of writing a specific part but write in parallel. Segments are distributed based on talents or skills. |
For high volume, rapid output; with supporting software; for complicated, difficult-to-segment tasks; when people have different talents/skills; for groups with good structure and coordination; small to large groups | Efficient; high volume of quality output; better use of individual talent | Redundant work can be produced; writers can be blind to each other’s work; stylistic differences; potential information overload |
| Reactive Writing
Members create a document in real time, while others review, react, and adjust to each other’s changes and additions without much preplanning or explicit coordination. |
Small groups; high levels of creativity; high levels of consensus on process and content | Can build creativity and consensus | Very hard to coordinate; version control issues |
Document management reflects the approaches used to maintain version control of the document and describe who is responsible for it. Four main control modes (centralized, relay, independent, and shared) are listed in Table 13.7, along with their pros and cons. Can you think of any more, based on your experience?
Table 13.7. Document control modes.
| Mode | Description | Pros | Cons |
|---|---|---|---|
| Centralized | When one person controls the document throughout the process | Can be useful for maintaining group focus and when working toward a strict deadline | Non-controlling members may feel a lack of ownership or control of what goes into the document |
| Relay | When one person at a time is in charge but the control changes in the group | Democratic | Less efficient |
| Independent | When one person maintains control of their assigned portion | Useful for remote teams working on distinct parts | Often requires an editor to pull it together; can reflect a group that lacks agreement |
| Shared | When everyone has simultaneous and equal privileges | Can be highly effective; non-threatening; good for groups working face to face, who meet frequently, who have high levels of trust | Can lead to conflict, especially in remote or less functional groups |
Roles refer to the different duties participants might undertake, depending on the activity. In addition to whatever roles and responsibilities that individual team members performed throughout other stages of the project, the actual stages of composing and revising the document may require writing-specific roles. Table 13.8 describes several roles within a collaborative writing team. Members of small teams must fill multiple roles when prewriting, drafting, and revising a document collaboratively. Which role(s) have you had in a group project? Are there ones you always seem to do? Ones that you prefer, dislike, or would like to try?
Table 13.8. Collaborative writing roles.
| Role | Description |
|---|---|
| Writer | A person who is responsible for writing a portion of the content |
| Consultant | A person external to the project and who has no ownership or responsibility for producing content, but who offers content and process-related feedback (peer reviewers outside the team; instructor) |
| Editor | A person who is responsible for the overall content production of the writer, and can make both style and content changes; typically has ownership of the content production |
| Reviewer | A person, internal or external, who provides specific content feedback but is not responsible for making changes |
| Project Manager | A person who is part of the team and may fully participate in authoring and reviewing the content, but who also leads the team through the processes, planning, rewarding, and motivating |
| Facilitator | A person external to the team who leads the team through processes but doesn’t give content related feedback |
This text was derived from
Last, Suzan, with contributors Candice Neveu and Monika Smith. Technical Writing Essentials: Introduction to Professional Communications in Technical Fields. Victoria, BC: University of Victoria, 2019. https://pressbooks.bccampus.ca/technicalwriting/. Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
- Susan McCahan, Phil Anderson, Mark Kortschot, Peter E. Weiss, and Kimberly A. Woodhouse, “Introduction to Teamwork,” in Designing Engineers: An Introductory Text (Hoboken, NY: Wiley, 2015), 14. ↵
