Limits
The Person Who Will Not Write
A small number of people will not write under any arrangement, and the useful question is whether they will do something adjacent instead.
What nobody wrote down here, and what it cost
Judgement about when a client is about to leave
Nobody could write it and nobody tried
Three occasions, all of them noticed too late
Why the architecture is the shape it is
Attempted twice and abandoned
Both drafts described the result rather than the reasons
two things nobody wrote down · 5 occasions it cost somebody something
Two things, five occasions, and no mechanism proposed for either.
Teams testing a new knowledge workflow can visit this page to establish a baseline, then compare the result after ownership and review rules change.
Teams can compare this approach with the established material available from Search Engine Land.
One person's quarter after four different approaches were tried
Asked for four lines, with a date
Agreed each time, written none of the times
Three requests, three agreements, nothing produced
Offered somebody to write it for them
Declined politely
Said they would rather do it themselves, and did not
Offered a recorded explanation instead of writing
Agreed and recorded forty minutes
The transcript became the only documentation of that system
Asked to correct a draft somebody else wrote
Corrected both, in under ten minutes
Both corrections were substantial and precise
four things nobody wrote down · 7 occasions it cost somebody something
Four approaches, seven occasions. Two produced nothing. Two produced documentation, and both of those removed the act of composing from the person entirely. The conclusion is narrow and useful: the thing being refused was writing, not sharing. One team's own quarter.
Cost explains most non-writing, and reducing it has occupied most of this collection. A residue remains: people who will not write regardless of how cheap it is made.
The useful thing is not to keep adjusting incentives but to work out what exactly is being declined.
The four things that look the same
Cost. They would write if an hour existed. Addressed by everything in the fourth section of this collection.
Fear. They do not want their reasoning fixed in public. Addressed by the pages on liability and on being wrong in writing.
Protection. They are, consciously or not, holding on to being the one who knows. Addressed by naming it directly, which has its own page.
Aversion. They find composing prose genuinely difficult or unpleasant, in the way some people find speaking in front of a room unpleasant.
The fourth is the residue, and it is not addressable by any of the remedies that work on the first three.
What aversion actually is
For some people, writing is not a neutral act with a time cost. It is effortful in a way that is hard for fluent writers to credit, and the effort does not reduce much with practice.
They will explain the same thing at length, happily, out loud. They will answer questions in chat all day. Asked to write two paragraphs, they stall, and the stalling is not about the two paragraphs.
Treating this as a motivation problem produces a person who feels inadequate and still does not write.
What works instead
Remove the composing.
The panel above has two approaches that produced documentation, and both removed the act of writing from the person who would not do it.
Record them explaining. Forty minutes of talking produced the only documentation that system has.
Have somebody else write it and ask them to correct. Both corrections took under ten minutes and were precise, which is the pattern: a person who will not compose will very often correct with care.
Why correcting is easier than writing
Because the hard part of writing, for most people, is not the sentences. It is deciding what to say, in what order, at what length.
A draft removes all three. Correcting is a different cognitive task — reacting to something concrete — and people who cannot do the first are frequently excellent at the second.
This is the single most useful fact in this page, and it generalises beyond the people who will not write at all.
Three things to avoid
Do not make it a performance issue, unless the role genuinely requires writing and that was stated when they took it.
Do not keep asking. Three agreed-and-not-done requests is the point at which asking a fourth time damages something and produces nothing.
Do not assume it is protection. Some of it is, and assuming it is unfair to the larger number for whom it is not, and the two look identical from outside.
Asking which it is
Direct is better than inferred, and the question can be asked without accusation.
"I notice writing doesn't happen even when there's time for it — is it that it's unpleasant, or something else?" That sentence gets an honest answer surprisingly often, because for most people with aversion it has never been named and they have been privately embarrassed about it for years.
The relief of being offered a recording instead is substantial.
Four things being declined, and what each needs
They look identical from outside and have entirely different remedies, which is why asking a fifth time does not help.
| What is being declined | What helps |
|---|---|
| The time | Everything in the section on making it cheaper |
| The exposure | A dated line saying the page is unmaintained and may be wrong |
| Giving up being the one who knows | Naming the fear directly, and saying what comes after |
| Composing prose | Removing the composing: record them, or have somebody else draft |
Only the fourth is the residue this page is about, and it is the one most often mistaken for the third.
Where it stops being about writing
A small number of people will decline all four approaches.
At that point the question is no longer about documentation. It is about whether the role can be held by somebody whose knowledge is unavailable to anybody else, which is a different conversation and belongs to whoever runs the team rather than to this collection.