adobe contribute,adobe robohelp,technical writing,technical communication,corporate authenticity

Calling Adobe Out On RoboHelp: Faux Pas Or A Reality Gut Check?

It’s worth knowing that when one reviews what I’ve written about Adobe, the impact of my words written under my direct name, in history forever, is not taken lightly. I wouldn’t have said it if I didn’t believe it.

And… yet.. I write this blog using another Adobe product, Contribute.

It’s nothing personal against Adobe however I do look at the HAT space critically. I think that using principles lifted from Cluetrain.org as a measuring stick works on products such as RoboHelp. It’s a painful and emotional break to stop using a product you love, sort of like trading in your first car you ever owned. But breaking the dysfunctional cycle is critical for recovering.

Past Analysis

When I make a public call in the industry like I did in 1999 about wireless data, in 2002 about search engine technology, in 2003 about the energy sector, and now in 2007 about Adobe, it’s something that impacts my social network. People remember the who-called-it, and they particularly remember if you’re wrong.

I’ve found that the really smart people remember who called the right trends. They’re the ones I end up doing business with down the road.

Innovation and Philosophy

If my father handed me down his father’s axe, which he had replaced the worn out handle, would it still be my grandfather’s axe when I replaced the blade?

When the previous human element of a merged company has been completely assimilated like Agent Smith did in The Matrix one has to wonder whether the product will still do the same function.

One has to wonder, when does the old exciting product stop becoming engaging? When is it time to cut the ties and begin embracing something else new and innovative? With the MonkeyPi’s Craptastic Review and the flood of comments that followed it, I read what other users had been experiencing.

I am left asking myself, do I need to break from a codependent cycle with RoboHelp? In my case, I helped bring some of the features to life within it, particularly the PDF import. That was my recommendation. It was adopted, I got a small bonus, and we moved on, excited.

How Did I Start This?

I’ve had specific interest fall on my motivation for posting this. I’ve been honest and direct about how I stumbled across the information.

From CharlesJeter.com » RoboHelp’s Dysfunctional Corporate Accounting | All I Hear From Adobe Are Crickets:

How Did All This Start ?

I was just looking for more information regarding their technical support expenditures and the level of outsourced overseas labor used within the company.

Note: Just tonight I found the tech support information I was looking for. While ASP Online says small companies spend 20% on Tech Support, the industry average is 8%, and according to Adobe’s 10-K their overall spending level is a mere 3%. No wonder nobody is happy with Adobe’s tech support.

I was also looking for RoboHelp specific data, which should have been found within their internal documents or within the SEC Filing 10-K under their market segment.

I mean, screenshots and everything within the RoboHelp Dead…Again?!? post. This is not hard to review the raw data. Yet folks just keep saying, it’s there, it’s there. I’ll cover the HATT posts at another time. There’s a great group of folks who are passionate about their software.

What do I do with RoboHelp?

For better or for worse I still support my RoboHelp customers, whether I have issues with Adobe’s direction or not. In fact, their incompetence in design makes me even more money when I have to be called in to fix what Adobe’s Tech Support cannot.

So if I make money on RoboHelp’s Problems… Why Shout Out?

I have always seen RoboHelp as part of a Disruptive Technology solution for knowledge management. The ability to transform printed media into searchable content has always intrigued me, and with the import of multiple document formats, I saw RoboHelp as a cheap man’s data aggregator.

Seeing that concept get garrotted by a dysfunctional corporation is sad. And I really did love the software. I just don’t trust who runs the show right now to do the BEST effort towards innovation.

Pounded by Adobe’s Proxies?

Responses to other Bloggers who’ve stated I’m wrong:

From Palimpset:

Although I’m also a great fan of conspiracies, I’m afraid that the answer in this case is quite simple. RoboHelp’s revenue is not material in the general scheme of things. The “Other” segment, which includes the infamous “Classic Publishing” (aka “We Don’t Give a $#$#@ About These Products”), accounts for just under 10 percent of total revenues. Source: Adobe presentation, PDF format, page 10)

Well… my response:

Sarah, I checked both page ten of the presentation and page ten of the actual PDF.

Neither had anything that stated RoboHelp was part of the Other category. Your raw data is the same I’ve been using, however nobody from Adobe has confirmed RoboHelp is part of the Other Segment to this date, and no print documentation has been found either.

So my assertion still stands. RoboHelp was omitted.

I do think you are correct for the reason why… I don’t think it’s a grassy knoll / lone gunman type of scenario: It just doesn’t earn enough money for Adobe to care.

TechCommDood, who first posted a one-liner denouncing my site as Anti-Adobe says in his post:

Sounds like Charles wasn’t entirely correct though, since there was mention of this in the SEC/investor documents, as Sarah O’Keefe points out.

One blogger using another blogger as source, yet not verifying the raw data himself. This isn’t smart.

Umm, actually Sarah’s raw data was the same as mine - I checked her link and even looking at the page number she quoted still didn’t see Adobe state RoboHelp was part of the Other source. I posted a reply to his site, same content as Sarah’s.

I hope I’m wrong and these two well known industry folks are correct, and I’ve overlooked the Segment / RoboHelp issue. Happens all the time, and these folks write awesome content I read from time to time.

And this zinger:

In an interesting twist, the thread on HATT concerning this RoboHelp issue has since turned around to ask Charles about his agenda with raising issues in this manner.

Thought I’d answered that in my post about Corporate Authenticity, or my reply directly to Bill/TechCommDood’s accusation of my entire blog being biased against Adobe.