- Jason Swarts, Stacey Pigg, Jamie Larsen, Julia Helo Gonzalez, Rebecca De Haas, and Elizabeth Wagner, Communication in the Workplace: What Can NC State Students Expect? (Raleigh: North Carolina State University Professional Writing Program, 2018), https://docs.google.com/document/d/1pMpVbDRWIN6HssQQQ4MeQ6U-oB-sGUrtRswD7feuRB0/edit#heading=h.n2a3udms5sd5. Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. ↵
- Julio Gimenez and Juliet Thondhlana, “Collaborative Writing in Engineering: Perspectives from Research and Implications for Undergraduate Education,” European Journal of Engineering Education 37, no. 5 (2012): 471-487, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2012.714356 ↵
- Adapted from Jason Swarts, Stacey Pigg, Jamie Larsen, Julia Helo Gonzalez, Rebecca De Haas, and Elizabeth Wagner, Communication in the Workplace: What Can NC State Students Expect? (Raleigh: North Carolina State University Professional Writing Program, 2018), 5, https://docs.google.com/document/d/1pMpVbDRWIN6HssQQQ4MeQ6U-oB-sGUrtRswD7feuRB0/edit#heading=h.n2a3udms5sd5. Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. ↵
- Jason Swarts, Stacey Pigg, Jamie Larsen, Julia Helo Gonzalez, Rebecca De Haas, and Elizabeth Wagner, Communication in the Workplace: What Can NC State Students Expect? (Raleigh: North Carolina State University Professional Writing Program, 2018), 5, https://docs.google.com/document/d/1pMpVbDRWIN6HssQQQ4MeQ6U-oB-sGUrtRswD7feuRB0/edit#heading=h.n2a3udms5sd5. Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. ↵
- Paul Benjamin Lowry, Aaron M. Curtis, and Michelle René Lowry, “Building a Taxonomy and Nomenclature of Collaborative Writing to Improve Interdisciplinary Research and Practice,” Journal of Business Communication 41, no. 1 (2004): 66-97, https://doi.org/10.1177/0021943603259363. ↵
- Adapted from Suzan Last and Candice Neveu, “Collaborative Writing Stages,” in “Collaborative Writing,” Technical Writing Essentials: Introduction to Professional Communications in Technical Fields. Victoria, BC: University of Victoria, 2019. https://pressbooks.bccampus.ca/technicalwriting/. Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. ↵
- Adapted from Suzan Last and Candice Neveu, “Collaborative Writing Strategies,” in “Collaborative Writing,” Technical Writing Essentials: Introduction to Professional Communications in Technical Fields. Victoria, BC: University of Victoria, 2019. https://pressbooks.bccampus.ca/technicalwriting/. Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. The original authors note that this table is adapted from Paul Benjamin Lowry, Aaron Curtis, and Michelle René Lowry, “Building a Taxonomy and Nomenclature of Collaborative Writing to Improve Interdisciplinary Research and Practice,” Journal of Business Communication 41, no.1 (2004): 66-97, https://doi.org/10.1177/0021943603259363. ↵
Final product that a team can pass on to another team, to executives and administrators, to consumers, or to the public.
[["Passive Voice","What is Unclear","Active Voice"],["The papers will be graded according to the criteria stated in the syllabus.","Graded by whom? The instructor? An anonymous reviewer? A TA?","The teacher will grade the papers according to the criteria stated in the syllabus."],["The bill was passed last week. ","Who passed the bill? ","The state legislature unanimously passed the bill."]]
[["Creative Commons Element Type","Meaning","Creative Commons Image"],["BY","Credit must be given to the creator","![\"An](\"https://oer.pressbooks.pub/app/uploads/sites/60/2022/02/by.xlarge-300x300.png\")
"],["SA (ShareAlike)","All adaptations must be shared using the same licenses.","![\"A](\"https://oer.pressbooks.pub/app/uploads/sites/60/2022/02/sa.xlarge-300x300.png\")
"],["NC (NonCommercial)","Only noncommercial uses of the work are permitted","![\"A\"](\"https://oer.pressbooks.pub/app/uploads/sites/60/2022/02/nc.xlarge-300x300.png\")
"],["ND (No Derivatives)","No derivatives or adaptations of the work are permitted. The work may not be altered by future users. ","![\"An](\"https://oer.pressbooks.pub/app/uploads/sites/60/2022/02/nd.xlarge-300x300.png\")
"]]
Document that establishes rules and expectations for a group working together.
[["Evaluating Authority, Content, and Purpose of Information","#colspan#"],["Authority\nResearchers\nAuthors\nCreators","
- \n
- Who are the researchers/authors/creators? Who is their intended audience?
- What are their credentials/qualifications? What else has this author written?
- Is this research funded? By whom? Who benefits?
- Who has intellectual ownership of this idea? How do you cite it?
