Within the quick service sector of the food and beverage industry, their seems to be two prevailing processes when it comes to taking a customer’s order, filling that order, and accepting payment. The order of these steps can change the way a customer perceives a restaurant and can influence revenue directly.
The most common version of this process includes recording the customer’s order, accepting payment, then filling the order. This process can be seen in many major fast food chains and seems to be the most efficient way to conduct this process however there are other options that can change the tone of the order taking process entirely.
Another, slightly less popular method for this process is to first take the customer’s order, then fill the order, then accept payment at the end of the process. This is more useful in situations where an order requires a lot of customization and options that do not influence the price of a product. This can also lead to less perceived waiting time because the customer is constantly engaged in the food making process thus, making the time seem to pass more quickly.
Each of these methods has their strengths and weaknesses in certain situations which are why there is no single best method for this process. The main tradeoff seems to be in the amount of perceived waiting time versus the actual waiting time where the first method usually has less actual waiting time and the second method usually has less perceived waiting time.
– Thomas Skowronski
In the traditional sense of technical writing, the technical writer and marketing team create 2 different documents for their product, the former being far more in depth than the other. However, this also begins to cause inconsistencies between them; The marketing team might overstate or understate a feature that the technical writer may know far more about.
But what if the technical writer works with the marketing team?
With most start ups, they are unable to afford careful marketing, literally. Instead, they have their technical writers rewrite packets of their material for consumer reading, and release it periodically over time to build momentum, trust, and support for the product. With this, however, is the benefit of getting rid of the inconsistencies that comes with having a marketing team work separately from the technical writer. By throwing the technical writer into this unconventional role, they are able to slowly build trust that doesn’t go away when they see the marketing team messes up with one of their products.
Though the question would be, would this work with a larger company with less possible growth within their market? Most likely. It would establish a level of trust on a level that is normally seen on home-grown start up companies, and not much other places. It would help the company establish a firm base to grow even more upon later, and help your later products down the road have even more traction than they would have if you accidentally released false or misstated information.
A technical writer, with this in mind, should begin to eagerly contribute to how marketing includes information, rather than have the traditional mindset of “not my problem”. This would help both further your own career and the status of the company you work for, as it would have more effective marketing to both general consumers and the technical crowd.
-Will G. Eatherly
As based on a post at http://idratherbewriting.com/2016/01/04/content-marketing-to-the-rescue-for-thought-leadership/