HOW TO PREPARE OPERATIONS MANUALS

This company used full-time writers, selected from various technical disciplines within the
refinery. The eight persons chosen were seen as being in a developmental role, enhancing
desirability of the jobs,

How should refinery operations department approach a massive writing project –the
preparation of 104 training manuals and tests? The management at ARCO Petroleum Products
Co.´s Houston refinery had been trying to answer that question for several years. About a year
–and-a-half ago, they came up with an approach that seems to be working.

The project had actually gotten underway a years or so earlier, with operations and employe
relations representatives reaching agreement on the training package. For each operator
position in the refinery, there was to be a comprehensive training manual that a trainee could
use to learn the knowledge and skills required to perform the job. The second part of the
package would be a valid qualification test that could be administered to the trainee after he
had worked through the training manual.

Task oriented. The proposed design for the manual reflected the training strategy- to focus on
the tasks that together made up each job. Job tasks would be grouped into modules according
to common skill and knowledge requirements. Every module was to the divided into several
exercises based on task analyses provided by the unit supervisor.

Each exercise would include introductory information necessary to understand the job. Each
would have a self-check quiz testing the trainee´s ability to recall key points- flows equipment
locations, job standards, signs of good operation, etc. After the quiz would come a task
procedure or other “hands on” activity required to perform the task.

Along with the sequence of steps would be safety precautions and reference points to control
the operation. After studying the procedure, the trainee would be ready to see the task
performed by the incumbent.

Since the incumbent would be expected to refer to the same manual, his demonstration would
conform to the manual´s standard as specified by the unit supervisor.

Progress checkoff. The last and most important part of an exercise would be the progress
checkoff. This is where the trainee would be instructed to demonstrate or simulate the task for
the job incumbent. The incumbent, in turn, would give the trainee written feedback on his
performance. The feedback would give the trainee information his performance. It would
definitely not be meant as an evaluation of his qualifications for the job. That type of
evaluation would be performance by the supervisor as part of the qualification test. And the
test would be given only after all the modules had been completed.

With the above format, the manual would incorporate enough self –study principles to allow
the trainee to learn much of the job on his own, using the job incumbent as a resource person
who would provide him timely hands-on experience.

As the content expert, the unit supervisor would have set the performance standards which
would be included throughout the manual and from the basis for feed-back to the trainee.
Who’s the writer? The strategy appeared sound. However, a question remained –who would
actually write the manuals?

Unit supervisor, usually chemical engineers whit some technical writing experience, seemed a
good choice. Accordingly, a system was setup whereby several unit supervisors were released
from their jobs to write manuals for the entry level positions on their units. Drafts of manuals
were to be sent to a training coordinator who was to critique them and return to the
supervisors for rewriting. After completing their rewrites, the supervisors were to return them
to the coordinator for printing.

The temporary manual writers worked on their assignments for several weeks, drafting a good
many but not finished any according to the plan. One reason was a lack of coordination
between the writers and the trainer, resulting in drafts that did not follow the intended design.
Manual revisions took weeks. Oftentimes a supervisor had become too involved elsewhere to
rewrite his manual. The project began to get bogged down.

A new approach. It was then, about two years ago, that operations management began a
process of reviewing approach to completing the manuals.

If writing and revising the training manuals couldn´t be done in addition to on-going job
responsibilities, an alternative was to select people for whom manual writing would be a full-
time responsibility. Full time manual whiter could be instructed as a group in manual design.
Because their job performance would be evaluated solely on manuals produced, the writers
could be expected to treat the project as their number one priority. They would report to a
training supervisor who would provide them with whatever direction they needed turn out
manuals at an acceptable rate.

It seemed obvious that having full time manual writers was critical to completing the project.
Still, there were come basic questions to be answered before staffing the new training groups.
How many writers were needed? What should be the minimum requirements for the manual
writing positions? Should the positions be filled from within or with a combination of inside
and outside people? What could the writers expect to be doing after the project was
completed?