- Where is this source published? What kind of publication is it?
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\nAuthoritative Sources: written by experts for a specialized audience, published in peer-reviewed journals or by respected publishers, and containing well-supported, evidence-based arguments.\n\nPopular Sources: written for a general (or possibly niche) public audience, often in an informal or journalistic style, published in newspapers, magazines, and websites with a purpose of entertaining or promoting a product; evidence is often \u201csoft\u201d rather than hard."],["Content","Methods\n
- \n
- What are the methods used in study? How has evidence been collected?
- Is the methodology (the system or collection of methods) sound? Can you find obvious flaws?
- What is the source\u2019s scope? Does it apply to your project? How?
- How recent and relevant is the source? What is the publication date or last update?
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\nData\n
- \n
- Is there sufficient data here to support their claims or hypotheses?
- Do they offer quantitative and/or qualitative data?
- Are the data statistically relevant or significant?
- Are visual representations of the data misleading or distorted in some way?
\n
\n
\n
\n
"],["Purpose\nIntended Use and\nIntended Audience","
- \n
- Why has this author presented this information to this audience?
- What biases does the author have? Remember, \u201cbias\u201d is not necessarily negative. One scientist may have a preference for a specific research method.
- Who is the intended audience? How has the audience affected how the document is presented?
\n
\n
\n
"]]
[["Type of Signal Phrase","Purpose","Example"],["Author\u2019s credentials are indicated.","Builds credibility for the passage you are about to present.","Grace Chapmen, Curator of Human Health & Evolutionary Medicine at the Springfield Natural History Museum, explains\u2026 "],["Author\u2019s lack of credentials is indicated.","Illustrates a lack of source\u2019s authority on the subject matter and persuades the audience not to adopt the author\u2019s ideas. Pointing to an author\u2019s lack of credentials can be beneficial when developing your response to counter-arguments.","Matthew Smythe, whose background is in marriage counseling and not foreign policy, claims\u2026 "],["Author\u2019s social or political stance, if necessary to the content, is explained. ","Helps a reader to understand why that author expresses a particular view. This understanding can positively or negatively influence an audience. \n\nNote: Be careful to avoid engaging in logical fallacies such as loaded language and ad hominems. See Chapter 4 for more information.","Employing nonviolent civil disobedience, Roland Hayes, prominent civil rights activist, preaches\u2026\n\nRichard Spencer, who takes credit for the term \u201calt-right,\u201d denies\u2026 "],["Publisher of the source is identified. ","Reinforces the credibility of the information presented by utilizing the reputation and credibility of the publisher of the source material.\n\nNote: When only referencing the publisher, make sure to include a parenthetical in-text citation identifying the author (or title, if no author is available) at the end of the cited material.","According to a recent Gallup poll\u2026 "],["Title of the source is included. ","Informs the reader where the cited passage is being pulled from. This is especially useful if the author has multiple publications or if the publication is particularly well-known.","In \u201cUnderstanding Human Behavior,\u201d Riley argues\u2026 "],["Information that establishes context is presented. ","Clarifies the author\u2019s purpose. Offers more information on the original circumstances for the quotation. ","In a speech presented during the Boston Free Speech Rally, Elaine Wallace encourages\u2026"]]
Transitional words and phrases show the connection between ideas and how one idea relates to and builds upon another. They help create coherence. When transitions are missing or inappropriate, the reader has a hard time following the logic and development of ideas. The most effective transitions are sometimes invisible; they rely on the vocabulary and logic of your sentence to allow the reader to “connect the dots” and see the logical flow of your discussion.
In previous English classes, you may have learned the simple transitional words or phrases in Table 6.2. These transitions can be effective when writing simple information in a structure where you simply add one idea after another or want to show the order of events.
