Re:The result would be a catastrophe (1985)
by jldugger on Thursday January 28, 2016 @01:02PM
(#10989920)
Engineering degrees universally require a technical writing course. Engineers universally revile it as busy work. This memo is Exhibit A for why written communication is critical for engineering, and I imagine an assignment to rewrite this memo to be more effective would be a good way to underscore the importance of clear and concise writing.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:The result would be a catastrophe (1985)
by brlewis on Thursday January 28, 2016 @02:58PM
(#10990758)
I upvoted this comment because the point about the importance of writing. However, I don't think conciseness and clarity was the problem here. In 1985 if an engineer personally composed a long letter you should automatically know it's important. If you read this letter at all the danger is made clear.
Re:The result would be a catastrophe (1985)
by banku_brougham on Friday January 29, 2016 @12:02AM
(#10993604)
The call to action was on the second page though - definitely try to keep it to one page in corporate communications class.
Re:The result would be a catastrophe (1985)
by gradi3nt on Friday January 29, 2016 @12:03AM
(#10993605)
What would us change about the letter? Commenter djcapelis above disagrees.
Re:The result would be a catastrophe (1985)
by jldugger on Friday January 29, 2016 @05:16AM
(#10994449)
First fix the grammar mistake ("insure"). Then put the Bottom Line Up Front. Bold it if possible.
Cut out the fluff like 'this letter is written' and 'a jump ball as to the success or failure.'
Rewrite the second paragraph with some verbs and a proper subject.
Not that any of this really matters in the end. The final decision was fully in the hands of management and NASA during a teleconference, during which argument was made.