Faux Pas - not even close.

My analysis is spot on. I’m factually correct in all but one area - I did find two mentions that I redacted in my follow-on article, and even quoted them. Yet there is a penalty to be played for calling the Emperor’s New Clothes anything but beautiful. Many decided to not read that I’d said there were two mentions, and refused to refocus on the segment issue.

The question remains that has not been answered in the HATT discussion: Why did Adobe exclude RoboHelp from their investor information this year when they released one version and are about to release a second less than six months later?

I was surprised at the level of response with the HATT discussion and I’ll post more about that later. In fact, I’m sure I’ll have more to look at as the night rolls on.

Suffice to say, I pointed out my 10-K sitrep first on the HATT, and everyone else says, oh, yeah, you missed it the next day… Umm. I explained it in a post also.

Not like I take it personally.

Tell you what, everyone. I can do one of two things. I’ll contact Adobe Investor Relations through email and keep everyone posted on their response, response time, and so forth.

Second, Vivek or RJ Jacquez - care to do a podcast interview? I’ve got some specific questions I’d like to ask you that you didn’t answer on the HATT. You can duck some under the Investor Relations shield, but I’ve got some more for you.

web 2.0,technical writing,communication dimensions,technical communication,technical support,o’reilly

Killer analysis from Sarah at Palimpset about whether or not the Information Age is dead with the advent of wikis and other web 2.0 information delivery.

Read on: Palimpsest - The Age of… Expertise?

In the comments, Tim O’Reilly points out that the real change is in how information is gathered and distributed with “the rise of new forms of computer mediated aggregators and new forms of collective curation and communication.”

I believe that we are still firmly in the Information Age because information has not yet become a commodity product. There is, however, clearly a shift happening in how information is created and delivered.

This is important. After all, how accurate is a wiki compared to an encyclopedia? It depends on the contributors. Information cannot become a commodity until there are so many Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) that the cost ratio becomes negligible.

Technical Writer to Technical Support

I really like what Sarah said about the spread between Technical Writing and Technical Support. This gets right into the Workflow Collaboration / Online Collaboration / Web 2.0 space I’m looking into. Again from Palimpsest - The Age of… Expertise?

I think it’s helpful to look at communication dimensions:

• Traditional technical writing is one-to-many. One person/team writes, many people consume it.
• Wikis are many-to-many. Many people write; many people use the information.
• Mailing lists are many-to-one. Many people respond to one persons’ question
• Technical support is one-to-one. One person calls; one person responds.

Technical support is the most expensive option; it’s also often the most relevant. Technical writing is more efficient (because the answer to the question is provided just once), but also less personal and therefore less relevant.

I’m so… going to grab those bullet points for my next ‘online help’ customer meeting, Sarah. My Corporate Wiki article might be relevant to this spread in the Workflow Collaboration sense.

There’s a sweet spot in there that reduces customer call volume, and actually increases consumer confidence in the product. Somewhere, the majority of the people will find the answers the majority of the time and mentally rate the support system a success.

Again from Palimpsest - The Age of… Expertise?

Furthermore, the fact that people are turning to Google to find information says something deeply unflattering about product documentation, online help, and other user assistance. Why is a Google search more compelling than looking in the help?

There’s a balance that support needs to strike. A sweet spot between cost efficiency and content delivery. ASP Online has a great Technical Support Award that examines the balance found in support web sites. I’ve written in detail about previous winners of that award previously.

linkedin,social networking,web 2.0,office 2.0,online collaboration,workflow collaboration

What’s Office 2.0? Heard recently I decided to do a little research and see how well this concept converged with Workflow Collaboration. Since the Office 2.0 Conference was constructed using Online Collaboration Tools, it made sense to list it here as a case study for your potential Workflow Collaboration.

Definition quoted from Gilbane Group Blog: Office 2.0:

What is “Office 2.0″? As far as I could tell the consensus in the opening panel “The Future of Work” (and in other sessions) was that it referred to any office-in-the-cloud tools, including but not limited to replications of Microsoft Office.

I would say “Office 2.0″ is differentiated from “Web 2.0″ by having mainly a business focus, and is differentiated from “Enterprise 2.0″, at least in terms of this event, by being more about the technology than the effects of its deployment on enterprise practices.

Office 2.0 Early Adopter’s Checklist

If you’re interested in this then review some of the tools that they’re talking about. This gives you a background on a buzzword that may or may not take off but is being bandied around the Workflow Collaboration universe.

Of the apps, listed, I adopted and currently use WordPress and LinkedIn. I’ve used Salesforce and Constant Contact. I like how they described the set up of the GMail accounts using their own domains. The rest I have yet to check out.

More from Gilbane Group Blog: Office 2.0:

There was some gentle push and pull between Microsoft and Google on the relative importance IT/workflow/regulations versus end-user/real-time-collaboration.When pushed on what they would be adding to future work environments, both Microsoft and SAP stressed the importance of business social networks.

Social Networking Trend Analysis - Dollar Wings Night at Aussie Pub Yields Ka-Ching!

Social networking is how I’ve connected with employment since 1997. I can trace the contracts and job routes I’ve taken, with about 75% through personal reference. Seeing as resume blanketing tends to yield a lot of return calls but little actual movement, I figured I was on the right track.

Glad I never made a fool of myself during Dollar Wings Night at the Australian Pub in Pacific Beach, San Diego. Some of those people are who I still get referrals from seven and eight years later.