Table 6.2. Simple transitions
| First | Firstly | First of all |
|---|---|---|
| Second | Secondly | Next |
| Third | Thirdly | Then |
| Last | Last but not least | Finally |
| Moreover | Furthermore | Besides |
However, more complex academic and professional communication requires more sophisticated transitions. It requires you to connect ideas in ways that show the logic of why one idea comes after another in a complex argument or analysis. For example, you might be comparing/contrasting ideas, showing a cause-and-effect relationship, providing detailed examples to illustrate an idea, or presenting a conclusion to an argument. When expressing these complex ideas, the simple transitions you’ve learned earlier will not always be effective–indeed, they may even confuse the reader.
The above “Simple Transitions” are mostly about communicating ideas that come in sequence. That is, the transitional words merely let the readers understand that the writer is moving to the next idea on a list. More complex transitions, however, can convey a range of relationships between ideas. The following Table 6.3, “Types of Transitions in Writing,” provides a list of how transitions can present conceptual links, the definition of each type of transition, and examples of how those transitions can be worded. Using these more complex transitions allows writers to present connections between ideas with more nuance and precision.
Table 6.3. Types of Transitions in Writing
| Type | Definition | Examples |
|---|---|---|
| Internal Previews | An internal preview is a brief statement referring to a point you are going to make. It can forecast or foreshadow a main point in your document. | If we look ahead to, next we’ll examine, now we can focus our attention on, first we’ll look at, then we’ll examine |
| Signposts | A signpost alerts the audience you are moving from one topic to the next. Signposts or signal words draw attention to themselves and focus the audience’s attention. | Stop and consider, we can now address, turning from/to, another, this reminds me of, I would like to emphasize |
| Internal Summaries | An internal summary briefly covers information or alludes to information introduced previously. It can remind an audience of a previous point and reinforce information covered in your document. | As I have said, as we have seen, as mentioned earlier, in any event, in conclusion, in other words, in short, on the whole, therefore, to summarize, as a result, as has been noted previously |
| Sequence | A sequence transition outlines a hierarchical order or series of steps in your document. It can illustrate order or steps in a logical process. | First…second…third, furthermore, next, last, still, also, and then, besides, finally |
| Time | A time transition focuses on the chronological aspects of your order. Particularly useful in an article utilizing a story, this transition can illustrate progression of time for the audience. | Before, earlier, immediately, in the meantime, in the past, lately, later, meanwhile, now, presently, shortly, simultaneously, since, so far, soon as, long as, as soon as, at last, at length, at that time, then, until, afterward |
| Addition | An addition or additive transition contributes to a previous point. This transition can build on a previous point and extend the discussion. | Additionally, not to mention, in addition to, furthermore, either, neither, besides, on, in fact, as a matter of fact, actually, not only, but also, as well as |
| Similarity | A transition by similarity draws a parallel between two ideas, concepts, or examples. It can indicate a common area between points for the audience. | In the same way, by the same token, equally, similarly, just as we have seen, in the same vein |
| Comparison | A transition by comparison draws a distinction between two ideas, concepts, or examples. It can indicate a common or divergent area between points for the audience. | Like, in relation to, bigger than, the fastest, larger than, than any other, is bigger than, both, either…or, likewise |
| Contrast | A transition by contrast draws a distinction of difference, opposition, or irregularity between two ideas, concepts, or examples. This transition can indicate a key distinction between points for the audience. | But, neither…nor, however on the other hand, although, despite, even though, in contrast, in spite of, on the contrary, conversely, unlike, while instead, nevertheless, nonetheless, regardless, still, though, yet, although |
| Cause and Effect, Result | A transition by cause and effect or result illustrates a relationship between two ideas, concepts, or examples, and it may focus on the outcome or result. It can illustrate a relationship between points for the audience. | As a result, because, consequently, for this purpose, accordingly, so, then, therefore, thereupon, thus, to this end, for this reason, as a result, because, therefore, consequently, as a consequence, and the outcome was |
| Examples | A transition by example illustrates a connection between a point and an example or examples. You may find visual aids work well with this type of transition. | In fact, as we can see, after all, even, for example, for instance, of course, specifically, such as, in the following example, to illustrate my point |
| Place | A place transition refers to a location, often in a spatially-organized essay, of one point of emphasis to another. Again, visual aids work well when discussing physical location with the reading audience. | Opposite to, there, to the left, to the right, above, adjacent to, elsewhere, far, farther on, below, beyond, closer to, here, near, nearby, next to |
| Clarification | A clarification transition restates or further develops a main idea or point. It can also serve as a signal to a key point. | To clarify, that is, I mean, in other words, to put it another way, that is to say, to rephrase it, in order to explain, this means |
| Concession | A concession transition indicates knowledge of contrary information. It can address a perception the audience may hold and allow for clarification. | We can see that while, although it is true that, granted that, while it may appear that, naturally, of course, I can see that, I admit that while |
In addition to specific transitional words or phrases, writers may use other transitional strategies to link their ideas. These strategies typically employ strategic repetition. Of these strategies, the easiest to employ is to begin a sentence with the modifier “this” with the type of noun being described in the preceding sentence. As a generic example: “According to a recent study, 76% of homeowners feel like they overpaid for their home. This finding shows…” In the previous sentence, the phrase “this finding” refers back to the previous information. (Avoid using “this” or “these” or other demonstrative pronouns without a corresponding noun).
