Sunday, August 13, after ad board:
Client says they need a flash report, with top-line bullet points of major issues and suggestions, parallel with the flow of the meeting, by Friday, August 18th. No problem, say we, since it is normal procedure to send a flash report within a week of a meeting. However, writer hears little voice in her head that says organizing a report based on flow of meeting, rather than by topics, means there is bound to be redundancy in several sections, as topics were brought up more than once, but then writer remembers that thinking logically is not always the best thing to do in work situations.
Monday, August 14 and Tuesday, August 15:
Writer works on draft of flash report.
Wednesday, August 16:
Client suddenly decides that they need the flash report, 5 to 7 pages, by Thursday morning, instead of Friday COB. Writer sighs and cautions that a draft could be sent by Thursday am, but it will not be the polished report client would have gotten by Friday COB, due to the loss of two days to work on it. Client is surprisingly agreeable to this.
Draft sent to consultant and VP for review, and both respond that client will want detail and context and the draft should be re-ordered by topic rather than by presentation to present more of a story (!). New information is that report is not just for client, but also for everybody and their brother who may even have a passing interest, and who did not attend the meeting, which calls into question why client would agree to a rough draft if it is to be seen by whole world.
Writer reorganizes draft by topic and adds detail while still trying to keep within 7 pages, though wondering why a so-called flash report should have so much detail and context. Writer thinks flash report is beginning to sound suspiciously like an executive summary.
Thursday, August 17, 2006
Writer and MSA revise flash report yet again and send to client.
Someone decides that the executive summary can be sent to client within a week (!!), which elicits audible gasp from writer, who is not sure how she'll pull that one off considering that her magic wand is in the shop for repair.
Monday, August 21
Client is "disappointed" with flash report, and puts consultant in charge of revising it. Five pm call with consultant results in writer pulling an all-nighter to revise just part of the flash report-on-steroids.
Tuesday, August 22
Revised part sent to consultant who likes it, so things seem to be looking up.
Writer pulls another all-nighter to revise more of Frankenstein flash report.
Wednesday, August 23
Writer, MSA, VPs, and AM spend all day in conference room amid doughnuts and coffee and bottles of water revising mutant flash report, which is a good idea because writer has started to forget words like "table" and "car" and "alibi" due to sleep deprivation.
Writer pulls only a late night rather than an all-nighter to finish up blasted report.
Thursday, August 24
Report makes the rounds of reviewers, and writer suddenly remembers she has other projects to work on.
Friday, August 25
Mega flash report sent to consultant, who still thinks it "needs work" and decides to rewrite it.
Saturday, August 26
Writer reviews consultant's comments through tears and begins searching for another job because writer realizes this client sounds very like a previous client who caused remarkably similar problems, and writer has pretty much had it with the lot of them.
The morals of the story are don't keep changing the rules of the game while players are in the middle of playing said game, and clients must learn that they can have a fast product or a thorough and polished product, but it is beyond the capacity of this writer to provide both at the same time, and under duress.
No comments:
Post a Comment