Another common and more advanced transitional tactic is to repeat a word or phrase from the previous sentence (or use a synonym or related word) to show that the same idea is still being discussed and is being developed further. This focused repetition, often called the “Known-New Principle” works because the writer starts with information that the audience knows and then adds on new information. For more information, see Chapter 5.
This text was derived from
Last, Suzan, with contributors Candice Neveu and Monika Smith. Technical Writing Essentials: Introduction to Professional Communications in Technical Fields. Victoria, BC: University of Victoria, 2019. https://pressbooks.bccampus.ca/technicalwriting/. Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
University of Minnesota. Business Communication for Success. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Libraries Publishing, 2015. https://web.archive.org/web/20240318113353/https://open.lib.umn.edu/businesscommunication/. Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
There are a few issues that may arise when a writer is researching a topic for the business or technical world.
Research that Does Not Support the Project Idea
In a technical document that contains research, you might discover conflicting data that does not support the project’s goal. For example, your small company has problems with employee morale. Research shows that bringing in an outside expert, someone who is unfamiliar with the company and the stakeholders, has the potential to enact the greatest change. You discover, however, that bringing in such an expert is cost prohibitive. Should you leave this information out of your report, thereby encouraging your employer to pursue an action that is really not feasible? Conversely, should you include the information at the risk of not being able to offer the strongest solution?
Suppressing Relevant Information
Suppressing relevant information can include a variety of factors, including the statistical significance of data or the researchers’ stake in the findings. For example, a study in 2015 found that driving while dehydrated is about as dangerous as driving while under the influence of alcohol. While this was widely reported in popular news sources, these sources failed to highlight some of the most important aspects of the study. To begin with, the study was conducted using just 12 people, and only 11 of them reported data. Furthermore, the study was conducted by an organization called the European Hydration Institute, which in turn is a think-tank subsidiary of the Coca-Cola corporation. In other words, not only was the sample size far too small to make this claim, but the data collection was designed and implemented by a corporation with a stake in the findings, since they profit off the sale of hydration products.[1] This case illustrates the ethical dubiousness of suppressing important contextual information for the sake of a sensational headline.
Not Verifying Sources Properly
Whenever you incorporate others’ ideas into your documents, especially quotations, make sure that you are attributing them to the correct source. Mark Twain, supposedly quoting British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli, famously said, “There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.”[2] On the other hand, H.G. Wells has been (mis)quoted as stating, “statistical thinking will one day be as necessary for efficient citizenship as the ability to read and write.”[3] When using quotes, even ones from famous figures that regularly appear as being commonly attributed to a particular person, it is important to verify the source of the quote. Such quotes often seem true, because the ideas they present are powerful and appealing. However, it is important to verify the original source both because you need to make sure that your quote is, in fact, correct, and that it is not being taken out of context from the original source. The effective use of statistics can play a critical role in influencing public opinion as well as persuading in the workplace. However, as the fame of the first quotation indicates, statistics can be used to mislead rather than accurately inform—whether intentionally or unintentionally.
Presenting Visual Information Ethically
Visuals can be useful for communicating data and information efficiently for a reader. They provide data in a concentrated form, often illustrating key facts, statistics, or information from the text of the report. When writers present information visually, they have to be careful not to misrepresent or misreport the complete picture. Many of the guidelines for designing informational graphics in Chapter 8 are meant to help ensure that you present your data ethically, primarily by not misleading readers and by ensuring access for as many readers as possible.
Figure 3.1[4] below shows information in a pie chart from two different perspectives. The data in each is identical, but the pie chart on the left presents information in a misleading way. What do you notice about how that information is conveyed to the reader?
Imagine that these pie charts represented donations received by four candidates for city council. The candidate represented by the gray slice labeled “Item C” might think that she had received more donations than the candidate represented in the blue “Item A” slice. In fact, if we look at the same data in the 2D chart, we can see that Item C represents fewer than half of the donations compared to those for Item A. Thus, a simple change in perspective can change the impact of an image.
Similarly, take a look at the bar graphs in Figure 3.2[5] below. What do you notice about their presentation?
If the bar graph above were to represent sales figures for a company, the representation on the left would look like good news: dramatically increased sales over a five-year period. However, a closer look at the numbers reveals that the graph shows only a narrow range of numbers in a limited perspective (9100 to 9800). The bar graph on the right, on the other hand, shows the complete picture by presenting numbers from 0-1200 on the vertical axis, and we see that the sales figures have in fact been relatively stable for the past five years.
Presenting data in graphical form can be especially challenging. As you prepare your graphics, keep in mind the importance of providing appropriate context and perspective.
Limited Source Information in Research
Thorough research requires you to incorporate and synthesize information from a variety of reliable sources. Your document or presentation should demonstrate that you have examined the topic from as many angles as possible. Thus, your sources should include scholarly and professional research from a variety of appropriate databases and journals, as opposed to just one author or website. Using a range of sources helps you avoid potential bias that can occur from relying on only a few experts. For example, if you were writing a report on the real estate market in Central Texas, you would not collect data from only one broker’s office. While this office might have access to broader data on the real estate market, as a writer you run the risk of looking biased if you only chose materials from this one source. Collecting information from multiple brokers would demonstrate thorough and unbiased research. The next section of this chapter focuses on the ramifications of bias in more detail.
This text was derived from
Hamlin, Annemarie, Chris Rubio, and Michele DeSilva, “Typical Ethics Issues in Technical Writing,” licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. In Gross, Allison, Annemarie Hamlin, Billy Merck, Chris Rubio, Jodi Naas, Megan Savage, and Michele DeSilva. Technical Writing. Open Oregon Educational Materials, n.d. https://openoregon.pressbooks.pub/technicalwriting/. Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Last, Suzan, with contributors Candice Neveu and Monika Smith. Technical Writing Essentials: Introduction to Professional Communications in Technical Fields. Victoria, BC: University of Victoria, 2019. https://pressbooks.bccampus.ca/technicalwriting/. Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Although a self-evident component of any communication, the topic (or subject) is an important focal point for mapping any rhetorical situation. Specifically, the topic being discussed situates the audience’s and the deliverer’s assessment of one another, as well as the deliverer’s strategies in appealing to the audience. For example, if a company hires a consultant to improve its hiring practices in terms of diversity, focusing on the topic of diversity helps us both to understand why the speaker’s credentials might be relevant and also to anticipate how the company’s management and workforce might understand and respond to the speaker.
Clearly describing the topic in a document also provides a more holistic and neutral understanding of what is being discussed, as compared to the purpose, or why a writer is discussing something (see “Purpose” section). The consultant may have specific goals in terms of promoting diverse hiring in the company, but this is a narrower understanding of diversity than the speaker and audience may possess.
Lastly, delineating the topic provides an anchor for determining what background information is contextually relevant. For example, the political controversy surrounding affirmative action and workplace protection laws is relevant to diversity in a company, but other political issues such as prayer in schools may not be.
This text was derived from
University of Minnesota. Business Communication for Success. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Libraries Publishing, 2015. https://open.lib.umn.edu/businesscommunication/. Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
